The Fennel Giraffe

09:08 pm - Narrative Voice

A question elsewhere about use of contractions in narrative set me to thinking about narrative voice.  Because, of course, the answer to the question is that it depends on whether it would be appropriate for the narrative voice to use contractions.

The same applies to use of slang, expletives, colloquialisms, etc. As well as pacing, word choice, sentence complexity, level of diction. It all depends on narrative voice.

So this is what I started writing there:

In dialog, the use of contractions depends completely on whether the character who is speaking would use contractions.

In narrative, it depends on the narrative voice. Narrative voice, however, is related to POV. In first person, the narrative voice is the POV character's voice, so narrative is essentially the same as dialog. If the POV character would use contractions, then use them.

For omniscient (or objective) POV, the voice that matters belongs to the omniscient narrator. It's far from being any kind of rule, but use of contractions in narrative is probably rare for omniscient. (Possibly less rare when the fourth wall is broken.)

When you get to limited third, narrative voice has many possiblitites. Unlike omniscient, it should vary depending on which character currently has the POV. Unlike first person, it shouldn't be entirely the character's voice. It's, well, somewhere in between. But just where in between is a matter of narrative distance. You can focus in close, sometimes called hot, and be almost like first person. You can pull out distant and cool, and be almost like omniscient.

02:26 pm - Writing Numbers, Take 2

[Forgot I had saved the previous rant here, and the same thing happened again: by the time I got this version written, the original discussion elsewhere had digressed. Anyway, I think this one is better.]

(Caveat: This applies to fiction and general nonfiction only. Some academic and professional disciplines have mandatory styles; those overrule general advice.)

First, recognize whether the number is being used quantitatively or symbolically.

Quantitative Numbers
These are numbers representing quantities and amounts, things that can be counted or measured. For example: three books, 15 gallons, 257 miles. This also includes age.

There are several alternate versions for the basic rule here. Pick one and follow it consistently, but it doesn't matter which version you pick. If you make it all the way to publication, it's likely that house style will trump your choice anyway. Before that point, as long as you stick to one of the standard variations, you won't look stupid.

- One through ten in words; 11 and above in digits
- One through twenty in words; 21 and above in digits
- One through twenty, plus thirty, forty, fifty, sixty, seventy, eighty, and ninety in words; all others in digits. (This is rare, but it happens to be the way I was taught in childhood. ETA: The logic here is that these numbers can be written as a single word.)
- One through ninety-nine in words; 100 and about in digits
- One through one hundred in words; 101 and above in digits

- Always write out a number at the beginning of a sentence. If the number would be cumbersome to write out, try to reword the sentence to avoid the necessity.
- Don't mix modes in the same sentence. Ex: Bring seven tables and 28 chairs. This can be corrected by changing either one. It's a judgment call. (In a simple case like the example, I prefer writing out them both out. If there are more than two numbers involved--7 tables, 28 chairs, and 56 notepads--I go with whichever predominates. When one of the numbers would be cumbersome to write out--2 tables, 8 chairs, and 5679 marbles--that rules.)
- Extremely large round numbers can be written as a combination of digits and words, such as 452 million.
- Always write out numbers in dialog. This is somewhat controversial. Purists say you can't speak digits, only words. Dissenters say the digit "1" is just as valid a representation of the spoken word as the letters "one". My opinion is that most numbers of three or more digits can be spoken in multiple ways and that showing which one he uses it helps reveal the character's voice. Also, situations in which a character needs to say a precise large number (such as 26,879) are rare.

08:39 am - Copyright

The SFWA vs. scribd.com kerfluffle is being widely discussed around the net.  Among many other issues, the nature of copyright itself is being discussed. I have no dog in that fight, and the odds are approaching certainty that I never will. Strangely enough, however, that doesn't stop me from having an opinion.

I believe that the law should recognize a distinction between personal and corporate copyright.

Personal Copyright
 - It should be non-transferable. No one except the original author or his estate should be able to hold copyright to his works.
 - No copyright should ever expire during the author's lifetime. However, what of works written shortly before the author's death? Shouldn't his heirs receive some benefit from those?  Life or N years, whichever yields the later date, seems most appropriate.  (I'm flexible regarding the exact value of N, but something in the neighborhood of 20-25 years would protect minor children.) Say N is 20. Then, at the time of an author's death, all of his works which are over 20 years old would immediately become public domain.  His works which are 15 years old would retain copyright for another five years.  His works which are five years old, would continue under copyright for another 15 years.
 - Collaborations pose some difficulty. Using the above rule, it would be possible for one author's copyright to expire while the other's is still active. This would occur when a work is over N years old, one author is deceased, and the other is still living. I see two possible solutions.  One is to let the deceased author's copyright expire while the living author retains sole control. The second is for the copyright to continue for both authors as long as either one is alive.

Corporate Copyright
 - Some people have suggested this should not be permitted, but I see value in allowing it under careful restrictions.
 - It should be of a set duration, probably something like 40-50 years.
 - It should only be allowed when ALL of the following conditions apply:
 - - Multiple individuals share creative input
 - - Those individuals were paid a salary or hourly wage for the time spent creating this work
 - - Those employees were explicitly tasked to develop a work of this nature
 - - Each separate work must be so designated prior to its creation (may need to tweak this for the case of an ongoing series)
 - Some of those restrictions are aimed at preventing a corporation from claiming copyright over work an employee creates outside of his work environment, unless the corporation can demonstrate that the work in question is clearly and significantly related to the employee's specific work assignments.

06:10 pm - Character Names

A common bit of writing advice is that no two character names should start with the same letter.  That's excellent advice as far as it goes, but with a large cast, you could run into trouble once you get past Quentin and Zelda. Besides, those of us writing SF/F occasionally want to use patterns of name prefixes to signal cultural details.

So, herewith, a few techniques to take the curse off names that begin with the same letter. Use at least two of these for any pair of names, preferably more. Give them a different:

• Number of syllables
  
• Gender
  
• Ethnicity
  
• Second letter
  
• Last letter 
  

01:00 pm - Writing Numbers

(This one isn't quite so wimpy; I did post a much reduced version in the appropriate forum thread.  But I like the long version, too and wanted to save it.  ETA: No I didn't.  I kept fiddling with it for too long.  The original thread had gone sideways, and my comment was no longer apropos.)

The true answer is that house style trumps all, but it also depends on what you are writing.

The Basics

These are generally acceptable rules which will keep you from looking clueless. Even if the house style differs in some details, you'll merely be asked to change your MS. No one is going to point and laugh.

For time, money, phone numbers, addresses, dates, etc., use digits. (10:15 AM; $27.50; 555-9062; 375 Oak St.; June 6, 1987) Addresses can occasionally be an exception; a small house number may be spelled out. (Eight Juniper Circle) I treat those like proper names and use the same form as the owner or other applicable authority.

For quantities, spell out small numbers and use digits for large numbers. (Five weeks; 379 books) There are several alternative rules as to which numbers are considered small. At a minimum, you should spell out zero through ten. Many people also do eleven through twenty. I was taught an obscure version--to spell out any number that can be written as a single word. So, zero through twenty, plus thirty, forty, fifty, etc.

Don't mix spelled-out numbers in the same list with digits. If the list is mostly small numbers with only one or two large ones and the large ones are reasonably brief when written, then spell out the whole list. (Three tables, twelve notepads, and twenty-five pencils) If the list has more than a couple of large numbers or any one number would be cumbersome when written out, then use all digits. (3 tables, 12 notepads, 25 pencils, and 2,146 pieces of candy)

In the absence of any other guidance, follow the basics listed above. However (a huge, important however), there are many different types of nonfiction, many different specialized contexts, and many different house styles. You really do need to find out which style guide is applicable to each individual project. Unfortunately, using the wrong style in some (not all) nonfiction venues does get you treated like an idiot.

Relax. No editor or agent is going to reject your MS because you wrote "16" instead of "sixteen", or vice versa. Follow the basics listed above. The most important thing is to be consistent. As long as it's obvious you're using some specific style, not the whim of the moment, you won't look like an idiot.

Your character can't speak "$12.50". What s/he says is "twelve dollars and fifty cents" or "twelve fifty" or "twelve and a half bucks". S/he will probably say 555-2782 as "Five five five twenty-seven eighty-two" or something similar.

Spell out all numbers, no matter what. I try to avoid the necessity of using any cumbersome numbers in dialog. Do remember to keep it in the character's voice, though. Different chars will say numbers in different ways.

01:51 am - Handling Background Info in SF/F

(Yet another wimped-out forum comment.  What's up with me this week?)

SF/F writers discuss this endlessly, so there is a whole vocabulary of specialized jargon related to the problem.

• Worldbuilding aka Backstory - all the details you invent about your world. From the physical environment to the rules of magic to the economics, and everything in between. In SF/F it's often called worldbuilding, perhaps to differentiate it from the more narrowly-focussed backstory used in other genres. (ETA: see below)
  
• Incluing - the process of scattering tidbits of worldbuilding throughout the story, revealing each one only when the reader is becoming curious about that particular detail. (No, it isn't a typo for "including"--the word is derived from "putting clues in", although I wouldn't be surprised if the similarity were intentional.)
  
• As You Know Bob (AYKB) - dialog that has characters standing around telling each other things they already know, but the reader doesn't. A frequent beginner mistake.
• Infodump - a large chunk of exposition that stops the action dead in order to explain things to the reader. Another frequent beginner mistake.
• Iceberg - the relationship between the details you as the author need to know and the details the reader needs to be told. Only the tip of an iceberg is visible; the bulk of it is hidden underwater. (OK, I confess, this isn't exactly a widely-used term. I don't recall where I first saw it, but I think it's a powerful image that should be used more often.)

10:24 pm - Italicize or Underline?

(Apparently I am in a phase of being both opinionated and timid. Here's another "had second thoughts about posting in the forum thread that inspired it" comment.}

Regarding whether to italicize or to underline to indicate italics in a manuscript:

The problem is that we are in the middle of a transition. Publishing as an industry is fairly conservative (in the sense of resisting change to its business practices). Long after most authors were using word processors, the typewriter way of doing things remained a solid industry standard.

There are still a lot of individuals in the publishing industry who started their careers in the typewriter era, although the numbers are dwindling. Even some of the next generation were mentored by traditionalists and became accustomed to the old standards. It has only been quite recently, that the number of publishing professionals who grew up with computers has reached the critical mass (and level of authority) to begin whittling away at outdated standards.

That's why it's confusing right now. That's why you find conflicting advice from reliable sources. There are three kinds of publishing professionals: those who insist on the old standard and see anything else as a lack of professionalism; those who acknowledge the transition and accept either format; and those who think the old standard is a sign the author is a stale old fogie.  We can only hope that most fall into the second category.

11:52 am - Larger Than Life Heroes

(yet another comment I wimped out on posting where I should have)

Someone elsewhere was discussing certain critiques:

I have gotten similar criticism on my own heroine. People seem to want her to have sprung forth from the head of Zeus with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal persons. And she can't have any flaws or any room to grow and learn.

10:27 am - Place Names

Place names are a product of history. They traditionally start out as simple descriptions used in conversation: South Fork, Jones' Mill, Eagle Rock, Snake River, etc. After a while, the description solidifies into a name. Then, as more time passes, the name gets slurred and shortened. Eventually, the area gets taken over by people who speak a different language and don't recognize the original meaning of the name. To them it's just a string of syllables, so they mush it around to sit easier on their tongues.

Sometimes the process results in redundancy. Say the original occupants of a place call it Valley of the Horses, which in their language is Gabril-na Tonar. But they say it so fast it all runs together. When invaders come in, to them it sounds like Gavrilato. But it's clearly a valley, so they add their word for valley in their own language, and call it Gavrilato Domera. But that's long, so after a while they blend it together as Gavriltomera. Finally, a new wave of invaders comes along and mushes that down to Aviltom. But, again, they add the word valley, to make Aviltom Valley. If you translate all the way back, it's actually Valley of the Horses Valley Valley.

Today we usually name places self-consciously. We still use a lot of descriptive names, but we also choose historical or literary references. Sometimes we honor prominent individuals by naming places after them, like MLK Park, even though the place has no direct connection to that person. Sometimes we even copy the names of faraway places, like New York or New England.

09:17 am - Reasons For Writing in a Genre You Don't Read

1. Watch a couple of movies based on books from genre X.
2. Decide those are crap.
3. Therefore, everything in genre X must be crap.

Option A:
      4A. Decide that everyone who writes in genre X is an illiterate idiot.
      5A. Decide that genre X is waiting for a brilliant writer who appreciates Real Literature to demonstrate how it should be done.
      6A. Decide that oneself is said brilliant writer.

Option B:
      4B. Decide that any semi-competent hack can get published in genre X.
      5B. Decide that tossing off a book in genre X is an easy way to make a few bucks to support one's efforts at writing Real Literature.

11:27 pm - What Do Space Ships Look Like? (part 4 of 4)

part 1 - part 2 - part 3

• A frequent error when using sea-going ships as models for spaceships is two-dimensional thinking. This often shows up in descriptions of space battles involving large fleet operations. On the surface of the sea, ships can go left and right, forward and back, but they can't go up and down. Even if you consider submarines, they have a limited range of up and down. They are bounded by the surface above and either the seafloor or increasing pressure below. Space has three full, unbounded dimensions.


• A frequent error when using airplanes as models for spaceships is banking turns and rolls. This often shows up in descriptions of "dogfights" in space. That kind of maneuvering in the air is possible because of the resistance of the air on various parts of the plane, such as flaps and wings. A similar error derives from sailing ships. Space ships can't move that way in a vacuum.

07:02 pm - What Does A Space Ship Look Like? (part 3 of 4)

part 1 - part 2

05:35 pm - What Does A Space Ship Look Like? (part 2 of 4)

part 1

02:24 pm - What Does a Space Ship Look Like? (part 1 of 4)

[What? You don't care about all this--you just want me to tell you what the ship is like?
Sorry. I'm not going to do all the work for you.]

• Distances within a solar system are measured in AU (astronomical units). An AU is defined to be the distance from the Earth to the Sun and is about 93 million miles. Neptune, the outermost planet, is about 30 AU from the Sun.


• Distances between solar systems are measured in lightyears. A lightyear is the distance light travels in one year and is more than 63 thousand AU. The nearest star, Proxima Centauri, is 4 lightyears away. Our solar system is 26 thousand lightyears from the center of our galaxy.


• Distances between galaxies are measured in millions of lightyears. (If anything at all in this discussion is new to you, you don't know enough science to talk about travel to other galaxies. Since there are about 300 billion stars in our galaxy, the restriction shouldn't be unduly confining.)

09:39 am - YA SF

(Confession: I lurk in a lot of blogs and forums where I'm not known. Sometimes I'm tempted to comment, but once I've written it, I get shy and decide not to post after all. Even so, sometimes I think what I've written is useful, and I hate to just toss it in the bit bucket. So I'm going to post those comments here, instead.)

The general rule is that if a book is written for a YA audience, then it is marketed as YA regardless of what other genre applies. YA Mystery is YA, not Mystery. YA Fantasy is YA, not Fantasy. And so on.

I think YA SF is the exception to this rule. SF has traditionally included many young readers, long before there was an established YA market. Many adult SF readers are perfectly happy to read well-written YA SF. I see a steady trickle (OK, more like a slow drip) of newly published books in the SF section with no indication of being YA until you actually read them. A few titles, such as Ender's Game, catch the attention of teachers and find their way onto reading lists--those eventually do get labelled as YA. But they were in the SF section first.

12:44 pm - Using The Right Words

This isn't about worldbuilding, but there is a rant I need to get off my chest.

I read a lot of blogs by authors and editors and agents.  I spend a lot of time at writers' forums.  The comments in those places are head-and-shoulders above the usual level of netspeak.  This is only to be expected.  People who want to write, and people who love books so much that they want to hang out with writers, should be able to use the language competently.

I also understand that posting online is casual and spontaneous.  No one wants to spend a lot of time revising and polishing comments the way we do for more formal writing.  However, most of us are careful of the appearance we present when we go out in public.  Most of us touch up our hair and/or makeup, check our clothes for spots, at least make sure we're fully dressed, before we leave home.  Don't the words we post online deserve the same level of attention?

But that's a digression.  The mistakes that drive me crazy won't be caught by careful proofreading if the writer doesn't know better in the first place.  I'm not talking about typos--we all make those.  I'm not talking about simple spelling errors, such as not being sure whether it's 'relavent' or 'relevant', or how many N's, C's, and S's are in 'unnecessary'--spellcheck usually suffices for those.

I am talking about misused common homophones: there/their/they're, your/you're, whose/who's, two/too/to, its/it's, site/cite/sight, even write/right/rite/wright.  (OK, I'll credit some too/to errors as typos.)  It's odd that others are less troublesome:  hear/here, bee/be, see/sea.  I wonder why. 

I am talking about multi-syllable words with similar sounds but unrelated meanings, like excess/access--I saw a more typical example a couple of days ago, but now I don't recall it. 

I am talking about apostrophes used to make plurals: two car's, a box of book's. 

Most of all, however, I am talking about the attempted phonetic rendition of a word the writer has apparently heard often enough to use correctly, but never seen spelled correctly.

• "It peaked my interest."  Possibly, but probably not.  Most likely, it piqued your interest.
• "I opened the door and, wahlah, there it was!"  The word is voila.
  
• "That isn't wrong, persay, but..."  Err, yes, it is wrong per se.
  

02:13 pm - Seasons

When designing a planet, keep in mind that there are two separate processes that create seasons.  If there is any generally accepted technical terminology for this distinction, I haven't come across it, so I'm going to coin my own.

Axial seasons, the seasons we are familiar with on Earth, are determined by the tilt of the planet's axis.  When the north pole is tilted towards the sun, the sun is high in the sky in the northern hemisphere, creating summer there. The sun is low in the sky in the southern hemisphere, creating winter.  Half a year later, when the planet is on the opposite side of the sun, the north pole is tilted away from the sun, and it is winter in the north and summer in the south.

Orbital seasons occur when the planet has an elliptical orbit, that is, not circular.  (Actually, all orbits are somewhat elliptical, but Earth's happens to be very close to circular, so we see very little evidence of it.)  In this situation, the planet is closer to the sun during one part of the year, and farther away during another.  The entire planet will be hotter when it is close and colder when it is far, so the entire planet will experience summer when it is close and winter when it is far.  A consequence of this is that summers will always be shorter than winters.  (For an explanation, look up Kepler's Law of Equal Areas.)

04:49 pm - What Do the Numbers Mean?

In my last post I gave some formulas to calculate various physical quantities for a hypothetical planet.  They look scary, but I promise the hard part has already been done, getting them to this point.  If you know how to enter formulas into Excel or some other spreadsheet, then these are quite easy to use.  (Hmm, maybe I could do a version of  the chart that can be copied and pasted into Excel. I'll look into that.)

Why should you care about these numbers?  You want to write a story, not do math.  What do the numbers mean?  Here is a list of some of the information the numbers can tell us.   Note that in each case I list only the consequences of getting a result greater than one--if the result is less than one, simply reverse each consequence.

01:20 am - Worldbuilding Formulas

My primary interest is in planets that humans might reasonably choose to colonize, ie, Earth-like.  These formulas have been simplified for that purpose and may not be applicable to more exotic cases.

• Worldbuilding, by Stephen Gillett
• Aliens and Alien Societies, by Stanley Schmidt
• Writer's Guide to Creating a Science Fiction Universe, by George Ochoa and Jeffrey Osier
• Writing and Selling Science Fiction, by the Science Fiction Writers of America
• Writing Science Fiction and Fantasy, by Gardner Dozois, Tina Lee, Stanley Schmidt, Ian Randall Strock, & Sheila Williams

12:46 am - The Death of Pluto

Before 1930, the solar system consisted of eight planets.  Then Pluto was found.  Not much could be discerned about it, but there was definitely something there, so it seemed reasonable enough to designate it a planet.  The orbit turned out to be quite odd, and theories abounded as to how it got that way, but no matter, it was there, so we accepted it.

For half a century Pluto flourished.  Schoolchildren now learned that there were nine planets and memorized "My Very Eager Mother Just Served Us Nine Pickles".  Life was good.  Good until 1978, that is, when Pluto suffered the first in a series of ultimately fatal blows.  Previously, it had been believed that Pluto was not the smallest planet, that it was somewhere between Mercury and Mars in size.  But over that half century telescopes had been getting bigger and better.  In 1978 someone finally looked at Pluto with a telescope powerful enough to see that it was actually two separate, tiny objects.  Even so, it was decided to retain the name Pluto for the larger and call the smaller Charon, also to continue to label Pluto a planet with Charon its moon.  (Although Charon the ferryman of Greek mythology is pronounced 'Khāron', Charon the astronomical body is pronounced 'Shāron'.)

Pluto made a slight recovery a decade later, with the 1988 discovery of its tenuous atmosphere.  The respite was to be brief, however.  The existence of a large number of small icy bodies in the outer fringes of the solar system, sometimes referred to as the Kuiper Belt, had been hypothesized for many years.  Pluto's second death blow fell in 1992, when the first Kuiper Belt Object was identified.  More soon followed.  Initially, these were quite small, so the severity of this blow wasn't immediately noticeable.  However, some of them were uncomfortably close to Pluto, and with new discoveries almost daily, the neighborhood began to get quite crowded.  Pluto was looking decidedly unwell.

Pluto's prognosis became even more gloomy in 2000, with the discovery of Varuna, a Kuiper Belt Object slightly smaller than Charon (about half Pluto's size).  Although diminutive, Varuna was large enough to be a real threat to Pluto, large enough to suggest that Pluto was merely one of a crowd, not deserving of any special status.  Varuna was soon joined by Ixion and Quaoar and Orcus and Sedna, as well as several others not yet named  How could Pluto stand against this assault? 

Battered and bleeding, Pluto staggered on, until 'Xena' (2003 UB313) made an entrance. Slightly larger than Pluto, Xena wielded an executioner's axe.  The death throes may have persisted until the formal descision in 2006, but Pluto died in 2003.

RIP.