Monthly Archives: February 2012

Writing for Boys

I have a new article over at Blogging Authors discussing the differences between writing for boys and girls in a post titled “The Art of Writing for Boys.” Boys are tougher. They aren’t as patient as girls, and they crave action. As a novelist, the trick is to tie the action into the substance of the story and characters. (I discuss the tensin between story, action, and character in more depth in an earlier post on this blog site, too.)

I discuss the art of writing for boys in more depth in the Blogging Authors article, but the idea came to me when I gave a presentation on writing novels to an eighth grade class in Tallahassee. I talk about this experience in a recent video log (VL 7) on youtube (SamRStaley) as well.

Like what your read? We'll make it easy for you to share....

Does a Writer Have to Sacrifice Story for Action?

One of the more important dilemmas facing a middle-grade writer, particularly one that wants to target boys, is the trade-off between story and action. A good story is crucial to a successful novel as characters and setting are weaved together in a plot to keep forward momentum in the book.

In fact, that’s one of the first rules of writing: Keep the pace of the story moving forward. A good story is almost always moved forward through conflict. (For a great discussion and “how to guide” to using conflict as the basis for crafting story, see the book on screenwriting by Robert McKee titled Story.) But conflict comes in many forms, sometimes focusing on relationships (confict between people), sometimes focused on physical survival (man v. nature), sometimes focused on personal psychological obstacles (e.g., self-doubt or self-esteem).
Identifying the nature of the conflict is criticial for writing for boys. I discuss this is a recent video on Youtube (VL-7), but the gist of the issue is this: Boys are more in tune with action and physical sources of conflict. We hear it all the time (and parents know it’s true): Boys are impatient and are “bundles of energy.” They really don’t become engaged with emotional or interpersonal sources of conflict. Their perspective is framed fundamentally by their developmental stage, which, in the teen years, if more driven by physical development. More importantly, their emotional development is tied to this physical development. The twin forces–physical and emotional conflict–frames the way boys handle conflict. Novelists take note!

For writers focused on engaging boys, the trick is to fuse emotional conflict with physical action in order to create a story. In some ways, this requires the novel to be more layered and complex than in more traditional approaches to writing. Sometimes I think (incorrectly) that a novel for a girl could sustain itself solely on the emotional conflict between her and her mother or best friend. (Importantly, girls like action too, but they are also more open, willing, and accepting of emotionally driven stories.)

Writing action sequences is an art in itself. Combining the physicality of action with the emotional conflict that creates complex story lines can be dauntingt, but it’s not impossible. Thus, I don’t think writers have to sacrifice story for action. I think I achieved some of this goal with A Warrior’s Soul (at least if the reviews are a meaningful indicator). The action starts with the first sentence, but the emotional content is embedded in the lead character’s response:

Hands trembling, Luke crouched behind the plastic trash can and prayed he’d be okay. The crumbling brick wall should have been enough to hide him. The rattling chains from belts and scattering rocks from scurrying books warned him it might not.

The story really takes off from here, using the action to drive the plot and conflict that ultimately results in Luke making a critical decision in the book’s climax that resolves an essential emotional dilemma (and completes his character arc).

Like what your read? We'll make it easy for you to share....

More on the Ethics of Pulling Negative Reviews

After reviewing my earlier post on negative book reviews, I realized I didn’t answer the question posted by Irene Watson: Is it ethical to ask bloggers to withhold a negative review of your book?

I don’t see this as an ethical problem for the author; I see this as a ethical matter for the reviewer. I think it would be unprofessional, tactless, and in poor form to ask a reviewer to withhold a review, but I think it falls short of a breach of ethics unless you are asking them to renege on an existing agreement. If the book was accepted by the reviewer under an agreement whereby only a positive book review would be published, the ethical issues are pretty straightfoward and nonexistent. No breach of contract exists, in spirit or letter; no harm, no foul.

Much of the discussion elicited by Irene, which is very productive and interesting, focused on questions of freedom of speech. This is an interesting take on the issue because book reviews fall in the area of civil contract (torts) not civil liberties. This may seem a bit pedantic, but freedom of speech refers to a constraint on government from infringing on individual freedom, not private parties to engage in a mutally agreed upon contract, which is where book reviews fall. The ethical issues emerge if undue pressure is put on the reviewer to behave in a way contrary to their sense of fairness or contract with the publishers/author.

That said, I believe strongly that the book review market’s integrity rests on its ability for give voice to a wide range of voices, whether their opinions are positive or negative, and I have never asked, and never will ask, a reviewer to withold a negative review of my work. (I have personally chosen not to review books because I don’t see the purpose in devoting space, time, and effort, to a book I don’t think has literary or substantive merit, but I’ve never withheld a review because the author, publisher or editor objected to the content.)

Like what your read? We'll make it easy for you to share....