Do You Have a Soul?

Or rather, does your novel?

Yup, I've got a few extra minutes this morning, so I'm going to take advantage of this day I normally reserve for a day off.




I got a couple books out of the library last Saturday (I know, I know, but you must always find time for reading) and I read one of them over the weekend.  The book was crafted extraordinarily well.  The style was unique and pushed me along to read more.  But there was something else about this book that kind of made that little lightbulb go off in my head and find the connection between this book and a few others I've read.

They all had souls.

These rare gems rise above their peers with true life and vibrancy.  Not only do they reveal their secrets within the pages, but they force their readers to do the same.

And I think having this life and vibrancy, this soul, goes beyond merely stringing words along correctly and telling a good tale.  There are some wildly popular and entertaining novels out there that haven't quite reached soul status.  That's not to say they aren't good.  In fact, there are many on the NY Times Bestseller List that are crafted beautifully, but they lack that additional umph to make them truly come alive.

It's much like that guy who painted the campbell's soup cans (sorry, can't remember his name) being compared with Leonardo da Vinci.  That guy was hugely popular and his art still is.  But though it may be appealing to the eye and even a little out there, it kind of just stays there on the canvas.  But Da Vinci?  Now, his art makes you take a look at your own soul.

The same is true with writing.  We can do everything right--obey all the writerly rules (or break them only in the best of places), craft fun and exciting characters in fun and exciting worlds, and even come up with something truly out there, something people have never seen--and still have no soul.

I don't think it's possible for a writer to be able to tell if his/her own work has this extra umph.  I know I can't.  I'm pretty sure I've strung a good story, but I don't know if I've brought up issues and presented them in that little extra way that will make people go "wow, now that speaks to me."

Besides the book I read last weekend (which I will review next Monday), there is another book on my mind that was right there with the clicking lightbulb, getting connected with all the other books that have touched me in the past.  This is a book that I have consistently tried to figure out just why I loved it so much.  So many people have told me I should hate it and I could kind of see where they were going with their argument...if writing was math and I was a mathematician.

Twilight.

Yeah, here we go again.  But I'm only bringing it up again because I think that if I explain what I mean with an actual book, you guys will understand me better.

Twilight was riddled with adverbs.  Let's just get that out there.  But, who cares?  Honestly.  It worked!  And isn't that the point of writing?  But more than that, this book convinced me--and I am sure convinced millions of others--that I was falling in love all over again.  It didn't just tell me about Bella falling in love with Edward.  It convinced me--me, Emily--that I was falling in love.  That's a book with a soul.

Discussion:  Can you think of any books you've read that spoke to you above and beyond entertainment?  And what about your WIP?  Do you think it's possible to purposefully try to put soul into it, or do you think it's just one of those things that happens?


~Emily White

Vampires Suck

Okay, you guys know I love Twilight, but this looks freaking hilarious!



Update on Aurumenas:

Still editing and getting it all nice and shiny for writeoncon.

~Emily White

Movies and Books

All right, chickadees, I've got some news.  My email has been tainted with a nasty spam virus, so I've had to open up a new account.  From now on, please contact me at emilywhite_1112(at)yahoo(dot)com.  The difference is very subtle--the underscore comes after the name, not in between.

For some reason, every time we saw that a book has been turned into a movie, we jump up and down in excitement, buy our tickets, and watch said movie with great anticipation.  And yet, the movie hardly ever stands up to our expectations.  The director and script writer took liberties we feel should never have been taken.  The heroine does not look like how we imagined her to be.  Etc.  So why go?

There's just something about finally seeing with our eyes the vision the author had.  I, for one, am willing to go through the disappointing parts just to be able to live through that world I loved so much in a new way.  I never missed an opening day for any of the LOTR movies (though I was extremely disappointed with where Peter Jackson took The Two Towers) and tomorrow I will be going to see Eclipse.  

I have watched the trailers several times since they've come out and have been twiddling my fingers in anticipation.  And yet, I don't really know why.  Since reading the series, the movies have kind of ticked me off.  Bella is far more tomboyish than she should be and it seems pretty clear the script writer is on team Jacob.  The movies have given the impression that Jacob has a better chance than he actually does.  And Edward (though he does lose his temper on several occasions), ends up losing his cool during parts in the movie where he was particularly calm (on the outside) in the book.  It wouldn't be that big of a deal if it weren't made a big deal in the book.

But I'll live through it and perhaps enjoy it enough to give a proper review on Thursday.  

You tell me.  What books you loved were made into movies?  Did they disappoint or were they just what you always hoped?

~Emily White

Twilight--A Review of the Saga

I think that by this point most of us know that the Twilight saga is about a plain Jane falling in love with a sparkly vampire and his mysterious obsession with her. Right. So I won't go into a "what this book is about" review. Instead, I'm going to give you my completely biased opinion on it.

You may remember me telling you a little over a month ago that I was reading the saga and that I was pretty much obsessed with it. Yes, it's true. I'm a Twilight fan. And no, it did not take me this long to read all four books. In fact, it took me a little over a week to finish them all, and then I just kept reading them over and over again. Seriously. I'm still reading them. I can't even tell you how many times it's been now. I honestly don't know. It's a lot, though.

I've also read Midnight Sun--the incomplete draft of Twilight in Edward's POV. For those of you who are aware of the drama concerning this one, I assure you that I found this copy on Ms. Meyer's own website.

After reading the saga numerous times, I've come to a few conclusions. The first is that, despite what a lot in the writing community may think, Stephanie Meyer has talent. And the second is that all writers make mistakes in their works, and I found them. And I'm not talking about those so called mistakes that many writers say she made like having Edward leave in New Moon and the mysterious disappearance of the sex scene in Breaking Dawn. I'm talking real mistakes. As in, certain data was changed between books, etc.

But first, let's talk about Stephanie Meyer's talent. I know, I know. I've heard the arguments. But truthfully, she did a LOT right when she wrote these books. For one, despite being written in First Person, all of her characters came to life. I don't feel like I didn't totally grasp a single one of them. Second, she artfully portrayed Edward's true character even through Bella's very biased filter. And third, she brought a mythological creature that was honestly getting boring in its repetitive usage in books and made it something completely different. This is what agents and publishers are telling us to do all the time, my readers. Don't get mad because these vampires don't do what you think they should do.

Now about those mistakes... Well, let's start with the first book. It's pretty well established in this novel that vampires have a hard time being around people without the bloodlust becoming a potential problem. Though the Cullen family is able to live through it after years of self-discipline, even they admit to losing it when blood is exposed. Admittedly, I didn't think about this problem until the beginning of Breaking Dawn, but if all of this is true and Edward would not have been able to resist Bella if her blood had been exposed prior to falling deeply in love with her...well, without being too crass...she wouldn't have lived through the first month. That's all I'm saying. I think you know where I'm going with that. *cough*

Second problem in Twilight is in the hospital at the end of the book. Edward had just saved Bella from becoming a vampire by drinking her poisoned blood. And yet, Bella made no mention of his red eyes (or murky brown if he was wearing contacts), which I find very odd considering how obsessed she was with the color of his eyes.

Other mistakes: the length of Edward's stay with the Denali clan repeatedly changed between two and six days, the Chevy was described as a '57 in one book and a '53 in another, and when Alice came back in New Moon, Ms. Meyer forgot that she had been there for two days before Edward called.

Why do I bring the mistakes up? Well, for good reason: it happens. Those books went through a dozen hands and these little mistakes are still in there (As for the first one I pointed out, I'm sure Stephanie Meyer was just hoping no one would pick up on that one). We obsess and obsess about our works all the time to the point that we don't bother putting them out there. Look, mistakes will be in there. If you write an engrossing book, your readers will forgive you and your editor might not even notice.

This saga is amazing and continues to succeed despite all the disparaging comments many have made. No, it's not literary, but it wasn't intended to be. It's just plain good.

So, what do you think about the series? Have you read it? Did you like it? For the adult men out there, my husband was not a fan of the first two, but he likes the fighting in Eclipse and Breaking Dawn.

~Emily White

A Look at Twilight

That book I mentioned last week that I just couldn't put down? Yup, it was Twilight. Now granted, I can rarely put down any book even if I hate it, but this one really held my interest.

Twilight, by Stephanie Meyer has caused a lot of controversy within the writer's circle. The intense amount of adverbs alongside robust descriptions bordering on purple prose have led many a new writer to wonder how Ms. Meyer could achieve such success when they receive rejection after rejection for "vastly superior work." I'm going to try to make sense of this reality here.

First, let's address the arguments from the poo poo corner. Adverbs. And lots of 'em. I'll admit that there were a significant number of dialogue tags with adverbs in practically every one of them. But let's think about this. First, Twilight is not a self-published book. Meyer had an editor comb through every bit of that book probably dozens of times before it went to publication and graced the bookstores with its pretty little cover. You can not argue about her supposed inferior writing skills unless you also want to poo poo said editor. Second, it's not a book for adults. We as writers may forget (but honestly never should and have no excuse for doing it) that there are different reading levels in books. We may spout off about Middle Grade and Young Adult with some authority, but to be honest, I've read many examples from new writers that are similar in style to an adult reading level. I have always been told (and forgive me if you know this to be incorrect) that the lower you go in the reading level, the more adverbs you include. Just because I, as a writer of adult fiction, would prefer to replace one of her adverbs with something that I feel would be better doesn't mean I would be right in so doing.

Another argument: Edward was just too darn perfect. I'll admit that Edward could have been dangerously close to being a Mary Sue, except for one reason--Twilight was written in First Person. The first person account of any narrator has to be suspect and Bella was in love with him! Of course he was perfect! He was her knight in shining armor; there was nothing that could ever be wrong with him.

Poo Poo corner round three: Bella was too whiny. Come on now. This, I think, requires no explanation. She was a teenage girl. Enough said. In fact, I think it's to Meyer's credit that she was able to depict human nature so well.

And finally, vampires shouldn't sparkle. Eh, I am probably more on the side of the poo poos here. From what I've read, this particular description is in keeping with Ms. Meyer's dream, so I can see why she may not have been willing to part with it. And to be honest, she worked it into the story well enough by creating problems for the vampire family. They couldn't just be out in the daytime with absolutely nothing to stop them. It was a (much needed) limit to their power and influence. Also, I always saw the sparkly nature of the vampires' as Edward tried to explain it: another weapon in their arsenal. Nature itself has shown its uses in the beautiful but deadly nature of predators. Just look at the angler fish that woos its victims with a pretty little sparkly bulb that dangles from its head over razor sharp teeth.

Now let's step back from defending Ms. Meyer and actually see what absolutely worked about the book and should invoke no argument to the contrary.

Millions of teenage girls (and women who remember their teenage years) refer to themselves as Twihards for only two reasons. One: they're in love with Edward. Two: they see themselves as Bella. Because of the latter, you can see why they would fall for former. With such a deep connection to Bella, they can't help but remember and see their own high school crush in that sparkly, tall, and handsome vampire.

And why shouldn't she love him? Should she be repulsed by his attentiveness and absolute obsession over her? Absolutely not. Despite what society may try to drill in us from very early ages, girls like the idea of a gorgeous hero, superior to them in might, swooping in out of the shadows to save them from some very dastardly men. And not to just stop there, but to have eyes for no other woman and to have a burning need to protect her at all costs.

And that's why teenage boys like the book. Because, again, despite what society tells us, men and women are different. Where women ultimately like the idea of finding security in a man they can count on, men like to be needed. And those traits of Edward's, not having been rejected by Bella as chauvinistic, but instead praised as something altogether desirable is something that boys need and desire to see.

Stephanie Meyer, despite anyone's arguments towards her writing abilities, captured human nature so perfectly so as to make each one of her characters real and someone we are sure we know personally. I say good job to her. And I'm very much looking forward to reading the next book in the series.

~Emily White