Digital Dragon Takes a Story

May is turning out to be a big month for me. As if I didn't have enough excitement going on, I've had a story accepted into a new magazine for me, called Digital Dragon. It's yet another space opera story, a flash fiction I've titled "Spacy Date."

Though I didn't plan it that way, I now have one anthology and two short stories that will be coming out in May (not to mention my 28th wedding anniversary, woot!)  And interestingly enough, all of them are space opera stories. I think my space opera published story listing is beginning to overtake my fantasy line.

Which is a good thing. Not that I don't want to do fantasy, but it seemed my space opera was struggling for a while. And now old stories are coming alive and finding homes. Gives me hope there's still more in there where that came from.

Now, what to do next. Hum....

Two stories bought up!

Last week, Residential Alien Magazine picked up two stories, one for his print magazine and one for his webzine.

The print magazine will run a story I had written in 2006 titled "Weapons of War." Probably their Nov/Dec issue. I originally wrote it for a Ray Gun Radio podcast flash fiction contest. The story had to have something about weapons. I ended up with an honorable mention for the contest. But the story has never appeared in print. This year will change that.

The other story is a space opera series I'm doing called "Neptune 2." Residential Aliens took the first story of that series called "Life Intruders."

I finished a second episode in that series, titled "Shifting Love," a fun story about a space creature that falls in love with the ship. It is due to come out on the webzine in June, barring changes to his schedule.

I'm sure I'll be giving you a heads up when these come out. Thanks for reading.

The Shaman and the Roseby Bill Haynes

This is a book sent to my by the author for free, to review. I've sat on it for some time. In part because I've had several other books I wanted to read, in part because I didn't have a lot of time, and in part because being a self-published book I feared the worst.

Unfortunately, my fears were not put to rest once I dug into it. Actually, we started out having my wife read it to me and my two sons in the car. We made it through two chapters, and the kids didn't want to hear any more. The problem from their perspective? A bunch of seemingly unrelated and random events happen. Stuff just happens. Vortexes appear, one minute we're saving a drowning boy, the next we're fighting vampires, then next we're in a cave, brought there by none other than a vortex, which seems to be a common vehicle in this world.

Their basic problem was they couldn't make much sense of what was going on. It was hard to follow. There was simply no connection with the story at all for them. And I had to agree. Some things simply didn't make sense, like when their car stopped working, and instead of walking down the road, for some unexplained reason, they felt they had to climb down a cliff to escape something (they ran as if fleeing for their lives, but no danger was given). Why they would risk life and limb when they could simply walk down the road to the nearest station was never explained. Or why they suddenly found themselves in a cave.

Tonight I decided I would pick it up at chapter 3 while I roasted coffee, to see if this redeemed itself. It didn't. More random events, though at least they're sticking to the theme of vampires. But that was preceded by freeing one of the characters from some bone prison (have no idea how she got there, maybe I missed something in all the mayhem) and I don't really know what was going on. One second you have her talking to a dragon, the next you're in another head, and the next another character inexplicably appears riding  a dragon and frees her.

I read part way into chapter 4 before giving up. This book simply wasn't worth my time to read further. Why was it so bad? Several reasons that I could pick up from reading these first four chapters.

One, the author uses a camera/omniscient view point, but pulls it off very poorly. A lot of the problems with it involve head jumping that is jarring and not smooth. It ends up being all over the place, one point looking at things from a narrator's view point, then into one head and then another, sometimes all three in the same paragraph. Following the author in this story is akin to chasing a rabbit through the woods.

His writing style doesn't help either. Often the actions, dialog, and/or thoughts of two or more characters are combined into one paragraph, making it hard to know who's head and view point we are supposed to be following. His action descriptions contain no feeling, no sense of tension. I felt more like someone observing the scene, but observing while a strobe light was flashing, making the actions jerky and difficult to follow.

Due to the above, we are introduced to at least six main characters in these four chapters, all of them seem to get equal time and none of them appear to be the primary point of view. Because we're jumping around in their heads so much, we can never settle in and get a sense of who they are. As a matter of fact, the characterization of these people didn't distinguish them much from each other. There simply was no way to really connect with the characters.

While maybe there is a plot to this novel, and if I was willing to wade through all this till the end of the book, maybe it would all come together and make sense, I was totally lost as to what was going on. Where it started out didn't seem to point to where it went in the few chapters I read. None of the events appeared to be related to each other save the barest of links. Some scenes appear totally pointless. Nothing happens and there's no attempt to move a story forward. As my sons said, stuff just happens randomly, and without any apparent reason other than it just does. Situations are introduced which don't seem to play a role in the story, like saving the boy from the lake. It's as if the author said to himself, "Hum, I need some excitement here, I think I'll have someone drowning and they can save him. Yeah, that will be cool." Whether that boy ever plays another role in this story from here on out is unknown to me, but my guess is that's the last we hear of him. But neither would I be surprised to find out he returns at some point as some powerful wizard that pulls their rears out of the fire, which such events have already happened.

Aside from an omniscient view point that isn't executed very well, a non-existent or hidden plot line/story, difficult to follow narration, head hopping, irrational decisions and dialog by the characters, one also finds overused and trite plot devices and dialog, an occasional typo (missing question mark, "trioka" spelled differently at times, .38 pistol spelled out in one paragraph and then use numbers two paragraphs from that, are three I recall off the top of my head), "as you know, Bob" dialog, deus ex machina resolutions, the old "look in the mirror and describe yourself" device, and a heavy reliance on adverbs, sometimes telling me what he just showed me, so a good bit of redundant narration.

Needless to say, all this made it very hard to connect with the characters or a story to hook me in. Maybe the story comes together later, but if it can't hook me within three chapters, it doesn't matter. Very few will get far enough to find out if it comes together. But I had the fear of wasting a lot of time reading it, only to discover it had left a trail of smoking gun plot devices that were never fired or resolved. Most people are going to feel the same way.

My suggestion for the author is to hone his craft more. Get it good enough to sell to a publisher rather than taking the shortcut route of self-publishing, because the inexperience shows here big time. If I could describe this novel in one sentence, it would be the author's attempt to throw everything but the kitchen sink into one book before he's taken the time to learn the basics of fiction writing.

And for the reader, this is not a book I would recommend, obviously. I wish I could, because I don't like giving negative reviews, but I have to be honest in my review of the work, and since the author sent it to me for that purpose, I feel I have a duty to give it. But I cannot recommend this book.

Flashpointby Frank Creed

If there is one thing that can be said about Flashpoint, it's this is not your father's Christian apocalyptic tale. This first book in Frank Creed's series (the next book is coming out soon, I understand), introduces us to a world controlled by a group referred to as "One-State Neros." This group attempts to subdue a rebel alliance of Christians who refuse to submit. It is into this group that Dave and Jen are thrown when their own church comes under attack and is captured.

But the world Dave and Jen find themselves in is nothing but unique. Reality finds enhancements with mind downloads, superhuman abilities, and fights that have a decidedly Matrix feel to them. Dave becomes Calamity Kid and Jen, E-girl as they take their places in this showdown and attempt to save their church family and parents from reformation by the Neros. What you end up with is a near-future world that is nevertheless significantly different, but very real.

The positives of this book are several. It has an originality few books have, especially in this sub-genre. The voice of the author itself is unique and compelling. The story and the world will keep you on your toes, and creates a very enjoyable ride through this intriguing world. If you like action, the book is packed with it. If you like cool abilities and science, this is for you. If you like all that with a dose of a distinctive Christian worldview, look no further.

But there are some areas a reader will need to be aware of going in. One, this book uses a lot of slang. If you have no idea what it means to slag something, that should give you an idea. I could usually figure out from context what the words meant, but even then, such terms tended to jerk me out of the story a bit until I became used to them, and I often had to recall what a specific term meant. Some terms I never was sure what they meant. The book is full of such slang, so if that kind of thing bothers you, take note and make your decision to read going in. If you're comfortable with that level of current slang, then you should have no problem.

The other issue that jumped out at me is the overuse of metaphors. He uses them frequently. That is not always bad in itself, but frequently the metaphors caused me (and my wife and kids) to pause the story trying to figure out what he was trying to say with it, because it was a bit obscure. And a few times the metaphors simply felt too much, overdone to the point of not directly linking with the thought being conveyed. The story even ends on one such metaphor we had to stop and figure out.

If you like such metaphor puzzles, this will not bother you much. If you just want to read without having to pause and think about what was being said, it might be an issue for you. I personally didn't mind them as much, but my kids and wife seemed to stumble over them more. We still enjoyed the story, however.

Due to the above, I sometimes had trouble following what was going on. I followed the basic plot all right, but in scenes I had this feeling of being a bit unsure if the picture in my head was what it should be, as if I might be missing something that would make it complete. Sort of like a puzzle with two or three pieces missing. I could make out the bigger picture, but I really would have liked to see it complete, and I'm not sure I did. But in fairness, I sometimes have trouble following narration/story with certain styles, and this felt that way to me. So it may be more me than the author on that point.

And any reader should know this is a Christian book. There is no attempt to claim it is anything but, yet some people may miss that point until they get to the first Bible verse mentioned in the text. They are sprinkled throughout. And while integrated well with the characters and the plot, those of the non-Christian variety, while appreciating the story itself, may find such things annoying. That said, I don't find here an attempt to preach, even though one will find a point made here and there. But generally it is more a showing than a sermon.

Myself, I found the book to be enjoyable. If the above issues don't bother you, I would certainly recommend the book. If they do give you pause, I would still recommend the book. I don't think they make the story inaccessible, and while you may have to work more than you'd like, you'll still find the ride enjoyable and interesting as I think there is a lot to be said for this author's vision and execution. Despite the road bumps I had personally with it, I still am glad I read it and would recommend it to anyone desiring to live a very different life though interesting characters.

Water Fight Goes All Antho

That's right. A YA space opera story I wrote has been accepted to be published in Residential Alien's new anthology: While the Morning Star Sings. It is scheduled to be published in May. The anthology is shaping up to be a great read, based on the authors I'm seeing who are making it in. So I'm looking forward to not only to see my own story in print, but also to read the other's.

You'll not want to miss it! Details will be forth coming.

New, Old Poem Now Up!

Back in 2007, I submitted a poem to Haruah.com, the magazine I worked at as an editor. After that, I later became the managing editor. The other editors liked it, but they also asked for a revision. As it happens, I became distracted and forgot all about that revision. So the other day I was browsing through our stash when I re-read the discussion thread on this one and realized that I had a rewrite pending. So, I rewrote it and now, about two years after I wrote it, it has finally gone into print.

It is called, The Angel of My Desire. I was inspired by the quick connection between mother and child, even before they leave the womb, but certainly after. And the emotion of a baby who has a disease that would send them to a early grave making that connection all the more striking.

So click on the title above and enjoy.

Which way does your action flow?

Passive voice and passive usage. What is it? When should and shouldn't I use it? Well, let's lay it out.

First, I want us to think about this in a different way, a way I hope will make it clearer why and when you should and shouldn't use these modes of writing. I want us to think in terms of the flow of movement in your verbs.

There are three ways the action in the verbs you chose to write with will flow: forward, backwards, and static.

Forward action is what is generally referred to as "active voice." Simply, the action of the verb flows from the subject of the sentence to the object of the sentence. Henry kissed the blond girl. The action flows from Henry to the girl.

Backwards action is when the flow of action moves from the object of the sentence to the subject. The blond girl was kissed by Henry. Here, the subject, the blond girl, is receiving the action from the object of the sentence, Henry. This is known as "passive voice" because the subject is being passive, that is, not acting, but being acted upon.

But action can also be static. There is no flow from or to either subject or object. These are usually typified by the use of linking verbs. The girl Henry kissed was blond. You'll notice the action of kissing is still there, but it is no longer the focus of the sentence. It has been demoted to a modifier of which girl we are talking about: the one Henry kissed. Rather, the focus now is on the fact that the girl's hair is blond. Though it mentions kissing, there is no real action present here. Rather, it is descriptive in a non-active way. This is what is known as passive usage in that the sentence itself contains no real action, the whole sentence is passive. So, I'm terming it static action.

Now that we have the definitions down, let's take a look at these. I've heard some people want to say that backwards action is simply their style, how they write, and chaff at the suggestion that they should change it. Why do editors want and good fiction writers use active voice or forward motion? Why do they say to avoid passive voice or backwards motion in fiction writing?

It's very simple. In story telling, in most all cases (there are always exceptions to most any "rule"), people want to see your main character do something which affects the outcome of the story and brings resolution. A story where everything happens to your main character isn't nearly as tense or interesting as one where your main character struggles to overcome some obstacle, whether they succeed or not. But to see your character do that, you have to use active voice. Otherwise, your main character will either not be the focus of the sentence(s), or the action will be flowing at him all the time instead of him doing the action.

But is there a valid use for backwards action? Yes. One, when you want to show your main character as having lost control, when things are spinning out of control and everything is happening to him. That's a time to use passive voice. If you know what affect it has on the reader when they read a passive voice, you can intentionally use it at times to create a sense of disaster happening all around.

Also, there may be times when you want the keep the action with your main character, but you want the focus to shift to a different character for some affect. For instance, your "hero" is about to strike the final blow that puts the villain in the slammer. Rosh was hit by Captain Flyboy, knocking him out cold.

Another time passive voice is handy is to create distance. The direct object isn't as intimate as the subject is. You are no so much in their head, so distance is created. In the example above, you may not want to make the action of Captain Flyboy as harsh as it might be, and so use passive voice to create some distance so the view is more objective than subjective.

The goal here is to know when you are using backwards action and do it to produce a specific affect. To use it as a style of writing may work for a news article or academic research paper, but for telling a story, its use would be limited to some very special cases. Otherwise, what you will produce is fiction lacking tension or intimacy.

While there are those who overuse backwards action, the bigger overuse is static action. Most writers who don't train themselves, will tend to write with a lot of static usage.

Don't think you do? Try this. Open your story in your word processor of choice. In most, you will find a search function which will highlight your search parameter throughout your document. Open that up and use "was" for the search parameter. Have it find all, and note how frequently this word appears in your story.

For most writers unless they've trained themselves otherwise, you will see it in nearly every sentence, sometimes multiple times in one sentence. What does this mean? It means your action is static which is really worse than backwards action, and you lose the effect it could have when you do want to use it.

Here are some common ways that static action tends to happen. One, when we attempt to describe the action of someone, but instead of describing the action, we describe the state of being of the one doing the action. She felt he was an idiot for not taking her seriously. Here, you are saying what she thought he was instead of describing the action itself. It would be more active to say, She felt he didn't take her seriously. In both, the subject does have forward action, but here the subject of the dependent clause is more active.

More commonly, you see static action appear in descriptions. The car was red. The dog was shaggy. Her hair was brown. In each of these, you are simply saying what something is. There is no action to speak of at all. But how much better to put all that into action when you describe something: A brown haired girl drove a red car as a shaggy dog chased it down the street. Make such statements into adjectives describing the objects, while those objects are in motion, when they are doing something.

But you can even make descriptions themselves come alive: The car flashed red as it passed a dog's bouncing shaggy hair covering a collar connected to a leash held by a girl flipping her blond hair in the breeze. A little wordy, but you get the idea. Learn to drop the linking verbs from your descriptions and they will move the story along rather than put it on pause while you lay out the scenery.

But are there times you want to use static action? Of course! One is in using a valid progressive verb. Henry was thinking she was smart. The first instance of was is a valid progressive verb use, "was thinking." You wanted to indicate that he didn't just think that in the past but had now moved on, but that he started to think that in the past and was currently thinking that in the present. But be careful, there are actions that progressive usage doesn't fit with, actions that by their nature can not be a continuing action. Henry was blowing up the building. There is only a split second when that statement would be true. He's either about to blow it up or he has. Yet, you'll see people use the progressive verb usage when it would be better to simply use past tense.

Another prime time to use static action is when you want to state specifically what something or someone's state of being is. This is often used for a revelation of some kind. Henry was right! Or in a murder mystery you might read, Henry was the murderer!

However, what happens if these statements are buried in an avalanche of static action usage? They don't stand out at all. They are simply one among hundreds of such statements. But, if they are one of the few, the brave, the proud, guess what? They have impact. The realization has force because the story isn't full of wases.

Another time I will use the more static action is in dialog. You don't want to overdo this, but it does give a more natural way to talk. We frequently use them in talking with each other. One of the reasons this works is that static action is more "telling" while forward action is more "showing." While showing is good for narration, we don't naturally talking in showing mode, we talk in telling mode. So, instead of, Henry said, "Did you see her car? It flashed red as it sped past me, the exhaust vibrating in my ears," it would sound more natural to say, "Did you see her car? It was an awesome red!"

But do searches on "was" and other linking verbs and evaluate each use to determine if you could say it in a more active way. This also will identify much backwards action which frequently uses a linking verb. What you should be left with are those uses you really want to keep in there, and they will stand out more when not in a crowd.

As you train yourself, you'll find your writing will be more dynamic and exciting by only using backwards and static action flows to specific instances when they serve a purpose.