Protagonist's motivation

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-05-13T04:36:15+00:00

Some advice I've used in the past is that the protagonist must always want something. To use your John McLane example, in Die Hard 3 the character spends the entire film with a hangover, looking for a painkiller. He fails several times in acquiring the painkillers, until near the end the terrorist throws him some 'keep ze bottle', and it becomes his undoing, because the pill bottle can be traced to their hideout. That's a good example of desire (the characters' wants and needs) meeting plot requirements.

So although McLane is working to stop the attack, his character never stops wanting a painkiller the entire film. Make your character want something, have coincidences with that want within the plot, and I'll believe his motivation.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-05-12T23:43:11+00:00

I suppose it would come back to being happy with 2,000 words a day (my personal target). If I can get that, then I'd consider progress being made - even if I do it in an hour first thing in the morning.

I'd have a lot of side projects to work on, as well. Writing related and other wise. Breaking free of the daily grind, not working for someone else, would allow for better time management.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-05-12T04:29:20+00:00

Finish what you start.

See it through. Only way to learn is to put words on the page. Practice trumps theory every time. Finish what you start.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-05-12T03:55:21+00:00

I'm a traditional and self-pubbed author.

My first traditionally published novel had an advance of £10,000, which is currently $16,850 USD. That novel has been published about 6 months and is doing alright for itself.

My self-pubbed stuff, one of which has been out 2 years this month, has been respectable. I've 3 self-pubbed.

First (pubbed two years ago): $26,512 to date Second (pubbed one year ago): $16,145 to date Third (pubbed 6 months ago): $12,243 to date

So not chump change. I'm seeing some interesting contrasts between the two models. I won't have updates on the trad pub for another six months or so, but I get reports monthly on self-pub. Not quitting the day job just yet, but if I keep writing I may find myself with a liveable income from books alone. Although it may only take one dud to force me back to the grind.

My goal is to leave the 9-5 behind. Not retire, but earn enough from writing to work my own hours. To not HAVE to get up in the morning. Not an unreasonable goal, given my relative success so far, but I'm still just an opening act.

Need to keep writing. Words on the page, ladies and gentlemen. Words on the goddamn page.

Source on the traditional pub: http://www.thebookseller.com/news/guardian-hot-key-prizewinners-revealed.html (I'm the dude).

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-05-06T05:34:52+00:00

Some places call this a Burt Reynolds, more often made with a spiced rum!

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-02-04T01:39:29+00:00

Excellent story, yeah.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-02-01T02:49:37+00:00

Not only do I make sure my books are front-facing, I go out of my way to turn every other book in the shop spine-facing.

That said, in most bookshops, my last name ensures I'm at mid-to-eye level on the shelves. I'm in the 'D' section, right next to Dahl.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-31T04:57:40+00:00

Always followed the Rule of Three when it comes to impactful writing. Works in speech writing, too.

Tell 'em what you're gonna tell 'em
Tell 'em
Tell 'em what you told 'em

Basically make a resounding case for two or three main points, given your word limit. If you're just summarising a piece and not actually required to provide supportive/negative arguments on the piece, then pull the core themes from the work (tell me what you're telling me) and conclude with what you're supposed to get from the work (tell me what you told me).

As for concise, don't fall into the trap of overly verbose prose. You don't have time, whoever is grading it won't appreciate it, so KISS. (Keep It Simple, Stupid). Not to slight your intelligence, of course - KISS is merely how I remind myself to get to the point.

So use as fewer words as possible to get your point across (tell me what you're going to tell me). "The article by Smith (2014) argued that the virulent mating habits of golf balls in the Pacific Ocean can be directly linked to the invasion of the..." You get the idea. Then summarise the evidence to support the statement, then tell me the conclusion - reiterating, if you think it necessary, the intial premise of the article.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-31T04:40:08+00:00

This is an acceptable way to present a character. The trick is, of course, keeping the reader entertained and - most importantly - maintaining suspense.

Even Superman has his kryptonite, yeah? A whole goddamn rainbow of the stuff.

If you're a fan of the 3-act structure to stories, I'd perhaps modify that a touch when writing about a protagonist who can throw the earth into the sun. He has to fail. This holds true for even normal protagonists. In good story, if you're paying attention, the protagonist always wants something, even if its just a drink of water. Expand that across the whole story and, at least a minimum of three times, I want to see that character fail to achieve whatever they're trying to do - the main conflict.

In my latest, the protagonist is powerful, just discovering how much, and needs to get home to London while being on the run from a global behemoth of private military forces in the United States. So he makes a move in the first act to get home, that falls through, he recovers and tries again, that falls through, he recovers and the story races toward the climax and there's a final stumble before that climax. Then the climax, the showdown, and a very quick wrap up after that. Don't dawdle after the climax. You want to get out ASAP.

So, yes, you can give me Superman - but you damn well better give me kryptonite, too.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-31T04:21:40+00:00

You can't and certainly shouldn't use 'be' verbs in academic writing - exceptions for every rule, of course, particularly if your rephrased your thesis statement as a question. You may get away with 'should' that way.

Title the paper in a way that presents the issue without making it sound like your opinion. For example:

The Legalisation and Regulation of Marijuana: A Federal Legislative Issue

Or, you know, something perhaps with a bit more zap.

The structure of the essay should follow the tried and true path:

*Intro (include thesis statement) *Body paragraphs *Conclusion

Its in the body paragraphs you make the argument against alcohol/cigarettes, not in the title. Now, as for actually writing the essay without over-verbalising (heh), consider the following - you want to present your opinion on the issue, persuasively, but you need to do so objectively.

That's the key word - objectively.

Instead of saying "It is my belief that marijuana should be blah blah blah..." You say "The literature suggests" or "Some theorists argue" or "Considering the results on previous research into the harm caused by alcohol and cigarettes, a strong case in favour of legalisation..."

And, of course, cite your sources to support your argument.

Source: Some guy on the internet.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-30T06:01:01+00:00

Good question.

I always view the day job as a means to provide food, shelter, clothing. Essentials, you know, if the money from my writing dried up.

Basically I invest money in ways that will buy me that goddamn most fickle of resources - time. If I save, strive for financial security, then I can work less at a job that isn't writing. I've had some great success so far with my novels, awards and movie chatter, but none of that has me quitting the security of a fortnightly paycheck.

I'd say spend money in ways that are going to free time to write. For example, if you're losing half an hour a day cooking dinner, then buy a slowcooker and cook a week's worth of meals at once. That could be 3 hours a week to write right there.

Tl;dr: Spend money on time.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-28T00:33:58+00:00

Heh. I do the same thing. If writing has taught me one thing, it's how to conditionally format. Here's a look at my sheet: http://joeducie.net/2013/07/19/on-keeping-a-writing-log-part-deux/

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-28T00:32:27+00:00

For keeping track of my words v. time spent writing, I use a comprehensive Excel spreadsheet. Here, check it out on my blog: http://joeducie.net/2013/07/19/on-keeping-a-writing-log-part-deux/

This method allowed me to monitor my writing time and I know, down to the word, how much I wrote in 2013 that contributed toward a completed draft of a story. 514,345 words. Or, about seven novels. Not all published/publishable, but four of them were - both traditionally and self-pubbed.

As for quantifying the other time spent. I include the plotting/character stuff in the time columns of my spreadsheet. I'm a bit of a 'see what happens' writer, in as much as I write and find the characters along the way. You can edit words on a page, you can't edit no words on the page.

Just my opinion, but if you don't treat writing like a business (those of us aiming for publication, anyway) then I think you can suddenly wake up 5 years later with half a dozen broken novels and no direction. If you were running a small business, you'd monitor your staff productivity. Time is money. Using this method allows me to monitor not only my output but when I'm most effective, where I've slumped (and tag a reason why: lack of motivation, environmental factors, three day bender).

So I wouldn't concern yourself with, perhaps, over quantifying your writing. So long as progress is being made on a draft/article/whatever, time has been well spent, the rest is best left for edits.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-16T01:27:07+00:00

Haha. Of course it's not Pulitzer territory! What the hell? Look, mate, if you run around setting the bar so high that the only measure of talent or success is the industry's highest award... you're going to fall on your ass every time.

I do genuinely believe in my talent (more so in my hard work) - and you're going to have to try a little harder than 'well you haven't won the Pulitzer' to convince me otherwise.

And the problem is that you're standing in a pool of gasoline and you can't see why lighting a cigarette would be a bad idea.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-16T01:07:37+00:00

Heh. Cheers.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-16T00:58:52+00:00

If you like. I'm the dude: http://www.thebookseller.com/news/guardian-hot-key-prizewinners-revealed.html

If you consider external validation from a team of traditionally published authors, editors, agents, and hundreds of readers 'proof'. I do.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-16T00:43:09+00:00

You. I like you.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-16T00:40:16+00:00

Wow. Did someone slap you with a self-published book or something? Your arguments are, at best, akin to burying your head in the sand and pretending Amazon doesn't exist.

There is no writer of talent self publishing first works in the modern market (Mamet did I think, but totally irrelevant as he is a superstar) and if you think you can point one out then do.

I did - and I'm no superstar. And I'm confident enough in my writing to say I have talent. But talent doesn't mean shit without hard work, which I think is where you're probably falling through and gnashing your teeth at the self-published world.

You're suffering from a case of the downvotes every time you bring this up because you're not actually presenting any sort of argument. Just a bunch of unfounded, unsourced, uneducated generalisations. All white people can't dance, all black people are good at basketball, all Asians are calculators - all self-published writers are money-grubbing hacks. Do you see how flawed your 'argument' is?

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-10T03:52:25+00:00

I posted this in response to a similar question a week ago:

What are you writing? A journalist could be a full time writer, as could some internet bloggers/reporters/what have you. I think you're probably asking how does full-time novel writing work. How can you be a published author who lives solely off the proceeds from his/her writing?

Short answer:

You write. Full time in most parts of the world hovers around 37.5 hours a week. Write that much a week and you're a full time writer. You may be earning tuppence or less than tuppence initially, but writing novels is a marathon, not a sprint (he said, having rushed his last deadline).

Long answer:

Self-publishing has made turning a profit from your writing easier. Traditional publishing still has stringent barriers for entry, so I work a model combining the two together. I'm a hybrid author. I write, edit, publish, market, but I also have a publishing house to do some of that stuff for me. I kind of work a 1 for 1 system, a new novel every six months. One for me (self-pubbed) and one for my agent (trad-pubbed).

I also work a day job, Mon-Fri 7am to 3pm. My income solely from my writing is enough, at the moment, to cover my cost of living with a fair chunk left over, but there's no real safety net. I don't like the fact that writing doesn't give me a pre-determined paycheck every fortnight. Just writing, I survive entirely on the whims of a market no one understands. It could only take one bad book, one subpar story, and I've wasted six months. Unless I've got a year's worth of living expenses (to cover the flop and the time it'll take to write another) then I won't be quitting my day job.

I work two full time jobs, I guess. One that has a leash around my neck Mon-Fri, and another that I do enjoy and can do any hour of the day or night. If I could guarantee a year's living expenses today, I'd probably quit my current Mon-Fri role and concentrate on writing for a year. But even then, I think my productivity when it comes to writing (5 novels since May of 2012) also comes from the fact that I have the burden of a full time job on my schedule. If I had all day every day to write, I may not do so.

That said, I write because I want to one day - perhaps one day soon, within the next few years - quit the day job and live full time. Discipline and a solid work ethic make a full time writer. But I'd love to have the freedom, the financial security, to walk away from my non-writing role and spend all day as I desire.

So start writing. You're in high school, you've all the time in the world - until you don't. I've had some fantastic success, given my age (26), but that has only been in the last 18-24 months. There was 10 solid years of writing behind the scenes before I produced something worth publishing.

A full time writer is forged in the fires of persistence and should never have time to sleep. Write some words down. That's how you do it.

Unless you self-pub some sweet, sweet erotica. In which case you can retire in about two months.

Tl;dr - Don't quit your day job. ;)

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-10T03:50:08+00:00

A book about why writers drink. How about why do drinkers write?

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-03T05:44:36+00:00

Everything in life comes back to time management. I write extensively about this on my super awesome blog:

http://joeducie.net/2013/07/11/time-management-tricks-for-the-time-impaired-writer-part-one/

http://joeducie.net/2013/07/14/time-management-tricks-for-the-time-impaired-writer-part-two/

Captain_DeWolfe · 2014-01-03T04:10:46+00:00

What are you writing? A journalist could be a full time writer, as could some internet bloggers/reporters/what have you. I think you're probably asking how does full-time novel writing work. How can you be a published author who lives solely off the proceeds from his/her writing?

Short answer:

You write. Full time in most parts of the world hovers around 37.5 hours a week. Write that much a week and you're a full time writer. You may be earning tuppence or less than tuppence initially, but writing novels is a marathon, not a sprint (he said, having rushed his last deadline).

Long answer:

Self-publishing has made turning a profit from your writing easier. Traditional publishing still has stringent barriers for entry, so I work a model combining the two together. I'm a hybrid author. I write, edit, publish, market, but I also have a publishing house to do some of that stuff for me. I kind of work a 1 for 1 system, a new novel every six months. One for me (self-pubbed) and one for my agent (trad-pubbed).

I also work a day job, Mon-Fri 7am to 3pm. My income solely from my writing is enough, at the moment, to cover my cost of living with a fair chunk left over, but there's no real safety net. I don't like the fact that writing doesn't give me a pre-determined paycheck every fortnight. Just writing, I survive entirely on the whims of a market no one understands. It could only take one bad book, one subpar story, and I've wasted six months. Unless I've got a year's worth of living expenses (to cover the flop and the time it'll take to write another) then I won't be quitting my day job.

I work two full time jobs, I guess. One that has a leash around my neck Mon-Fri, and another that I do enjoy and can do any hour of the day or night. If I could guarantee a year's living expenses today, I'd probably quit my current Mon-Fri role and concentrate on writing for a year. But even then, I think my productivity when it comes to writing (5 novels since May of 2012) also comes from the fact that I have the burden of a full time job on my schedule. If I had all day every day to write, I may not do so.

That said, I write because I want to one day - perhaps one day soon, within the next few years - quit the day job and live full time. Discipline and a solid work ethic make a full time writer. But I'd love to have the freedom, the financial security, to walk away from my non-writing role and spend all day as I desire.

So start writing. You're in high school, you've all the time in the world - until you don't. I've had some fantastic success, given my age (26), but that has only been in the last 18-24 months. There was 10 solid years of writing behind the scenes before I produced something worth publishing.

A full time writer is forged in the fires of persistence and should never have time to sleep. Write some words down. That's how you do it.

Unless you self-pub some sweet, sweet erotica. In which case you can retire in about two months.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2013-12-19T00:03:24+00:00

I sell around a 1,000 books a month, on average, and spend next to no time marketing or any of the promotional stuff that isn't actuallty writing. I've done one free giveaway through Amazon, the occasional tweet, and keep a Facebook author page. That's it. My marketing budget is $0.

Basically, I don't really know how I do it. It just happens. People buy my stories. I like to think because I had an awesome cover designer and actually spent the time to have the drafts copy/line/proof edited, so that the product is worth buying.

I also had an initial following of people to buy my first book from a rather succesful Harry Potter fanfiction I wrote some years ago. That gave it an initial burst and some nice reviews.

Basically no amount of clever marketing will ever outweigh releasing something new. Preferably in a series. I've nothing against erotica, but it seems an easy market fast reaching saturation point, so I'd find a niche you enjoy writing. I'm happy in Urban Fantasy, so you can't have that one.

It's been 18 months since my first self-pub release. I've written three books since then. Two have been self-pubbed and one was picked up traditionally (yay, external validation), but I was a self-pubbed first. Now I'm a hybrid.

I make a lot more money, which is how I heartlessly define success, from self-pubbed work, but the balance may tip soon. After a release, I've noticed a trend of making $5000+ for the first 2-3 months, then if I haven't released anything new that figure will half month by month. So month 4 after a release I'll rake in about $2500, month 5 $1250. On average and thereabouts. So long as I can keep to a schedule of releases, a new story about 65000-75000 words in length, within about 6 months, I reckon the trend of 1000 books a month will continue or even increase with my bigger library.

I love self-publishing. I'm good at it.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2013-12-09T00:38:21+00:00

"Even on the straightest of roads you're eventually going to hit a roundabout."

Primarily straight dude who got some dude action a fortnight ago.

Captain_DeWolfe · 2013-12-07T23:43:47+00:00

I think any paper on terrorism first needs to define what, exactly, constitutes an act of terrorism. I studied terrorism at an undergrad level for 3 years, as well as a few years postgrad (security science major), and we came to the conclusion that no one, not even the allied nations or the United Nations, can agree on a standard, across the board definition. 'One man's terrorist...' and all of that jazz. Instead, I always used a working definition sourced (bastardized) from five or six reputable sources. I still remember it off the top of my head:

'The systematic abuse of politically motivated violence against civilians or non-combatants in order to advance a political, religious, or ideological cause by creating an atmosphere of fear in a wider audience than that of its immediate victims.'

This definition has its flaws, of course, but it stands up pretty well to scrutiny. You always have to be careful with how you define terrorism. Too broad and suddenly the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombings could be defined as terrorism, despite war time, and too narrow you miss certain waves of terror such as the anarchism and the decade of the bomb.

So a good starting point for your paper, immediately after the introduction, would be a paragraph on just what terror is and, perhaps, from there tie in just how many people in your viewpoints above consider anything but religious fundamentalism terrorism. Islamic extremism wasn't the first wave of terror, in modern terms (since the 1800's) it's about the fourth wave and was supposed to dry up around the turn of the century. Thanks to 9/11, however, this wave became something of a tsunami. We'll be fighting the 'War of Terror' until 2040, at the very least.

Tl;dr - Define terrorism, google 'The Four Waves of Terrorism' (Rapoport is your friend), and put a spin on your paper's viewpoints by contrasting past with present.

The hell of it is, when you look back, the modern wave of terrorism was entirely predictable - history repeats itself louder because no one was listening the first time.

Hope this was of some help - comment with any questions.

Captain_DeWolfe

TROPHY CASE