Caprica, Good Riddance

Caprica, Good Riddance

For once, I’m not disappointed when SyFy cancels a series before its time. Caprica is now thankfully put out of my misery. But let this be a lesson to all the writers out there as an exemplary example of how NOT to write. Let me demonstrate many of the missteps that defined Caprica’s demise.

1. Broken Promises
   I don’t know if I got this impression from promos or from early episodes, but I was promised to learn the origin of the Cylons. That’s literally all I cared about. I wanted to see early Cylons,”By-your-command” and all that. Cylons. Not weird religions and terrorists. Not corporate politics. Not marital difficulties. CYLONS. Where the fuck were the Cylons??
   When you make your readers a promise, in other words, you set an expectation, you form a “contract” with the reader/viewer. The same thing happened in Battlestar Galactica. “They have a plan.” What plan?? We never found out. Compare with “I’ll be back.”
   DO NOT BREAK YOUR PROMISES WITH THE READER/VIEWER. DELIVER!
   
2. Lousy/Non-existent Setting, Bad World Building
   Umm….why does Caprica look exactly like Earth? Everything except the alphabet is identical. Are sets really that expensive? When they went into a CG world it was much better, but overall, there was absolutely nothing interesting or intriguing about the setting. Not only that, but none of the tech really made any sense. It was inconsistent and self-contradictory, some hi-tech, some ridiculously low-tech. I had a hard time suspending disbelief.
   I DON’T READ/WATCH SCI-FI (or SyFy) TO SEE MY OWN BACKYARD! BE CREATIVE!
   
3. Flat Characters
   I didn’t get it. Girls as monotheistic terrorists? Really? Why? I didn’t get any of it. The girl-turned-pre-Cylon Zoe sorta sat around and did nothing…and still does very little. You’re a goddamn Cylon, start wrecking shit! Yeah, it took Anakin 3 damn movies to turn in Darth Vader, but Anakin was driven. Zoe is just boring as hell. It’s like a bunch of talentless gamers wrote this thing after an all-night WoW battle. Really? She’s the mother of all Cylons? REEALLLY????
   YOUR CHARACTERS DRIVE THE STORY! IF THEY DON’T CARE, NEITHER WILL THE READER/VIEWER!
   
4. Random Subplots
   I literally have no idea what they were trying to achieve in Caprica. I thought it was about Cylons, but there’s terrorists, businessmen, Taurons (rhymes with morons), and really no one I cared about. Yeah, the subplots had some drama, but so what? They didn’t matter. All that mattered was that the Cylons will destroy their world. Cyyylllonnss. Ass-kicking terminators.
   STICK TO THE POINT. MAKE SURE YOU HAVE A POINT. THEN MAKE THE POINT!
   
5. Relativism
   Stories are allegorical. Caprica wasn’t. The sad thing is that I could see them trying. Terrorism. The internet. Virtual reality. Let’s just mix these all up and see what happens. I really love it during cooking shows when the contestants pull ingredients out of the hat and make a dish. Sometimes it’s great, sometimes horrible. To me, Caprica illustrates the latter, a random assortment of good ideas that produce disgusting slop.
   MAKE THE STORY MATTER(relevant) TO THE READER/VIEWER. THE STORY IS ABOUT THEM, NOT ABOUT YOU. IF THEY DON’T “GET IT”, YOU WILL BE CANCELED (not be published).

I hope this illustrates how a perfectly conceived piece of creativity can turn into utter crap. When working on NaNoWriMo or whatever your next project is, keep this lesson in mind. It’s perfectly fine (and expected) to have any and all of these issues during your first draft, so don’t sweat it. Just don’t let them get into production/print.

Why Did The Chicken Cross The Road?

Why Did The Chicken Cross The Road?

Suppose you’ve never heard that one before, and someone casually asked you this question. You might recognize the question as a set-up for the punch line, then run potential answers through your mind.

Was something chasing the chicken?
Was there birdfeed on the other side?
Was he returning home for the day? (yes I know that would make him a rooster)
Was his wife calling?
Were his chicks in trouble?
Was the coop on fire?
Was a storm brewing?

You start thinking about motivations, about what could possess a chicken to cross a road. At least nowadays roads can be treacherous with speeding cars and trucks. You might sense some conflict in that statement, as the chicken is clearly taking direct action, perhaps against a perceived threat or opportunity.

What’s happening is that the author of this riddle (unknown) is setting up the reader for a surprise, for a twist. He’s taking everything he suspects you know about riddles, jokes, stories, and using that to invent an ending that will surprise and enlighten you. One hundred thousand word novels should be no different.

This reminds me of the ending of Gran Torino (Major Spoiler if you haven’t seen it which I highly recommend). The writer of the screenplay Nick Schenk sets up to believe that Walt Kowalski (Clint Eastwood)  is hell-bent on revenge and about to shoot it up with the local gang of rapists. So he confronts the gang, reaches his hand into his pocket, pulls it out quickly, and is summarily gunned down by the gang. Except…he wasn’t armed at all. Schenk had all the clues in there to Walt’s real intentions, but the audience is led to believe that he is out for vigilante justice. In that instant, the entire meaning and theme of the movie has changed.

Think about how you are setting up your readers. Are you telegraphic everything, or laying subtle hints along the way? When your readers get to the equivalent line as

To get to the other side

are they surprised at how simple yet profound the ending is? The Chicken/Road riddle works because we’re completely thrown off by the question. How can something so simple be the answer? In tons of books, the Hero eventually “does the right thing.” It’s as simple as crossing the road. It’s kind of a basic premise of all fiction, to illustrate moral values. Yet with everything else going on, it’s amazing how confused characters can become. So in literary terms, we can then convert the Chicken/Road riddle to the basic riddle underlying all literature:

Q: Why does the Main Character go on all these adventures, endure hardships, fight villains, survive ordeals, and save the world from total annihilation?
(select the text of the answer with a mouse or type ctrl-a to reveal it)

A: Because that’s what he does.

Now for those thinking this post was about something else, here are some Chicken/Road jokes I’ve stolen off the Internets.

Q: Why did the chicken cross the road halfway?
A: She wanted to lay it on the line.
Q: Why did the rubber chicken cross the road?
A: She wanted to stretch her legs.
Q: Why did the Roman chicken cross the road?
A: She was afraid someone would caesar!
Q: Why did the chicken cross the road?
A: To prove to the possum it could actually be done!
Q: Why did the dead chicken cross the road?
A: I don’t know but I’m not hanging around to find out!
Q: Why did the Rooster cross the road?
A: Why that’s where the chickens are!
Q: Why did the schizo chicken cross the road?
A: So they could get to the other side.

Okay I made a couple of those up.

Next Week: How the Chicken vs. Egg riddle applies to Character Development.

I Disagree. You Should Too. Contest!

I Disagree. You Should Too. Contest!

Yes, I’m holding my first-ever WriteRunner blog contest!

I’ve noticed a disturbing trend lately. We’ve become a bloggy nation of yay-sayers. I subscribe to 200+ writing-related blogs, and every comment on these blogs is almost identical: “Way to go.” “Sounds great.” “You’re amazing.”

What every happened to good old-fashioned disagreement? Discussion? Conflicting points of view? Have we come to worship Bloggers as some kind of Deities? Nothing they say can be wrong because they write a blog or published something once? Or are we so afraid of disparaging anyone that we hold our tongues, not wanting to be known as “that commenter” who has a differing opinion? Then, when someone does speak out and counters the blogger’s views, they are summarily vilified by the other commenters. Seriously, is this what you want out of blogging? A bunch of sycophants who agree with and verify everything you write, no matter how ridiculous it is? (BTW none of this applies to my lovely blog readers. You are all awesome). I’m not saying that praise isn’t welcome and warranted (especially on this blog of course). I’m just saying sometimes it’s okay to disagree.

Here’s the thing. I’ve never read a perfect writing blog. Published, unpublished, editor, intern, publisher, etc, all offer various degrees of writing advice. Sometimes, this advice is wrong. I’m sure you’ve heard some if it: “Remove all adverbs and adjectives. Don’t use ‘was’. Start your book with the main conflict. Have a professional write your query letter.” If no one ever says anything, this advice just sits out there for the next unlucky aspiring writer to stumble over.

What ever happened to critical thinking? To sound judgment? To speaking one’s mind despite the prevailing notion of what’s “correct”? At least questioning the blogger to achieve a better understanding of the material.

Therefore, in order to help you practice your critical blog reading skills, I’m holding a contest on this blog. There are two ways to win. In some upcoming posts, I’m going to offer a blatantly wrong piece of advice. Here are some examples (that I won’t use):

• “Crossing the Threshold” is when the protagonist defeats his arch-enemy.
• The best writers only write 20 minutes a day.
• When submitting a manuscript, instead of the Em Dash(—), use the Not Sign (¬).
• The Yankees deserve to win the World Series.

The first person to comment with a corrected piece of advice wins! So if you replied, “no, the Mariners deserve to win the World Series,” you would win!

The second way to win is to find something you disagree with in one of my upcoming posts, and convince me that my version is incorrect and yours is better. This is completely at my discretion.

The prize will be a book from my recycle pile. You can view the current list here, but this isn’t everything I have available.

Here are the rules:

1. First person to find the incorrect advice and post a correction in the comment section will be the winner.
2. Not every blog post contains deliberate misinformation.
3. Typos and unintentional punctuation/grammar mistakes do not count.
4. You may only win one prize. If you have won before, don't "give away" the incorrect advice in future posts.
5. If no one notices the mistake, I’ll be sure to call it out on the next post.
6. Please find something unintentionally wrong with my upcoming posts if you can. I’m not perfect, I’m not published, and I’m doing my best, but at times I know I throw crap up here. Find it and you can win!
7. I make no guarantee of the condition of the books in the prize bin. They’re all used to some degree but should be intact. If you win, you can choose your prize.
8. You agree to not sell your prize and that you will find a way to pass it on or donate it.

The contest starts with my next blog post (probably Friday). If you disagree with anything in this post, sorry. Good luck, and good hunting!

The “Evil Twin” Meme Sucks

The “Evil Twin” Meme Sucks

Meme: A postulated unit or element of cultural ideas, symbols or practices transmitted from one mind to another through speech, gestures, rituals, or other imitable phenomena.* (Wikipedia)

You’ve all seen it or read it. The main character is somehow “split” into a good and evil part. Or a long lost twin reappears for an episode or chapter, and is nothing like the original character. Ever since TV and movie directors discovered that they can overlay the same actor twice in the same frame, they’ve explored in nauseating repetition every possible angle and variation of the Evil Twin Meme. It all started full steam with the “Evil Kirk” ST:TOS episode “Mirror, Mirror”. This Wikipedia entry has more details.

The latest series to fall victim to this craptastically unoriginal concept is Warehouse 13. In the latest episode (stop reading if you haven’t seen it and want to), Myka Bering (Joanne Kelly) is trapped in a mirror and an evil, possessed version of herself emerges. Our hero Pete Lattimer (Eddie McLintock) supposedly discovers the switcheroo when they kiss. “She would never kiss me, even if the fate of the world was at stake.” Hey, guess what Pete? Maybe your clue should have come from the stinky derivative writing! At least she didn’t have a goatee like Evil Obama over there. Ever notice that Evil Twins of women are sexier than the original? Why is that? At least they got this meme over with early in the series (Or have they??).

Are all the good ideas gone? Is there nothing new? I’ve complained about this before. I know that when you have to crank out a 13- or 26- week episodic series, you need to use whatever ideas are out there.

Moving right along, I have a confession to make. I have a concept for a novel or short story where a person lives in two universes inhabited with the same cast in different roles. One is a “light, happy” universe, the other is “dark, deadly”. You know, Utopia vs. Dystopia. So, like my concept with Dawn’s Rise where I include as many disasters as I can into a disaster novel, maybe in this case I’m going to do the Evil Twin meme to death, the ultimate Evil Twin novel to end all Evil Twin novels. Maybe the Evil Twins will have Evil Twins. Yes, that’s it! Evil Quadruplets! Start lining up the publishers!

Taking this even further, I can’t wait to come up with a Paranormal concept. I will find every repetitive and overused meme in the genre and overdo it completely. I’ll have vampires, ghosts, werewolves, zombies, skeletons, monsters, demons, witches, spirits, angels, devils, sprites, fairies, and haunted houses up the wazoo. It will be frickin’ Halloween on every page. And of course I’ll have to make it an urban romance as well, because apparently you can’t sell fiction unless it’s a romance nowadays. Another meme I’d like to kill. Well, you gotta write to the audience. Paranormal urban disaster evil twin romance market, here I come!

*Forgive me for using the LOLcat meme. And note the new category “Random Rants.”