razieltwelve

Because writing should be fun

How Not To Throw A Jab Properly

I’ve long been a fan of combat sports. And until my knees decided to quit on me, I used to train quite regularly in them too. In any case, I still enjoy watching combat sports, especially boxing and MMA (my knowledge of striking is somewhat better than my knowledge of grappling), and there’s something I’ve noticed a lot of people in MMA doing that kind of bothers me.

They don’t throw the jab properly.

Okay, let me expand on that a bit more. A punch does not end when the arm reaches it maximum extension. It ends when the hand is brought back to the guard position and the puncher is back in a stable stance. Until then, the puncher is extremely vulnerable to being hit back by their opponent.

The jab is supposed to be one of the safest punches to throw (i.e., one of the most difficult for an opponent to punish). But that assumption relies on several things:

  • The chin is tucked
  • The shoulder of the punching arm is used to shield the chin (usually by lifting the shoulder)
  • The punching arm should be retracted quickly after throwing the punch, with the arm resuming a guard position
  • The rear arm (right arm) stays in a guard position throughout the jab
  • The jab should be thrown with a clear purpose in mind, not simply to pass the time

Now, the jab is not the most powerful punch in the world. For most people, the most powerful punch is either the overhand right or the left hook. But the jab can still be thrown (and should be thrown) with enough force behind it to make someone think twice. Good timing has a major role to play here since a jab thrown at someone moving forward can hit with far more force than a jab thrown at someone moving away.

That said, one of the most common mistakes I see in MMA is people who throw the “nothing jab”. This is a jab that basically combines every possible mistake into one hideous monstrosity of a punch. Essentially, it’s a pawing jab that lacks any real speed or force, which is thrown simply out of a need to look productive. This punch is usually performed haphazardly with the person throwing it committing several key mistakes:

  • The chin is elevated and the shoulder is not lifted
  • Instead of being brought back to a guard position, the punching arm is allowed to fall and then kind of dragged back up into guard
  • The jab is thrown while moving backward (it is much harder to throw a good jab while moving backwards, and few fighters have the footwork for it)
  • It is thrown in a highly predictable manner

These mistakes leave the puncher off balance with their chin and head completely exposed. Furthermore, because the punch is thrown in a predictable, pawing manner, the opponent can simply walk through it without concern. Do you want to know what this leads to?

This.

Watch closely and you’ll see that most of the knockouts via overhand right are preceded by one fighter moving backwards and throwing a nothing jab. The other fighter then does the sensible thing: they wade forward through the jab (which is too weak to do any real damage) and then throw a huge overhand right into the gap in the first fighter’s defence. Caught mid-punch, the first fighter cannot dodge or brace themselves for impact. They are simply knocked senseless.

Now, MMA fighters aren’t the only people who do this (I’ve seen boxers do it too), but it does seem to be more prevalent in MMA than boxing. There are several reasons for why this might be the case:

  • Lack of boxing training. MMA fighters have to train in multiple styles of combat. It stands to reason that their boxing skills will be poorer than those of a dedicated boxer who only focuses on one.
  • Fear of the takedown. The only possible reason (and it’s still not a good reason most of the time) to drop your hand after throwing a jab is because you fear the opponent going for a takedown. In that case, having the hand (or both hands) low will help defend that, especially if they make a grab for your legs or for your hips.
  • Exhaustion. It is a simple fact that technique breaks down as people get tired. If a fighter has otherwise excellent form that falls apart at the end of a gruelling five-round fight filled with non-stop striking and grappling, I can understand that. But a lot of fighters exhibit poor technique from the start.

So what about if you’re the one fighting somebody who likes to throw nothing jabs? Here are some options:

  • The cross counter. This essentially means slipping to the left while throwing an overhand right at the opponent’s exposed chin before they have a chance to protect themselves. What makes this a favourite amongst MMA fighters is that it allows them to step forward while slipping to the left, thereby loading up their right hand with all of their body weight and momentum. It’s not elegant, but it hits like a sledgehammer. Don’t believe me? Stand up, take a boxing stance, and then move your front foot (it should be your left foot) forward and to the left while shifting your head to the left as well. Your entire body is now going forward, with the right shoulder coming around, so throw a looping right hand. Now imagine hitting somebody in the face with that.
  • The counter jab. If someone likes to throw nothing jabs, but you don’t want to swing for the fences (see the above), you can simply step forward and into a jab of your own while either slipping or blocking/parrying their jab. Since your jab is thrown with authority (especially if you’ve stepped into it), they are the one who is going to be getting hurt, particularly if they have the bad habit of moving their head too much when they punch (which is surprisingly common).
  • The counter hook. If they throw nothing jabs, then the odds are very good that they will not have their right hand (their rear hand) in the correct guard position. This is where you take your left hand (your front hand) and throw a hook at their head. The hook is a much heavier punch than the jab and can be thrown with great speed. You should be getting the better end of any trade (although you can also try to parry/block their jab with your right hand).

Out of all the things I see in MMA, the nothing jab is probably my least favourite. The only one that comes close is the “nothing leg kick” which is basically the leg kick equivalent (and is usually dealt with in similar fashion).

Mistakes and the Process of Improvement

Learning to write well is not easy. It can be a long and difficult process, and mistakes are often made along the way. But making mistakes is no reason to feel discouraged. In fact, makes mistakes is part of the process of improvement. Today, I’ll be taking a closer look at that process and some of the mistakes that you might make along the way. I’ll be paying particularly close attention to what those mistakes mean in the broader context of improvement.

In my opinion, there are four main elements to a good story:

  • Characters
  • Plot
  • Setting/Ideas
  • Technical proficiency

Each of these different elements has a tendency to produce different mistakes. However, the most common mistakes are seldom random. Indeed, the most common mistakes occur so frequently because they are signs of growth.

Characters

Creating engaging and believable character is crucial to writing a good story. The more that people care about the characters you create, the more likely they are to care about the story as a whole. Readers cannot fully appreciate a tragedy if they don’t care about the characters involved, and a romance will likely live or die based on how much the readers care about the characters.

So what tools do we have for portraying engaging and believable characters? Well, some of the most obvious tools are dialogue, gestures, inner thoughts, and behaviour. But putting all of these things together isn’t easy. Here are some common mistakes associated with characters:

  • Attempting to convey some sense of a character’s motivations or personality through overly elaborate or detailed dialogue
  • Trying to create unique characters but ending up with caricatures (note: unlike parody, this is not deliberate)
  • Overly elaborate or lengthy descriptions of characters and their backstories
  • Overuse of inner monologues

All of these are mistakes – but they are mistakes that people often make because they are trying to create better characters. Indeed, all four of these mistakes are usually committed in response to criticism.

For instance, a writer might be told that their characters don’t have unique voices in the dialogue. In other words, the writer is being told that all of their characters sound the same. A perfectly rational way to try to correct this is to write dialogue that conveys the characters’ motivations and personalities. But it is very easy to go overboard when doing this, which is why a lot of writers have dialogue that is overly elaborate and detailed. They are trying to fix one problem and end up creating another. With time and practice, however, they will learn to find a balance.

A similar approach can be used to understand why many writers attempting to improve come up with characters that are more like caricatures. We are told by a great many authorities on writing that every character should be unique. But how can we make each character unique? Well, the easiest way is to give everybody a few quirks to set them apart (e.g., differences in speech, mannerism, etc.). But the problem is that if these quirks are too subtle, the reader won’t notice them. So why not make them more obvious? Well, if the quirks are too obvious and too exaggerated, then the characters are no longer believable. They become caricatures. But making this mistake doesn’t have to be a bad thing – only by going too far can a writer learn how far is too far.

Having overly elaborate or lengthy descriptions of characters and their backstories is the most common mistakes related to character creation and development. It stems from another criticism that is typically levelled at novice writers: there isn’t enough detail about the characters. The problem with this criticism is that it is rarely put into context. A novice writer doesn’t know where to add extra detail. Should it be added to describing the appearance of the characters? Perhaps it should go into explaining the long and horrible histories of each character? Or perhaps every interaction between characters should be described down to the very minutiae of how many hairs are on each person’s head?

Writing is usually an intensely personal endeavour. Few writers feel comfortable sharing their work with others, and even fewer feel comfortable asking critics to provide a more detailed explanation of their criticism. As a result, an improving writer who has received criticism regarding a lack of detail will often respond by adding far too much detail across all aspects of their characters. Doing so ensures that they fixed the problem – but it also creates another problem. However, with continued feedback and practice, a writer should learn how to better strike a balance between brevity and detail. Indeed, as a writer grows, they will typically develop a better understanding of their own strengths and weaknesses, allowing them to better identify the areas where more detail is required.

The overuse of inner monologues occurs for much the same reason that the mistakes previously outlined occurs – readers may not feel that they know the characters very well. The writer will thus try to give them a better glimpse into the characters’ minds using the most straightforward and practical method available: inner monologues. But inner monologues are a fairly blunt way of telling readers what a character is thinking or feeling. This doesn’t mean that they are bad, but it is easy to use them too often or to make them too heavy-handed. Once again, however, it is a mistake that often leads to growth because it forces the writer to confront a weakness and to work on a solution. The solution may be imperfect at first, but over time, the writer is likely to become better at incorporating inner monologues into their stories. Furthermore, as a writer becomes more practiced at working with inner monologues, they should start to realise the limitations of inner monologues, leading them to seek out alternate methods of conveying their characters’ thoughts and feelings (e.g., through character interactions and mannerisms).

In summary, the most common mistakes that improving writers make with regards to characters have their roots in the most common criticisms received by writers about characters. These mistakes may be examples of poor writing, but they also lay the foundations for much better writing. In much the same way that someone learning to drive will make a lot of mistakes and over-correct for those mistakes, someone who is learning to write will over-correct in response to criticism. But like someone who has finally learned to drive properly, a writer will eventually learn to strike the correct balance if they continue to work hard and practice.

Plot

The plot is another integral part of a story. Although some types of stories are more reliant on a good plot than others (e.g., a detective story versus a slice-of-life story), a good plot is never a bad thing to have. Most of the plot-related mistakes I see (and have committed myself) can be tied to the conventions of storytelling.

As with any other long-lasting discipline, writing has developed certain “rules”. Many of these rules are genre specific and have come to be known as tropes or clichés. It goes without saying that not all of these rules are good. Some of them are actually quite bad. But some of them are good, and these good rules exist for a reason. Consider the concept of the “hero’s journey” – this is a story structure that has existed in one form or another for thousands of years. Clearly, it’s doing something right. So, here are some of the common mistakes associated with the plot of a story:

  • Plot lines that involve everyone being horrible and treacherous – not to improve the story, but to try and buck convention
  • Having too many plot twists or surprises in an effort to move past “conventional” plot structure
  • Trying to work with too many plot lines or to use a non-linear plotline in an bid to be unique or different

All three of these mistakes are very common. But once again, we should look not only at whether these mistakes are made but also at why these mistakes are made. I believe that all three stem from a common cause: rebellion against convention. It is goes almost without saying that a story that slavishly adheres to every single convention will end up boring. But a story that defies every single convention without a good reason can be even worse.

One of the oldest conventions in storytelling is that there are heroes and villains, good guys and bad guys. This convention exists because it makes the story easier to tell and because it gives the readers a clear idea of whom they should cheer for. But a lot can be gained from creating a plot that goes beyond black and white to include shades of grey.

Perhaps the best contemporary example of a writer who takes advantage of moral ambiguity is G. R. R. Martin. Regardless of what one thinks of Game of Thrones (and I think rather highly of it), it is undeniable that the story derives a lot of its power from the twists and turns the plot takes – twists and turns that are only possible because the line between good and evil is blurred. However, as Martin’s writing has become more popular, I’ve noticed an increasing number of writers trying to copy his approach by creating plots marked by unrelenting treachery and betrayal. The problem is that almost none of these writers have Martin’s skill. If a plot is filled with nothing but betrayal and treachery, then it becomes every bit as predictable as a plot where there are clear heroes and villains.

Martin chose to include treachery and betrayal because they allowed him to write a better story. But simply including treachery and betrayal does not automatically make a story better. Hidden amongst all the treachery and betrayal of Game of Thrones is the fact that not everyone is treacherous and eager to betray others, and that is what makes the story work. In trying to avoid a world of good versus evil, too many improving writers simply create a world full of evil. This is not particularly interesting. What improving writers will develop with more experience (and this is what Martin does very well) is the ability to create a plot that includes good, evil, and everything in between.

The archetypical structure of a story is a topic that has been studied for decades. Indeed, no matter what genre you want to write, you should be able to find an in-depth analysis of what basic plot structure is required. One of the most tempting things for a novice writer is to try and come up with something new, to move beyond the established boundaries of the discipline. This desire can be very powerful, but conventional plot structures exist for a reason – they are highly effective, and it can be extremely difficult to create a plot that goes beyond this archetypical style.

The surprise twist is an excellent example of something that can either go brilliantly or horribly depending on the skill of the writer. A poorly written plot twist can leave the reader feeling cheated, as though the writer has simply pulled a rabbit out of a hat. A good plot twist will leave the reader nodding in fascination as they realise that all the pieces were there, but they just never noticed them. The most common mistake for novice writers is to try and include too many plot twists – but constantly contorting the plot runs the very real risk of damaging the coherence of the plot and becoming predictable. A writer who is trying to improve will often go overboard with the plot twists because they are trying to understand what makes a plot twist effective. As they learn how to make more effective plot twists, they should not feel the need to shoehorn one into every single chapter.

A conventional plot follows a linear structure and focuses primarily on one set of characters. By adding more plot lines and adopting a less conventional structure (e.g., multiple timelines, flashbacks, etc.), a writer has the chance to create a truly unique and engaging story. But the mistake that a lot of improving writers make is to fail to realise the answer to a simple question: what plot structure should a story have? The correct answer is: whatever plot structure most effectively serves that story.

When an improving or novice writer first comes across the idea of unconventional plot structures, they are likely to be tempted to try them. That is perfectly understandable. Multiple plot lines and non-linear plotlines sound amazing. But they are only amazing in the right story – and that is the critical point. It isn’t at all unusual to see improving writers make the mistake of trying to apply these techniques to stories that would have been better served with a normal plot structure. But that’s okay – making these mistakes is vital for improvement. The only way that a writer will learn what stories are best served by unconventional plot structures is to make the mistake of trying to shove unconventional plot structures into a story that doesn’t need them. Believe me, I’ve learned this the hard way.

Overall, the mistakes commonly made with regards to plot are mostly related to the understandable desire to buck convention and try new things. But convention usually exists for a reason, and although not all conventions are good, there are some that should be followed unless there is a good reason to do otherwise. An improving writer needs to make a few of these mistakes so they can learn to recognise when stories should follow conventions and when they should move past them.

Setting/Ideas

The setting of a story is the world in which it takes places. Creating that world is, in many ways, the hardest part of writing a story. All of the characters exist inside that world, and they and the plot are all bound by the rules and laws that govern how that world works. Likewise, the ideas and themes that run through a story will also influence how the setting takes shape. In order to explore certain themes or ideas, it may be necessary to create a world with a particular set of characteristics. For example, the controlling society of Brave New World was necessary so that the book could explore the themes it wanted to. Likewise, the dystopian society of The Hunger Games is also necessary for the discussion of certain themes and ideas.

Here are some of the most common idea/setting-related mistakes made by writers trying to improve:

  • Creating a world that is highly similar to an existing one
  • Creating an inconsistent world
  • Being heavy-handed with themes and ideas

Creating an entirely new world is extremely difficult. It’s no coincidence that most fantasy novels have at least a passing resemblance to medieval Europe or that most science fiction stories seem to be projections or forecasts of how the modern world will advance. It is also no coincidence that many novels appear to borrow, at least slightly, from other novels (e.g., Tolkien’s influence on high fantasy).

The reason that this kind of borrowing occurs, and the reason that so many novice and improving writers tend to participate in it more heavily than experienced writers, is that it is a lot easier to make small changes than to make big ones. For instance, if a writer has never written about a world with magic in it before, it is much easier for them to tweak an existing magical system rather than to create an entirely new one. Doing this allows them to focus on other aspects of the story (e.g., their descriptions of magic, the characters, the plot, etc.).

In short, one of the main reasons that many novice and improving writers create worlds that are highly similar to existing worlds, only with small changes, is that doing so allows them to work on the problem of world creation piece by piece. In one story, they might tweak how magic works. In the next story, they might tweak how magic works and throw in a few changes to how society works. In this way, they can gradually build up to creating their own unique world. Seen from this point of view, this isn’t a mistake so much as it is the middle of a long process of development.

Another common mistake amongst novices and improving writers is creating an inconsistent world. By inconsistent, I mean a world in which the rules and laws that govern how things work are not logically consistent (i.e., they conflict with the logic of the world in which the story operates). On the flipside of the writer who only makes small modifications to an existing world is the writer that tries to create an entirely brand new world. An entirely new world demands its own set of rules and laws, and these can often be quite complex. Without practice, it is very easy for a writer to create rules or laws that conflict with each other or combine to produce nonsensical situations and results. But this mistake is not a bad one to make – it is a sign that a writer is trying to create their own world. With more practice and a more systematic approach (e.g., by writing down notes and discussing it with others), the number of mistakes should gradually decrease until a writer can create their own world.

Being heavy-handed with themes and ideas is another mistake that is often symptomatic of a lack of experience and practice – both of which can be remedied in a relatively straightforward manner (more practice). Including themes and ideas in a story is easy – the hard part is doing it in a way that makes it feel natural as opposed to forced. This can be done in a number of ways (e.g., by having characters embody certain points of view), but all of these methods require a subtle touch. A character that spouts about communism every second paragraph will allow you to discuss communism – but it isn’t going to be a very productive discussion. In contrast, characters embedded in a communist society who grow up and gradually come to a fuller awareness of the political system through working their way up the ranks of the political class would provide a much better discussion – but it would also require a much softer touch and a better grasp of character, setting, and plot.

The key is to look at how a writer responds to making this mistake. The best response is to try and find a way to work the themes and ideas into the story in a natural or organic way. The worst response – the one that shows a writer is only interested in shoving ideas down the throats of the readers – is a writer that is more concerned with the ideological message than with portraying engaging and believable characters, a solid plot, and an interesting setting. Such a response tells the reader that the writer is more interested in talking about an idea than telling a story. Now, this can work if they are writing a manifesto of some kind, but if the reader is looking for something entertaining to read, they are likely to be put off.

The most common mistakes related to the setting/ideas are often signs of growth. Creating worlds is hard, and mistakes are to be expected. What is important is how a writer responds to make these mistakes. An improving writer will try and learn from a mistake, even if it produces a different mistake. Nobody is perfect, but with more practice, world building should become easier as an improving writer identifies the areas that give them difficulty and the areas they find easiest.

Technical Proficiency

Technical proficiency refers to the purely technical side of a writer’s writing – their punctuation, grammar, sentence composition, vocabulary, and so forth. What makes technical proficiency so tricky to evaluate is that some parts of it are highly amenable to brute force improvement (i.e., improvement through stringent practice) whilst others are highly resistant to it. Here are some of the most common mistakes

  • Poor punctuation and/or grammar
  • Limited vocabulary
  • Awkward writing style
  • Inconsistent tone/style

The easiest way to improve punctuation and grammar is to practice. This means doing things the hard way: proofreading your work repeatedly and consulting grammar resources whenever you’re not sure about something. This can be very time consuming and mentally draining, which is why a lot of writers I see trying to improve their punctuation and grammar suffer in other ways. The most common of these is that their writing becomes more robotic and sterile because they are focusing almost entirely on punctuation and grammar. Another possibility is that they go overboard with punctuation (e.g., commas absolutely everywhere). But both of these mistakes will decline as the punctuation and grammar becomes automatic. Think of how you learned to type for the first time. You probably had to look at the keys a lot. But once you got the hang of it, you didn’t have to watch your hands anymore. Punctuation and grammar are like that – once you get the hang of them, you don’t have to think about them anymore, and you can focus entirely on the content of your writing.

Vocabulary can also be brute forced in much the same way as punctuation and grammar. I know what a lot of people say about relying on dictionaries and thesauruses, but if that’s what helps a writer learn more words, then I’m all for it. The most common mistake here is for writers to fall in love with their growing vocabulary, resulting in prose that is florid, verbose, and a rather hideous shade of purple. Trust me, I’ve gone through this phase myself (and still go back there occasionally, and an improving writer will grow out of it. It’s the same way that a child who has just learned to tie their shoelaces will want to tie them as often as possible to show off their newly acquired skill.

Both awkward writing style and inconsistent tone/style stem from an improving writer’s attempts to identify the style that fits them best. I believe that almost every writer is naturally inclined toward one particular style, a style that matches their strengths as a writer. The problem is that it can be very hard to identify what that style is. As a result, improving writers will often try many different styles (often starting with the styles of authors they admire). Most of the time, using a style that doesn’t suit them will produce awkward writing – the kind that just reads really badly. Thus making this mistake isn’t necessarily a bad thing – the writer may simply be searching for the style that suits them. And even once they find that style, it may take them some time to master it (e.g., read the early work of an author versus their later work – there is often a substantial difference in quality).

Inconsistencies in tone and style often stem from much the same cause – an attempt to explore different tones and styles to find out which ones a writer is skilled in. This is perfectly normal behaviour, akin to the way that a tennis player might try hitting different shots from different parts of the court to see where they are most comfortable. What is most important is that the writer takes careful note of which styles they need work in and which they are already proficient in.

Technical proficiency is something that can – and should – be worked on. Many of the mistakes that improving writers make that are related to technical proficiency can be tied to their attempts to improve and explore their own abilities, both of which are things a novice or improving writer should do.

Summary

As you can see, novice and improving writers can make a lot of different mistakes. But what is important to realise is that they do not make these mistakes simply because they lack skill or practice. Instead, most of these mistakes are made during practice in an attempt to improve their skills. For this reason, there is no need to feel discouraged about making mistakes. Indeed, making these mistakes – and then learning from them – can lead to rapid improvement.

Don’t be afraid to make mistakes – the only time you fail is when you stop trying.

I hope you found this useful. If you want to know more about my thoughts on writing, you can find thosehere.

I also write original fiction (mostly fantasy). You can find that here. If you’re interested in some humorous fantasy, give Two Necromancers, a Bureaucrat, and an Elf a try. Trust me, it’ll put a smile on your face. If you want something more serious, try The Last Huntress.

Thinking About Fanfiction.net Story Analytics (Part 1)

I recently received the following question:

“A question on story analytics. Being new on FFnet, I don’t know what to expect. My first 2 stories featuring popular characters have gotten something like 900 views from 800 visitors over 2 days… and 3 reviews each. I’m grateful for the thoughtful and positive feedback. Just wondering if the writing is so meh that the vast majority have no opinion (even negative ones) on it at all. Do you look at your numbers, and how would you interpret them to identify areas for improvement?”

This is a very interesting question, and I’d like to break it down into a few parts:

  1. What constitutes a “successful” story in terms of hits, reviews, etc.?
  2. Can you use any of these numbers to help yourself improve, and if so, how?

The first question does not have an easy answer. From what I have observed the numbers that a story does depend on several main factors:

  • Which fandom the story belongs to
  • Which characters are involved in the story
  • What style/genre of story it is
  • How long the story is
  • How often the story is updated

The more people belong to a particular fandom, the larger your potential audience will be. For example, more people (total) read Naruto fan fiction than read King of Thorn fan fiction. However, this is complicated by the fact that a more popular fandom is also likely to have more stories, meaning there is more competition (assuming that people can only read a limited number of stories each day).

Consider the Naruto fandom. You could have the most brilliant story ever and it is quite possible that most people will never get the chance to read it since it will be buried in amongst all the other (~366,000) stories. In contrast, if you write an absolutely brilliant story for the Madlax fandom, it is highly unlikely that anyone will miss it since there are only 46 other stories for that fandom.

Thus simply writing in a popular fandom does not guarantee that the people who would enjoy your story will actually read it – they might never be able to find it amongst all the others.

A mid-sized fandom offers arguably the most favourable conditions for a budding writer who is eager for feedback since the community is still large enough that there are a lot of potential readers but also still small enough that the story is likely to be seen.

So how do we define a mid-sized fandom? It depends on what classification type is being used. For example, here are the story numbers for the top 5 most popular anime/manga:

  1. Naruto (366k = 366,000)
  2. Inuyasha (113k)
  3. Hetalia Axis Powers (105k)
  4. Bleach (78.4k)
  5. Yu-Gi-Oh (64.7k)

Now, let’s look at the top 5 most popular cartoons:

  1. Avatar: Last Airbender (38.4k)
  2. Teen Titans (36.9k)
  3. Transformers/Beast Wars (24.7k)
  4. My Little Pony (21.1k)
  5. Danny Phantom (17.9k)

The top 5 cartoons combined do not even add up to the most popular anime, and are not that much higher than the second-most popular anime. Heck the most popular cartoon would only come in at #11 for anime/manga.

The point here is that a mid-sized fandom for cartoons will be much smaller than a mid-sized fandom for anime/manga. As a result, you need to look at what classification you’re using and adjust your expectations accordingly.

To illustrate the potential effect of the size of a fandom on numbers, let’s have a look at the most popular Naruto stories versus the most popular Yu-Gi-Oh stories.

The highest number of reviews for a Naruto story is ~13.9k vs only 4.6k for Yu-Gi-Oh. The highest number of favourites is ~15.1k for Naruto vs 1.4k for Yu-Gi-Oh. And finally, the highest number of follows is 12.6k for Naruto vs 0.7k for Yu-Gi-Oh.

Clearly, the most popular stories from the bigger fandom have much higher numbers that the most popular stories from the smaller fandom. This, in my opinion, speaks to the power of audience size: more people are interested in Naruto fan fiction, hence the popular Naruto stories have more reviews, favourites, and follows.

Keep in mind, however, that these are the most popular stories. The number of Naruto stories with only a handful of reviews or follows vastly outnumbers those of Yu-Gi-Oh simply because a lot of Naruto stories are “lost” amongst all the others.

The characters that are the focus of a story are also important. It is a fact that in any given series, some characters are more interesting or popular with fans than others. In general, fans want to read more stories about these interest/popular characters.

Again the same dilemma emerges. If you write about a popular character, you have a much wider potential audience – but also more competition. However, if you write about a less popular character, you have a smaller audience – but less competition.

One exception to this is the rare story about a less popular character (or pairing) that is so brilliant that it becomes highly influential even amongst people who do not like that character/pairing. Indeed, some of the most popular stories are those that lay the foundations for non-canon pairings. For example, the popular Hermione/Draco pairing exists only in fan fiction – there is virtually no evidence whatsoever in canon to support it, but the pairing rapidly became popular and stories supporting it are amongst the most reviewed/followed/favourited in Harry Potter fandom.

To see how dramatic an effect the choice of characters can be, let’s pick the genre where it makes the most difference: the romantic genre. Shipping wars (relationship wars) are a notorious part of fandom wherein fans grab their proverbial stakes and pitchforks and attempt to enforce their chosen OTP (One True Pairing) upon the rest of the world. I will, once again, use Naruto as an example because it is the largest fandom with which I am reasonably familiar (Harry Potter with 690k is actually larger, but I’m not particularly familiar with the shipping wars over there).

The most popular Naruto/Hinata story has a staggering set of statistics 12.9k/15.1k/12.6k (reviews/favourites/follows).

The most popular Naruto/Tenten story has a much less impressive set of statistics: 1.9k/2.5k/1.3k.

As you can see shipping has a very real influence – the most popular Naruto/Hinata story crushes its Naruto/Tenten counterpart. But this is where things get interesting. There are only ~500 stories classified as Naruto/Tenten vs ~13.8k stories classified as Naruto/Hinata. A Naruto/Tenten story thus has a much better chance of not being lost in the crowd and can still garner significant numbers. This kind of discrepancy means that a newer writer, eager for feedback and notice, might want to consider a slightly less popular pairing – provided that it still has an audience of a reasonable size.

Turning to the question of genre, there is no doubt in my mind that some genres are more popular than others. In Naruto, the most popular stories by review/favourite/follows tend to be adventure or romance (or have no genre listed). I suspect that this varies slightly from fandom to fandom, but a lot of fan fiction stems from a kind of wish-fulfilment. For instance, if a pairing is heavily hinted at during a series but never taken to fruition, fan fiction can fill that void.

The Naruto/Hinata pairing is an example of this wish-fulfilment although perhaps the most dominant non-canon pairing I’ve ever seen (as a percentage) is the Maura/Jane pairing from Rizzoli and Isles which permeates the fandom despite it not being canon. Indeed, I would estimate that around 90% of all Rizzoli and Isles stories feature this pairing in some fashion.

In other words, the most popular genres are either those that extend what makes a series great (e.g., adventure for series like Naruto) or address things that the series does not (e.g., romance in Naruto).

However, this doesn’t mean that other genres cannot succeed. Every fandom has certain stories that are considered by the majority of fans as “good”. These are the stories that new fans are told about and encouraged to read by more experienced fans. Invariably some of these stories are the tear-jerkers (e.g., angst/tragedy), and while they do not seem to gather the massive numbers of the aforementioned genres, they can do very good numbers nonetheless.

Furthermore, it is also possible to identify areas of the fandom that are not getting the stories they want. A fandom is, in general, a collection of diverse individuals (diverse with regards to temperament, personality, etc.). As such, many fans will have tastes that are not being sated by the most common stories. If, for example, a fandom ceases to write angst/tragedy then the door is wide open for someone to write those things because there absolutely will be someone who will read and appreciate them. Likewise, if a fandom has been overrun by dark/broody stories, some of the most popular stories are those that focus on fluff/romance, serving needs that have gone unmet.

The length of a story can also impact what kind of numbers it does. In general, longer stories tend to do better numbers than shorter stories. This stems from a number of possible factors:

  • There is more content, which makes people like the story more
  • The story is updated multiple times (i.e., has multiple chapters), making it visible more often so that people can find it more easily
  • The story is long enough that readers require multiple visits to finish it (and multiple chapters opens the possibility for multiple reviews)
  • The story has enough going on that the reader wants to revisit it from time to time and read their favourite bits, much the same way that someone might pick out the favourite parts of a movie to watch over and over

This isn’t to say that shorter stories cannot do big numbers. Some can and do, but a causal perusal of the most popular stories in most fandoms shows that they are of above average length.

Does this mean that longer and longer is better? Absolutely not. Above a certain word length, increased length does not seem to help (indeed it may actually hinder since it becomes a huge investment of time that some are unwilling to make). From what I’ve seen, anything over 50,000 words is long enough for most of these effects to set in. Certainly, anything over 200,000 words is long enough to squeeze every possible ounce of the “length-effect” out of the story.

Closely related to story length is updating. In general, readers love having ready access to the story of their choice. Most of the highly popular stories either update frequently or, at least at one point, had a regular updating schedule. Stories that update very infrequently or sporadically can leave readers feeling frustrated and uncertain as to whether the story will ever finish. That said, this effect is not nearly as strong as some of the others I’ve mentioned. Indeed, I’ve noticed that readers will wait years (actual years) for an update to a story they love and then return in droves when the author begins updating again.

So what does this all mean? How do you judge if a story is successful or not? Well, let’s take a case study with the fanfiction.net fandom that I am most familiar with, the Final Fantasy XIII fandom.

Final Fantasy XIII is what I would call a mid-sized fandom. It ranks outside the top 20 in terms of popularity for games and features 3.4k stories (versus the 74k stories for Pokemon, the most popular game fandom).

The most highest number of reviews for any Final Fantasy XIII story is ~1000, the highest number of favourites is ~500, and the highest number of follows is ~350. These numbers are all, I would suggest, in line with a mid-sized fandom (adjusting for the smaller size of game fandoms relative to manga/anime).

So what would constitute a successful story? Well, what becomes clear from even a cursory examination of the statistics is that things are very top heavy. If we sort via review, there are 121 pages of stories. The 61st page should thus give us some idea of what the median number of reviews are (the average being a horrible way to measure central tendency in a distribution this heavily skewed).

The answer is actually pretty surprising. Every single story on 61st page has 7 reviews. Seven. What about if we do the same with favourites and follows? Well, here are the numbers. For favourites: 10. For follows: 4.

If we compare the top 10 stories in reviews/favourites/follows the trend that emerges is quite striking: the system is top heavy. If you look at just the first page of stories (sorted by review), you find that the difference between the ones at the top and at the bottom of just the first page is dramatic. The most popular stories are the most popular by a considerable margin.

So, what can I say about Final Fantasy XIII fan fiction? If your story has done better than 7/10/4 (reviews/favourites/followers) across its entire lifetime, then you are doing better than the median across all categories (a good thing). In the second part of this, I’ll talk more about what those numbers mean in terms of improvement, but here, I’ll leave it at that.

However, there is one factor that I haven’t considered yet, and it is a big one: the lifetime of a fandom. It is a sad fact that every fandom has ups and downs in popularity. In general, a fandom goes through four main stages:

  1. Initial foundation
  2. Expansion
  3. Stabilisation
  4. Contraction

The first stage describes when a fandom is very small. During the initial foundation, only those who are heavily invested in the fandom participate. It is not unusual for all members of the fandom who post on fanfiction.net to actually know each other and communicate regularly. These individuals will also typically provide leadership as the group expands.

The second stage describes the time when the fandom becomes increasingly popular as knowledge of the series/game/manga/etc permeates the public consciousness and strikes a chord. A classic example of this would be the effect of the Marvel movies on the Marvel fandom – few people (relatively speaking) knew who the Avengers were until the movie turned the Avengers into a fandom phenomenon. For video games, this is usually the period when the game is still new and exciting and everyone else is buying it. Fan fiction becomes far more popular at this stage, with many scrambling to become involved.

The third stage, stabilisation, refers to when the fandom has reached its zenith in terms of popularity and begins to plateau. This maturation phase typically involves the writing of the vast majority of fan fiction as the fandom stabilises and begin to look toward fan fiction and fan art to meet any needs that have not been met by the original source material (e.g., the desire for Fang/Lightning in the Final Fantasy XIII fandom).

The fourth stage, contraction, refers to the general tendency of fandoms to grow smaller again as they pass their zenith of popularity. However, this does not spell the death of the fandom. In any fandom, there are a certain portion of fans who remain interested, and many more who will continue to read fan fiction (but not write it). Depending on the specifics of the fandom, the contraction can be larger or smaller. Some fandoms may die, but others will stabilise at a smaller size (see e.g., the Harry Potter fandom which has retained much of its strength despite the series being over). The fan fiction produced during this phase is often of high quality as those writing are genuinely engaged with the source material and not simply trying to piggyback on the popularity of the source material.

This has consequences for the numbers that a story does because the numbers (reviews/favourites/follows) are cumulative. That is, they aggregate over time. Thus a story that has been out twice as long as another has had twice the time to accumulate numbers. Hence, if both stories are equally popular, then the older story will appear to have better numbers.

Here’s an interesting fact. Of the top 10 Final Fantasy XIII stories (as sorted by reviews) only one was started in the last 2 years (Lightning and Fang Sitting in a Tree, #6 at 462 reviews). Of that top 10, only four have been updated in the past year. Older stories appear to have a significant advantage, which I believe operates in the following manner:

  1. The story is initially published and proves to be popular
  2. The story is completed
  3. The story becomes part of the accepted collection of “good stories” by the fandom, meaning new fans are directed toward that story by other fans
  4. New fans use fanfiction.net’s search engine to look for the most popular stories (assuming those are the good ones), which leads them to these stories, thereby reinforcing their popularity (since if they are genuinely good AND highly visible, they should do great numbers)

This effect is not unlike that which applies to the “classics”. For instance, everyone knows about Lord of the Rings, and everyone knows that it is supposed to be good. Hence, everyone seeks it out to read it. Because it actually is good, these people then leave lots of favourable reviews about Lord of the Rings. In other words, a story, having established itself as a “classic” of the fandom, is at a tremendous advantage since it constitutes “required reading” for the fandom, thereby bolstering its numbers. Of course becoming a “classic” is not easy – having read the stories in the top 10, I will readily agree that all of them have their merits and deserve the attention they’ve gotten. Naturally, we can quibble about which story is the best, but it is easy to see why each of them has been popular (and it’s largely a matter of personal taste anyway).

Another factor, which I’ll talk about in more detail in the next part, is the impact that name recognition can have on numbers. To put it simply, if you’ve written good stories before, people are more willing to read any new stories that you have. If we look at the first page of stories (sorted by review), we find that of the top 25 most popular stories (by review) several authors appear multiple times. One author appears three times, and another appears four times.

Anyway, I’ll continue this in another post since this is already getting monstrously long.

*Note: The statistics cited in this post have all been gathered using fanfiction.net’s in-built search function and sorting function. I am very much aware that these engine have their flaws, but they remains good instruments for gauging rough trends. Furthermore, I also acknowledge that one particular problem is that many old stories have not been updated to include character/pairing information. However, I do not believe that these substantially change the overall picture presented by the data. I have also chosen to include all languages in the analysis since it should be obvious that my points about audience size apply to foreign languages (all of which have a smaller audience than English). Finally, stories are removed from fanfiction.net for a variety of reasons, and there have been several purges throughout the sites history (perhaps the most famous being the removal of stories featuring heavy hard-core explicit content). Such stories have not been included in this analysis.

*Note: I am also aware of the growing popularity of AO3. However, I am not familiar enough with trends on the site to comment on it in the manner that I have commented here. Furthermore, there also appear to be significant differences in the popularity of fandoms between fanfiction.net and AO3, which complicate the analysis. Indeed, I suspect that the demographics of the two websites have significant differences.

Writing From Different Perspectives

In principle, it is possible to write a story entirely from the perspective of a single character. In practice, however, it is much more common to write a story from the points of view of multiple characters. Although writing from different perspectives is a skill that develops with practice, there are a few things that you can take into account to make it easier:

  • People are not omniscient
  • People do not perceive the world the same way
  • People do not speak or think in the same way
  • People have different habits
  • People act differently depending on whom they are with

People Are Not Omniscient

One of the most common mistakes when writing from multiple perspectives is forgetting who knows what. The fact is that people are not usually omniscient, and this should be reflected in their actions. Just because one character is privy to an important piece of information does not mean that all the other characters are too.

Consider the following situation:

  • A group of rebels has a traitor in it.
  • One character, James, discovers that the traitor is someone that everyone trusts, Tom.
  • James discovers that Tom is a traitor by following him to a secret meeting with enemies of the group.

Unless James tells the other characters what he has seen, there is no reason for them to treat Tom any differently. The other characters should continue interacting with Tom as usual. In contrast, James’s interactions with Tom may be markedly different depending on whether he decides to share his knowledge with the others or to keep it to himself in order to take Tom by surprise at a later point in time. The big mistake in this situation is having everyone else act as though they know about Tom without giving a reason for why they are acting that way (e.g., having James tell them) since there is no way they should know about Tom at all.

The best way to avoid falling into this kind of trap is to keep track of essential pieces of information. In other words, by keeping of track of where characters are, who they’ve interacted with, and what information they have access to, you can make each of their individual points of view more authentic and exciting. After all, what better way to ratchet up the tension in the aforementioned situation than showing James and Tom matching wits against each other, all while trying to keep their awareness of the situation hidden from each other and the rest of the group.

People Do Not Perceive The World The Same Way

Different people do not perceive and interpret the world and their surroundings in the same way. This is because a lot of how we think about a range of different things, from relationships to reasoning problems, is a function of our experiences, our culture, our personality, our intelligence, and our upbringing. Thus when writing from the perspectives of different characters, we need to be careful to take this into account.

Let’s compare how two different people might perceive the same situation.

Stan has lived his entire life on a safe, prosperous world with low crime. Although Stan is considered highly intelligent, he has never handled a weapon or been in any situation more dangerous than piloting a spacecraft under highly controlled conditions. Most of his friends describe him as a happy, cheerful young man.

Amy has been raised to be a soldier on a world where war is extremely common. She has handled weapons all her life and has been exposed to both intense urban warfare and larger-scale space warfare. Although she has not received a strict formal education, she has spent years learning to survive in war zones with almost no support. Like most of the soldiers from her planet, she has been trained to disdain weakness and to display as little emotion as possible.

Now, let’s imagine that both Stan and Amy arrived via transport at a world known for its industrial capabilities. Stan is there to negotiate a new contract for the company he works for – they make furniture. Amy is there to try and secure a deal to manufacture weapons for the faction she fights for. Shortly after their arrival, the world comes under attack by a third party, which begins to launch landing parties while bombarding the planet’s defences from orbit.

Are these two people, Stan and Amy, going to see things the same way?

Of course they aren’t.

It is highly probable that Stan will panic and perhaps even freeze up. He has never been in a situation like this before. The story, as told from his perspective, will probably focus on the sheer terror and horror of what he is seeing. There are likely to be heavy casualties and massive amounts of property damage – things he has never experienced before. He may struggle to understand how or why the attack is happening, and he may struggle to deal with the physical and psychological wounds in the aftermath.

In contrast, Amy is far less likely to panic or freeze. She has been raised for this. She has lived it. The story, as told from her perspective, may focus on the attack as a threat to be dealt with. For instance, she may immediately begin cataloguing the possible courses of action that she has to take to survive and even retaliate. She may also begin considering who the culprits are, and she is unlikely to be bothered by the property damage or casualties because she has been raised to think that such things are normal.

The way that Stan perceives the attack is fundamentally different from Amy because he is different from Amy. A good way of approaching this situation would be to write in a way that emphasises this difference. For example, you could try to draw out Stan’s sense of disorientation and horror while highlighting Amy’s cold, analytical approach to survival and retaliation.

People Do Not Speak Or Think The Same Way

It is almost trivially easy to demonstrate that people do not speak the same way. Simply go out onto the street and listen to the people around you. It will soon become evident that different people have different patterns of speech. This isn’t simply a matter of different accents – it is also a matter of word choice, intonation, speaking speed, and volume. All of these are influenced by a range of both personal and situational factors (e.g., where someone comes from, how they feel, etc.).

It is slightly less obvious that different people do not think the same way either. This relates both to my previous point about how people perceive the world and to the fact that thoughts are, in a manner of speaking, simply private, personal speech. Again, how a person thinks is a function of both personal and situational factors.

We’ll start off with a very trivial example. Which of the following two samples of speech do you think best fits an elderly professor in archaeology?

  • Although the Ancient Greeks had developed many of the mathematical concepts that would prove integral to the development of calculus, they would not actually manage to develop it on their own.
  • The Ancient Greeks knew some stuff that helped make calculus, but they didn’t come up with it.

If you answered the second one, then you must have a very odd archaeology professor. If you’re writing from different perspectives, it is important that characters that are different from each other sound different (e.g., two characters who have very similar backgrounds can and should sound more similar than those with vastly different backgrounds).

This can also come through in the thoughts/interior monologue of the characters. Consider the way that an elderly archaeology professor and a young student perceive each other:

  • The young student’s thoughts may immediately go to the professor’s somewhat old-fashioned and formal mode of dress. They might immediately begin wondering if the professor is going to be as boring as all the others they’ve met and if the class will be worth attending. They might also wonder why the professor likes using so many big words.
  • The professor may ponder the student’s clothing, wondering when ripped jeans and brightly coloured shirts became popular. They may also begin wondering if the student will actually pay attention during class or if they’ll simply pretend to listen like a lot of others. They may also consider whether or not the student has decided to study archaeology because they think it’ll be an easy credit.

As you can see, the same event (a lecture) can be thought about in very different ways by the different characters involved. This can come through in the way the thoughts of each character are phrased:

  • The old man up the front was like all the others, stuffy and overdressed. He was probably going to be boring too. Heck, he was probably just going to read off the lecture notes like all the others. It’d be better to stay home and read the notes later.
  • He’d seen people like him before – dressed like university was a party. He wondered if the boy would even bother to pay attention, or if he had simply selected archaeology because he thought it was an easy course, another way to pick up an easy credit or two.

A few subtle differences in word choice and phrasing can add depth and shade to the thoughts of different characters, fleshing out different points of view.

People Have Different Habits

Almost everyone has a routine, and this routine will usually come into play when you’re writing from a particular character’s perspective. For example, a single mother with children will probably have a routine that involves helping those children get ready for school. In contrast, a retired couple whose children have all moved out and started families of their own will have a different routine.

Including a character’s routines when writing from their perspective is not something you should do every time – and it can get boring quite quickly. But including it a few times can help readers build up an idea of who the character is and how they are different from the other characters. Again, we can illustrate this with an example. Imagine that we have two sets of parents, both with young children:

  • One set of parents insists upon the children adhering to a strict schedule, with an emphasis on order and efficiency. The children are not allowed to be late, and the parents do not spend much time talking with them over breakfast before dropping them off at school with carefully packed lunches that are designed to provide the optimal level of nutrition.
  • The other set of parents has a more relaxed schedule, resulting in minor chaos each morning as the parents and children struggle to get ready on time. At breakfast, the parents often get caught up with the daily news and with what their children will be doing before driving them to school at breakneck speed with whatever lunch they’ve managed to throw together.

In a very general sense, the basic structure of events is the same: get the children to school. However, the routines for each family are quite different. As a result of these differences, readers can draw conclusions about how each of the families differs, not only in terms of routine but also in their approach to life and childrearing.

Another example of how differing routines can express differences between characters that are experiencing essentially the same set of events is a combat situation. What does a veteran do to prepare for battle? They might calmly attend to their weapons and review the mission parameters. At the same time, the rookie beside them might be nervous, on edge, and wondering about whether or not they’ll pull through the mission in one piece. Once again, the same event can appear very different when you look at the routines of different characters.

People Act Differently Depending On Whom They Are With

How a person behaves can vary dramatically based on whom they are with. Consider a group consisting of the following individuals:

  • James (Susie’s older brother)
  • Susie (James’s younger sister)
  • Tony (Susie and James’s younger brother)
  • Melissa (Susie’s friend)

In this group, three are members of the same family. If the story is being told from the perspective of Melissa, it may include feelings of awkwardness and isolation since she may feel like an outsider. If the story is told from the point of view of Susie those feelings are unlikely to occur (assuming that the sibling all get along).

What happens if the group is reduced to just Susie and Melissa? Well, Melissa probably won’t feel like an outsider anymore since she isn’t outnumbered. Susie may even feel less confident since she is no longer surrounded by members of her family. It is also quite possible that the topics of conversation will change now that the group is composed solely of women.

If we imagine that both James and Tony are very attracted to Melissa, then the changes in the group dynamic are likely to be even more dramatic. In the group with all four of them in it, James and Tony may attempt to compete for Melissa’s attention, to the point that the situation becomes socially awkward. Susie may even feel marginalised. Reducing the group to just Susie and Melissa thus presents a drastic change – Susie might seem more outgoing now that her two brothers aren’t competing for her friend’s attention. If Melissa doesn’t actually like either James or Tony, she would definitely feel more comfortable if they aren’t around.

This logic also applies to different situations, not just different groups. People are often more confident and outgoing when dealing with things that they have expertise on. For example a professor of archaeology might be shy when talking to strangers but that shyness might vanish when the talk moves to archaeology – a subject that he is extremely confident about and familiar with. Similarly, a Special Forces soldier may be more at home on the battlefield than at home watching television with friends and family. Think of how the same situation – watching an action movie – would be like through the eyes of a trained soldier versus the eyes of a teenager.

As you can see, it is important to consider the dynamics between characters when writing from different perspectives. A character that seems highly confident in one setting may appear insecure in another. Likewise, a particular group might set one character at ease but make another feel very uncomfortable. The situation is also important, since different people will react to the same situation in different ways.

The final thing we need to remember is that people can act very differently when they are alone. A character may act very outgoing with others, quick to make a joke and have a bit of fun. But they may also be much quieter and introspective when they are on their own. When you are writing from the perspective of different characters, this is something you need to take into account.

Consider a character who likes to scheme and plot in private before modifying their behaviour to ingratiate themselves with every group they meet. Such a character could very easily be perceived as duplicitous. What happens if we then throw in the perspectives of the other characters, showing that they too act in a similar manner? This tells the reader that this behaviour is normal – perhaps even expected – in this setting. This might lead the reader to question the values of the society that the characters belong to (e.g., what kind of society encourages such treachery?) or even the values of the characters themselves (e.g., are these characters simply a treacherous subset of an otherwise normal culture?).

By showing the differences in how characters behave when they are with different people, you can help flesh out your characters for the reader. By doing this for other characters (i.e., from multiple perspectives), you can add even more detail and subtlety. Think of spy thrillers – so much of the tension and enjoyment comes from watching them play the game against each other, using group dynamics to trick, coerce, and otherwise manipulate people.

Summary

Writing from the perspectives of multiple characters is not always an easy thing to do, and it is certainly a skill that improves with practice. However, there are several things you can keep in mind to make it easier:

  • People are not omniscient
  • People do not perceive the world the same way
  • People do not speak or think in the same way
  • People have different habits
  • People act differently depending on whom they are with

It is no coincidence that most stories incorporate multiple points of view. It can make the story much more exciting and add much needed depth and shade to your characters.

I hope you found this useful. If you want to know more about my thoughts on writing, you can find those here.

I also write original fiction (mostly fantasy). You can find that here. If you like humorous fantasy, check out my latest story, Two Necromancers, a Bureaucrat, and an ElfIf you’re in the mood for something more serious, try The Last Huntress.

I Watched Guardians of the Galaxy Today

So… I watched Guardians of the Galaxy Today. I’ll admit that I didn’t go into the movie with particularly high expectations. Guardians has a certain quirkiness to it that I felt might not translate so well to the screen.

But I was pleasantly surprised.

What struck me, right from the beginning of the movie, was that Guardians is not a movie that takes itself overly seriously. From the use of small, alien creatures as pretend microphones (you have to see this to understand how awesome it is) to the single greatest phrase I’ve heard in a movie this year (it involves the words “pelvic sorcery”), Guardians is not afraid to have fun with itself and with quite a few of the standard “galactic villain of ultimate doom” cliches.

This isn’t to say that Guardians is just about the laughs – although there are plenty of those. The movie ticks all of the boxes you’d expect from a good comic book movie:

  • All of the main actors do their bit to keep the movie engaging.
  • The script is constantly amusing but changes tone when it needs to. I won’t spoil some of the great lines (and there were quite a few in there), but the dialogue constantly brought a smile to my face. At the same time, however, the villains were also allowed to be suitably menacing and evil.
  • The action was, for the most part, on point. I won’t lie to you. The hand-to-hand combat in Guardians isn’t going to match something like The Raid or even Captain America: The Winter Soldier, but it’s not bad either. However, where the film’s action truly excels is in some space battles. The battle over Xandor was particularly cool to watch.
  • The characters are actually likeable. It isn’t strictly necessary to actually like the characters in a movie to enjoy it, but I actually liked the good guys in this one. My favourite character (probably not a surprise to anyone) was Rocket. Raccoon + Machine Gun = Awesome. Yeah, it’s simplistic, but there’s something fundamentally awesome about watching a raccoon blow the crap out of everything. Groot (tree guy) was also another favourite of mine.

Another concern I had about the film going into it was whether or not they would be able to simplify the story enough for non-comic people to follow. I think they did a pretty good job on this. Sure, most people won’t know – or care – what Xanodor or the Cree are, but they don’t have to. The bad guy establishes his bad guy status fairly clearly by being a genocidal maniac bent on obliterating a whole lot of innocent people. You don’t need to know what particular species of alien he is to realise he has to be stopped. In short, even if you’ve never read the comics, you can still follow the storyline, which boils down to: genocidal crazy dude = evil; cool guy who listens to a walkman = good.

So, yes, I quite enjoyed this one. It set a good pace and maintained my interest throughout the whole movie. I would call it one of the better comic book movies I’ve seen, and I actually liked it more than Captain America: The Winter Soldier.

This year has been pretty good for movies so far (at least in my point of view). The next movie I plan on seeing will either be Lucy or Hercules. I’m leaning toward Lucy because I’ve been a fan of Luc Bessson since The Professional.

So, what’s my final rating? I’d give Guardians of the Galaxy a solid 8.5 on the enjoyment scale.

It isn’t the most cerebral thing you’ll ever watch, but it will put a smile on your face and a spring in your step. If movies could have souls, this movie would be wearing a smile and cracking a joke while beating the absolute crap out of its enemies. And it’d be listening to some sweet 80s and 70s tunes while doing it because that’s just how it rolls. Oh yeah.

The Three Different Kinds of Dash

In English, there are three dash-like punctuation marks: the hyphen, the en dash, and the em dash. Although these punctuation marks appear quite similar, each of them has a slightly different purpose.

The hyphen (-) is the shortest of the dashes. It has a number of different uses:

  • To connect the two parts of a word when one part of the word is on one line and the other part is on the next line. You don’t usually see this anymore since most word processors automatically adjust to avoid splitting words across lines.
  • To connect parts of a compound word (e.g., son-in-law, well-being, twenty-one).
  • To connect groups of numbers or characters, such as phone numbers or number plates (e.g., 555-555-555, ABC-123).

The en dash (–) is longer than the hyphen. It is mainly used to connect numbers, dates, and other similar things that provide a range of values:

  • To connect numbers which form a range (e.g., World War II took place during 1939–1945).
  • To join months which form a range (e.g., He worked at the hotel June–October).

The em dash (—) is the longest of the three dashes. It has a variety of uses:

  • It can be used in place of commas to set off parts of a sentence (e.g., John drew his gun—a single-action Colt—and levelled it at the sheriff; John drew his gun, a single-action Colt, and levelled it at the sheriff).
  • It can be used in place of parentheses to emphasise what would have gone in parentheses (e.g., Amy was a wonderful teacher—her students always improved; Amy was a wonderful teacher (her students always improved); Michael liked a bit of mischief—who didn’t? —but he always took it too far; Michael liked a bit of mischief (who didn’t?), but he always took it too far).
  • It can be used to replace a colon to draw attention to the conclusion (e.g., The test results were in—she passed; The test results were in: she passed).
  • It can be used to indicate when speech is being interrupted (e.g., “Don’t—”)
  • It can be used to denote missing words or letters (e.g., Agent J — — was sent to spy on the targets).
  • It can be used to provide bullet points for lists.

As you can see, all three of these dashes serve a different purpose. However, there has been some disagreement about whether or not it is acceptable to use one particular kind of dash over the other.

Traditionally, the em dash is used without a space on either side of it (as you can see from the examples given above). However, there are style guides (e.g., the AP and most newspapers) that suggest flanking the em dash with spaces (i.e., having a space on either side of it).

One of the issues that has been raised with the em dash is that it looks rather hideous. The em dash can be quite disruptive from a visual perspective, drawing the reader’s attention away from the actual words of the text. Simply flanking the em dash with spaces does not solve this issue. It may, in fact, even make it worse.

My preference – and the preference of quite a few others – is to abandon the em dash in favour of using an en dash flanked by spaces (i.e., an en dash with spaces on either side). Indeed, that is what I have just done. Those who have adopted this approach typically do so because they feel that an en dash flanked by spaces is less intrusive but still manages to do the job.

You might be surprised by my stance on this issue, given my support for correct grammar. However, one of the purposes of correct grammar is to aid communication, and I believe the en dash does this by being several million times easier on the eye than the em dash.

If you found this little jaunt into punctuation interesting, you can find more of my thoughts on writing and grammar here.

I also write original fiction (mostly fantasy), which you can find here.

“Two Necromancers, a Bureaucrat, and an Elf” Now Available on Amazon

My newest original story Two Necromancers, a Bureaucrat, and an Elf is now available on Amazon! It weighs in at 35,000 words and goes for $1.99. Most of my previous stories have been fairly serious (e.g., The Last Huntress), but this one is different.

If you’ve been looking forward to something humorous from me, then your wait is finally over. Two Necromancers, a Bureaucrat, and an Elf is a fantasy with plenty of humour, warmth, action, and a healthy dose of craziness (the kind you’ve come to expect from me).

You can get it here.

And here is the blurb:

Two necromancers, a bureaucrat, and an elf – it sounds like the start of a bad joke, only the joke is on Timmy.

Timothy Walter Bolton – better known as Timmy – has spent most of his life as a necromancer. When he isn’t terrorising his enemies, he’s plotting inside his castle, which is built on top of lightless chasms filled with nameless horrors and beings of a generally malevolent and megalomaniacal nature. But after one of his latest creations, a zombie hydra-dragon-bear, tries to eat him, he decides that maybe it’s time to find a new, less dangerous, career.

But that’s easier said than done. He’s a wanted criminal with no shortage of powerful (and crazy) enemies, and he has a bone or two to pick with the Everton Council of Mages.

Hope arrives in the form of a new law. War is coming to Everton, and the Council is desperate. In exchange for providing some help, Timmy might just earn that pardon he’s been looking for. Of course, just because it’s possible to earn a pardon doesn’t mean that it’s going to be easy.

To earn his pardon, Timmy is going to have to take down some of Everton’s most dangerous enemies and put together a quirky group of unconventional heroes, most of whom want nothing more than to mangle him and/or the Council in as vicious a way as possible. It’s a good thing that he’s got some help: an obnoxious ten-year-old apprentice who thinks that pink glasses are appropriate for a budding necromancer and a bumbling bureaucrat who may or may not make it through their first real fight without puking his guts up.

Wonderful.

Still, Timmy’s never been one to back down from a challenge even if their first recruit is basically the elf version of the bogeyman.

If you want to know more, just keep on reading to see a longer preview: Read more…

Writing Tip of the Day #5 – The Consequences of Human Emotion

Without telepathy, it is impossible to truly know what someone else is thinking. We can each feel emotion, so we assume that everyone else can too. But how do we know what emotions someone else is feeling? We make judgements based on verbal and non-verbal cues.

Verbal cues are perhaps the quickest and easiest way to make a judgement, but they are not necessarily the most accurate. A verbal cue for sadness might be someone stating that they feel sad. But just because someone says they feel sad does not mean that they actually are sad. It is easy to lie, and some people are very good at lying.

Non-verbal are the other way we can judge a person’s emotions. In the case of sadness, there are a particular subset of facial expressions that are associated with sadness. Tears are also often related to sadness. But we can look at other parts of the body aside from the face. For instance, someone’s posture may change when they feel sad. They may slouch, and their shoulders may slump. Sadness is not simply a facial express – it is a whole pattern of behaviour.

In writing, emotions are amongst the trickiest things to accurately depict. It is possible to simply state how a character feels, but we can paint a much richer picture if we include both verbal and non-verbal cues to better convey their emotions. Indeed, some of the most poignant moments can occur when we deliberately contrast the verbal and non-verbal cues.

Consider the impression left when a novice soldier tells their superior that they are fine despite how badly their hands are shaking. Are they really fine? Or are they simply putting on a brave face?

Likewise, what conclusions can we draw when we read about someone who claims to be heartbroken but shows no outward signs of sorrow? Are they lying? Or are they simply holding it all in?

Emotions are an important part of character development, and it is rarely enough to simply state how people feel. Instead, it is often better to look at the consequences of human emotion. Show the reader the consequences of emotion and they will be able to draw their own conclusions about how the characters feel.

How To Hit People In The Face Really Hard

Punching power is one of those things that people talk about all the time in combat sports. Fans, in particular, are obsessed with fighters who possess the kind of firepower that leaves their opponent twitching on the ground. This is why a good, scrappy brawl often pulls in higher ratings than a highly technical bout.

But what are the secrets behind punching power?

The two most obvious places to begin are size and muscle mass. There is no denying that larger combatants tend to have more striking power than their smaller counter parts. This isn’t to say that there aren’t some middle weights who hit harder than some heavy weights, but the average heavy weight is going to be a much bigger puncher than the average middle weight.

But setting those two factors aside, how can we explain the differences in punching power between people of roughly the same size and muscle mass? There are a few places we can look.

A punch is basically a collision – you are hitting someone’s face with your hand. The amount of force that is transferred during that collision is a function of the mass of objects colliding and their acceleration. This means several things.

A punch that the opponent walks into is more powerful than one they are trying to get away from. The classic example of this is when someone walks into a big right hand rather than trying to flinch away from it. If you aren’t a particularly big puncher, you can help your cause by luring your opponent into the punch. In boxing, Ali was very good at this while Machida provides an example from MMA.

Do not allow your opponent to cramp your punches. A punch accelerates most rapidly (and attains most of its speed and leverage) when it is allowed to extend fully. An easy way to test this is to throw a normal punch at a punching bag before taking a step closer and trying to throw that same punch again. In the latter case, your fist will end up shoving the bag rather than striking it cleanly. If you allow your opponent to get too close, you will not be able to extend your punches properly, robbing them of much of their power. This is why you will often see fighters with shorter reach swarming those with longer reach – their aim is to get close enough to throw their shorter punches while smothering their opponent’s longer punches. This is also why at very close ranges it’s more common to see punches like hooks or uppercuts (which have shorter ranges than jabs and straights) or other strikes like knees or elbows (in MMA).

The punch that the opponent doesn’t see is the one most likely to hurt them. Any well-trained fighter will know how to respond to a punch. They can block a punch, parry it, slip it, roll with the impact, shift to take the hit on a stronger part of the body, and so on. Any one of these approaches reduces the damage they receive. But all of these responses rely on them actually noticing the punch and reacting to it. If the opponent does not see the punch, then they cannot react to it properly and will take full damage. The classic example of this is a fighter who gets lazy with their jab eating a counter right hand (usually an overhand right) over the top of the jab before getting knocked out. Seriously, watch some MMA knock out highlights and many of them will feature fighters getting knocked out by overhand rights after throwing out a lazy, pawing jab without tucking their chin in. Boxers are hardly immune to this either – I’ve seen quite a few technicians knocked out when they throw a pitter-patter jab against a savvy brawler with good instincts.

Counter punching is another way to potentially increase the force of your punches. Fighters are often at their most vulnerable when they are in the process of striking. Think about it. If the opponent wants to really hit you, then they are going to have to commit. A properly thrown punch usually requires planting the feet, a shift in weight, and a focus on where the punch will be directed. All of these things leave the opponent vulnerable. If they plant their feet and are shifting their weight, they will not be able to evade as easily – they may even move into your punch. And their mental focus on landing their own strike can make it easy for them to miss a counter strike coming in. Fighters are also often not mentally prepared to be hit back while in the middle of throwing their own attack.

But counter punching can be very difficult – it requires both speed and timing. Speed is required because you must be able to react to a particular set of circumstances (e.g., the opponent throwing a hook) in the correct manner. Timing is also required because you have to know when to throw your counter strike to do maximum damage.

Although boxing has had its share of fighters who had Howitzers for hands (e.g., Foreman and Shavers), the majority of its knock out artists rely on more than just brute force. They rely on leading their opponents onto their punches, on speed and timing, and on getting the most leverage out of their punches.

Here are a few examples:

In this video you can see quite possibly the most perfect left hook ever thrown. Sugar Roy Robinson catches Gene Fullmer leaning in to throw his big right hand and catches him with a blindingly fast short left hook that Fullmer never sees before he’s down on the ground. Sugar Ray’s punch not only had speed and placement behind it, he also caught Fullmer moving into the punch.

And in this video you can again see what happens a fighter is caught in the middle of a punch. Ricky Hatton throws a pawing left and gets caught by a tremendous left hand from Pacquiao that hits him right on the jaw. Not only was Hatton caught unawares by the punch but he was also leaning into it. Take a look at Pacquiao’s body placement as well. His feet are planted firmly, his entire body is pivoting into the punch, and his punch connects at the perfect distance – he has maximised his leverage.

And finally here. This is the great Ali putting Sonny Liston down with an “anchor punch”. Ali, though a great boxer, was never known for the kind of chilling power that some of his contemporaries had (Foreman comes to mind here along with the doozy of a left hook that Frazier possessed and Shavers’s bomb of a right hand). What makes this punch so effective is that he catches Liston missing and hits him while he is still moving forward but before he can take a defensive a stance again. Heck, Liston doesn’t even seem to see the punch, it comes out so quickly.

The Last Huntress Free Today On Amazon (Friday 4th July, Pacific Standard Time)

The Last Huntress will be available for free on Amazon today (4th July, Pacific Standard Time). Get it here. If you enjoy fantasy with a healthy dose of atmosphere and action, give it a try! Here’s the blurb:

Scarlett is the last of her line – a huntress sworn to kill all monsters.

Rose is a girl searching for the power to take back her homeland.

In the icy forests of the north, on the trail of the only werewolf to escape her, Scarlett will teach Rose what it means to be a huntress. There can be no room for softness in a huntress’s heart, no room for weakness. And a huntress must be willing to kill anything – and anyone – that poses a threat to the innocent.

If you don’t have a Kindle, don’t worry. You can download a free Kindle app from Amazon from here.

You can find my original fiction here.

Post Navigation

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 49 other followers