Falling in Love: Plan it, Plot it, Show it—in Four Phases

When I started teaching romance writing, it took a while for me to realize that there's an aspect of romance we seldom consider in depth. We talk a lot about characterization and plot and conflict. But too often we assume that the love story -- the attraction and progression of our characters as they fall in love -- will just happen naturally.

But that assumption is how we get so many characters in romance who move from "I hate you" to "I have to have you forever" with no logical reason -- leaving the reader scratching her head about how on earth these two could ever have fallen in love.

Today's post comes from author Ginger Monette, author of Darcy's Hope -- Beauty from Ashes.

Ginger has made a study of how to write characters who move plausibly and convincingly from initial meeting to happy ever after. Please welcome Ginger! 

~~~~~~~

As romance novelists, it's our job to weave stories that gives readers a front row seat to watch the unfolding of a beautiful love story.

So what's the best way to show a couple moving from “Hello my name is” (or even “I despise you”) to “You're my soulmate and I want to spend the rest of my life with you”?

Having been disappointed by numerous novels where the couple claimed to suddenly “be in love” without actually “falling in love,” I went on a quest to investigate this mysterious process of falling head over heels. What I discovered changed my writing.

I dissected some fifty romance novels and made notes. All the couples had hefty doses of attraction, but the most satisfying stories went beyond attraction to something deeper. They showed the characters passing through four phases that moved them step by step from “meh” (or downright hatred) to “wowie-zowie he's the most wonderful person in the world.”  And each phase seemed to be characterized by distinct thought patterns—particularly if at first Prince Charming seemed to be more of a frog than a prince. Here are the stages I observed:

Acknowledgement of him:

-Acknowledges some good quality about him (talented, kind, generous, etc)

-Finds him attractive

-Hyper aware of him, or hyper critical of his shortcomings (which often signals preoccupation or a subconscious denial of admiration)

-Acknowledges an attraction, but blows it off

Appreciation of his good qualities:

-Defends his character while not necessarily liking him

-Is genuinely thankful for a good quality

-Beginning to warm towards him

-Not so judgmental towards him

-More willing to consider his opinion on a matter

Admiration:

-Takes his advice

-Imitates quality or action of his

-Admits her initial criticism or objections were exaggerated or biased

-Curiosity grows—willing to spend more time in his company

-Acknowledges similar values or mutual interests

-Finds she is thinking (fondly) of him more and more

Adoration

-Openly acknowledges her love/warm feelings for him

-Desires to be in his company

-Thinks he is wonderful

-Thinks he is perfect match

-Misses him painfully when he is gone

-Thinks about him constantly

So how did this awareness of stages change my writing? 

In my novel Darcy's Hope ~ Beauty from Ashes, I kept these stages and behaviours in mind as I crafted scenes. They became an outline of sorts that I wove with compelling action, mystery, suspense, and historical detail. When my characters (Jane Austen's iconic Fitzwilliam Darcy and Elizabeth Bennet) are reunited at a WWI field hospital, Elizabeth is none too happy to encounter Darcy. And although she disdains him, I had her acknowledge that he is handsome and there is something between them. This cracks the door to romance and gets readers rooting for the couple.

Then, I moved her into the appreciation stage by having her surprise herself by praising and defending Darcy to a colleague. After she directly benefits from his wise leadership, she comes to appreciate him, even though she still doesn't like him. Readers can feel her slowly warming towards him and eagerly turn pages to find out how the couple will sort out the baggage between them.

As truths of Darcy's past are dramatically revealed and she comes to understand him better, I have her admit that her initial criticisms were misplaced. Now, with a softened heart, she's able to look at him more objectively. Then I set up an ah-ha moment where she realizes they both share a similar deep-seated insecurity which turns her reservations about him into empathy. Now that her appreciation has turned to admiration, her feelings are almost there! And readers are waiting with bated breath to find out what it will take for him to fully win her heart.

I gave him some scenes that show off his admirable qualities, so not only does she find herself attracted to him, she admires his leadership, work ethic, and drive. Then I purposely played up the things they have in common and showed her enjoying his company. In short, I showed them building a relationship. Finally, after they share a heroic act and laugh over a tent whipping in the wind, she realizes that in fact she adores him. 

Intentionally crafting scenes that follow this four-stage progression of romance enables readers to sense her falling in love, so it's no surprise when she finally declares it. I think a lot of romance authors make the mistake of never showing the characters moving beyond physical attraction and chemistry. It's not easy! But to write a fulfilling romance, the characters need to interact on a deep level and share common interests. Readers should see the couple building a relationship and hear their internal dialog as their thoughts and feelings evolve.

Using this four step model, I think Darcy's Hope has succeeded in providing readers a deep sense of satisfaction as they watch the heroine's tiny bud of acknowledgement open into appreciation, then expand with admiration, and finally blossom into full adoration.

What challenges do you face showing a couple falling in love?

 ~~~~~

Downton Abbey Meets Pride & Prejudice!

Escape to the era of Downton Abbey and experience all the drama of World War 1 alongside Jane Austen's iconic Elizabeth Bennet & Fitzwilliam Darcy. You'll watch their tender love unfold as they learn to work together and reconcile their differences at a field hospital only miles from the Front. When injury and espionage separate the couple, Darcy is crushed. But Donwell Abbey holds a secret that just might change everything.

“…a stellar example of fine Austenesque literature. …an exceptionally moving story complete with a compelling plot, danger, mystery, action, introspection, vivid detail, and an emotionally wrought romance.” ~Austenesque Reviews

Darcy’s Hope Beauty from Ashes:

            Universal link for all retailers. https://books2read.com/u/47kXOj  

            -Amazon USA :  http://bit.ly/2cy01KFBlogTourAmaUS

Darcy’s Hope at Donwell Abbey:
            Universal link for all retailers. https://www.books2read.com/u/3GMPaK
            -Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01M6A76CZ/

Website: GingerMonette.com

Author’s Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/Ginger-Monette-Author-612096318934524/  

Top Five Ways Historical Writers Go Wrong

Writing any book is tough enough, but stepping back in time to create characters from previous centuries presents a yawning trap for today's writers. As an author myself, I struggle with anachronisms -- for instance, I only recently learned that the term "grandfather clock" wasn't in common use until the late 1800s -- after an 1876 song called "My Grandfather's Clock" became popular. Before that, they were called "longcase clocks.")

But it isn't just material goods that create problems for historical writers. Here are the top five ways we all tend to get it wrong:

Using modern speech. We’re so used to our ordinary way of talking that modern expressions often slip into our characters’ dialogue and thoughts. While expressions like “Get a grip” and “I haven’t got a clue” are pretty obvious, others aren’t quite so easy to weed out. Like the nineteenth-century character who tells his grandson, “I don’t like the people you’re hanging around with.” Or the narrator of a novel set in 1066 who says, “They took off into the woods.” Or the Regency heroine who says the hero has derailed her train of thought – before trains and rails were commonplace. Or a hero from the 1820s who says, “I didn’t come here to be analyzed like some patient in a mental asylum” – 70 years before Sigmund Freud developed psychoanalysis. A more subtle (but still disconcerting) example is the heroine who says to the hero, “You think everything is all about you, Your Grace.” 

Including modern attitudes. Far too often in romance fiction, people who were supposedly born and reared in the 1300s or the 1500s or the 1800s think and talk and behave as though they just stepped out of Starbucks holding a latte. It’s true that in order to appeal to today’s reader, main characters tend to be more modern in outlook than their real life peers would have been. But when characters don’t even stop and think about it before they spout today’s perspectives on things like religion, lifestyles and women’s rights, or when they display today’s understanding of psychology, hygiene, nutrition, and medicine, it’s tough to make the reader believe they’re real.

Messing up titles. The most common error when it comes to using aristocratic titles is using the wrong form of address, or using multiple forms of address for the same person. Lady Sarah Winchester isn’t the same person as Lady Winchester is. (Lady Sarah is the daughter of a peer, Lady Winchester is Lord Winchester’s wife.) Lord Winchester isn’t the same person as Lord Randolph Winchester. (Lord Randolph Winchester is the younger son of a duke or a marquess, Lord Winchester is the big cheese himself.) Sir James Smythe is always Sir James, not Sir Smythe. When the author doesn’t realize there’s a big difference between variations which seem so small, it’s easy to dismiss the story entirely.

 Not understanding the rules of inheritance. In the eras most commonly used in historical fiction, illegitimate sons could not inherit titles – period. Oldest sons could not be bypassed in favor of younger ones. Daughters could not pass along titles, except for a very few cases by royal decree. Most often, all the land and money was left to the eldest son. I remember an author who made her heroine a duchess… but not by having her marry a duke, which would be the only way for her to achieve that rank. Instead, this heroine got her title because her grandmother, who was the previous duchess, abdicated and bypassed her daughter in favor of her granddaughter. That’s at least three kinds of impossible.

Just plain getting it wrong. Why bother to look it up when we can make it up? It’s tempting to assume that our vague recollection of the timeline is accurate, or figure that if some other historical author used it, we don’t need to check for ourselves.

A few prize-winning examples: The Regency hero and heroine who honeymooned on an ocean liner – decades before ocean travel started to be comfortable. The maid who says to her mistress, “It’s chilly; you should wear your wool kid gloves” – they can’t be both wool and leather. The hero and heroine who run away from a London ball to Gretna Green, arriving there early the next morning – but traveling 320 miles took at least 36 hours in those days. A Regency hero and heroine who get married at St. George’s Cathedral – St. George’s Hanover Square is a simple parish church, not a cathedral.

This trap yawns equally wide for authors writing in other historical periods. Take a Viking romance which refers to potatoes – five centuries before they were introduced to Europe. Or a story set in 1949 where the narrator says, “He passed out after we hit the interstate” – years before the interstate highway system was even proposed.

Some of these things sound pretty obvious when we look at them in a list. But beware – they can sneak up and attack us when we’re not paying attention.

This blog was first posted on Sitting on the Porch with Kelly, hosted by author Kelly Abell. 

Speed Dating for Authors

Author Tierney James has this cool feature on her blog called "Speed Dating for Authors" where she shares intriguing bits and pieces about books and authors -- including trivia or personal details or stuff you wouldn't otherwise know.  It's a good place to find new authors or find out more about your favorites.

This week I'm featured -- along with some photos of my dollhouse. 

Come on over to Journeys, Treks and Daylilies and join us! Here's a sneak peek: 

Yep, that's really a dollhouse!

Top Five Ways Historical Authors Go Wrong

A couple of weeks ago I met fellow author and blogger Kelly Abell when we were both guests on Marsha Casper Cook's radio show. We talked there about the errors that historical authors most commonly make, and that led to Kelly inviting me to guest blog for her. You can read my post on the Top Five Ways Historical Authors Go Wrong here. Enjoy!

Splitting Heirs

Under the aristocratic system of primogeniture, followed almost religiously during the Regency period, the eldest son is the heir. He gets the title, the fortune, and the land. 

But what if there isn’t an eldest son?

If a title-holder has no legitimate children, or has only daughters, then the lot goes to the nearest male relative of the title-holder. The next in line would be the title-holder’s next-younger brother, and then his sons (if he has any). If the younger brother has no children or only daughters, the title descends to the next brother in the original family, and then to his sons.

An eldest son is known as the heir apparent, because no matter what happens, if he outlives his father he will inherit. Because no one can come between him and the title, he is the apparent – obvious – heir.

If there is no oldest son, then whoever stands next in line is known as the heir presumptive. Since the title-holder could still sire a son (no matter how unlikely that might be), the heir presumptive could still be pushed out of the line of succession. So he’s presumed – but not guaranteed – to be the heir.

If the title-holder dies without a surviving son, but his widow is pregnant, then everything comes to a halt until the baby is born. If it’s a boy, he will hold the title from the moment of his birth. But if it’s a girl, then the next heir in the male line wins the jackpot.

I used this scenario in my Regency novel, Gentleman in Waiting – where the entire family is gathered, waiting to see whether Lady Abingdon’s child will be a boy or a girl...

* * * * *

Everything depends on the baby…

Lady Mariah Gerrard anxiously awaits the birth of her stepmother’s child, desperately hoping for a boy who will inherit their father’s title so Mariah can gain access to her dowry and her freedom. Her father’s cousin John, the next heir in line, has other plans – so if the baby is a girl, disaster looms for Mariah.

When Myles Moreton comes to Edgeworth to manage the family estate, Mariah’s no longer certain that even the birth of a boy will solve her problems. Why is money missing? Why is Mariah’s dowry in doubt?  Despite his genial façade, is Cousin John planning mischief – or worse? Why is Myles Moreton, rather than the late earl’s trustees, suddenly in control? And how can Myles -- a man who’s entirely ineligible -- be not only completely maddening but utterly charming and very, very tempting?

As the family gathers to await the birth, Mariah and Myles search for answers – and they find that playing the waiting game can have its own rewards.

Buy links for Gentleman in Waiting

The Best Little Writers' Conference

Okay, I'm prejudiced... but I really think that ORACON, the Ozark Romance Authors' annual writers' conference, is the best small conference to be found anywhere. It's just one day -- but that day is packed full of information, fun, networking, support, and great people.

Make that lots and lots of great people....

The attendees at ORACON 2014, University Plaza Hotel, Springfield, Missouri

(my thanks to ORA and Sharon Keeling Davis for sharing this photo online)

ORACON kicks off on Friday evening with a booksigning at the Springfield Barnes & Noble store and then fills Saturday to the brim with programs like The Editors and Agents Gong Show (this year was first pages -- and very enlightening discussions of when and why the editors and agents would stop reading or lose interest). Plotting, self-publishing, and editing your way to a best-seller rounded out the topics. The day ends with announcements of winners in the Weta Nichols writing contest. 

ORACON 2014 is history -- but plans are already being made for ORACON 2015. Don't be left out!

Leigh's nominees for best conferences:

Best small romance conference: ORACON, Springfield, Missouri (September)
Best regional romance conference: Moonlight and Magnolias in Atlanta, Georgia (October)
Best regional writers' conference (for writers of all sorts): Midwest WritersWorkshop in Muncie, Indiana (July)

Everybody Needs an Editor, Part Two

Back in January I wrote about the unintentionally-amusing consequences when an author who doesn't know the right word gets the almost-right one, or lets SpellCheck take over instead of consulting an editor. (You can read that post here.)

Today we're back with More Head-Scratching Moments From Today's Books...

“Mildred, a graying brunette with hair as black as her son's..."

Really? Her hair is gray AND brunette AND black, all at the same time? 

The building was modeled after the Pentagon, though it didn't have seven sides.

I hate to tell you, Dear Author, but the Pentagon doesn't have seven sides either. Penta means five. Always has, always will.

Here are a couple of lines from a story set in 1949: 

He passed out after we hit the interstate. 

Nope. The first legislation setting up what's officially called the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways -- no wonder we just call it "the interstate" -- was passed in 1956, and the original network wasn't completed until 35 years later.

We laid in a stock of MREs to eat on our camping trip.

MREs -- Meals, Ready-to-Eat -- replaced canned combat rations in 1981. These two characters could have gotten hold of C rations, but a couple of guys in 1949 wouldn't ever have heard the term MRE.

And these two from a Big-Six published memoir:

"My bedroom was kind of girlie, with a rod-iron bed"

Truly? Who the heck doesn't know about wrought iron? Are they hiring third-graders as copy editors?

"I'd hit the motherload of riches" 

After all of these, I feel like *I* hit the ... uh... mother lode!

Without naming names, what  are your favorite gaffes?

A Regency Lady Meets Third-Grade Students

This week I had the honor and privilege of being a visiting author at my granddaughter's third-grade class. Speaking to 9-year-olds about books and writing represents something of a challenge, considering that I write love stories, and some hot and spicy ones at that. Reading a passage from my books would require some pretty careful editing.

So I decided to talk about research, and the many differences between their lives as kids born into the 21st century and what things would have been like for 9-year-olds and their parents 200 years ago, during the Regency period when many of my stories are set. 

And I went dressed as a Regency lady -- gown, shawl, gloves... I skipped the corset, though. :)

I was pleased at how quickly these very savvy kids defined the math problem of how many years ago the Regency period began and came up with the answer. And then we started talking about all the differences -- the things that didn't exist 200 years ago. They easily got all the obvious ones -- cell phones and the Internet, cars and electric lights. I had to prod a little to get them to figure out that refrigeration was hardly the easy and commonplace thing we have today, and they were stunned when we figured out that the trip from their school to the state capital -- a two-hour drive today -- would take something like twenty hours and at least 10 different teams of horses.

Among the things which surprised them most were schools. Despite the number of their peers who are home-schooled today, they were startled by the fact that kids their age would have been educated at home by governesses, or they'd have gone to boarding school -- if their families could afford it. Or they simply wouldn't have gone to school at all, if their families were poor.

Next time -- and I've already been invited to speak to another group of 9 and 10-year-olds next month -- I'll try to find a piece of one of my books which I can actually share with the kids. 

But this time, we finished up with a story about a pet duck my family used to have -- a children's book my husband and I are thinking of publishing later this year. That's Just Ducky at two days old -- already showing her inborn instincts by trying to incubate an egg!

Writing Between the Sexes

Let's face it -- men and women are different, and the  ways in which they talk, act, and think differently cause all kinds of distress for writers. That's why a seminar called Writing Between the Sexes is the most popular program I do, not only for the writers who attend but for me. 

Last weekend a great group -- First Coast Romance Writers -- gathered in Jacksonville, Florida, to share a day of discussion with me. And did we ever have fun!

Writers fall into a trap when we write about characters of the opposite sex, because we make them act as if they were us. 

Women writers tend to write about guys who are chatty, who ask questions, who share feelings, who think things to death -- and act just like one of the girls. 

Male writers tend to write about gals who give advice, who are pushy, who approach pretty much everything in sexual terms -- and act just like one of the guys. 

The result is often a reader who's turned off -- even if she doesn't completely understand why.

We had a riotously good time on Saturday as we went through the many, many ways in which thinking, talking, and acting differ between the sexes. Thank you to Ada and Abigail and Suzanne, to everyone who played a part in bringing me to Jacksonville, and to everyone who took part!

Thanks to Lynda Gail Alfano, Entourage Member Extraordinaire, for the photos.

Goodreads Giveaways

I'm currently offering two different giveaways at Goodreads. Come on over and sign up for a chance to win a copy of my new contemporary romance novel, Return to Amberley, or one of two copies of my book about the differences between men and women, Writing Between the Sexes. All will be autographed. Giveaways will end in early January, and winners will receive the books soon afterward.

Here are the book descriptions, and the links to enter the drawings:

Return to Amberley

Autographed copy -- a new contemporary romance, never before published. When her girlhood crush blossomed into marriage, Andie believed in a rosy future with the man of her dreams – until Todd's betrayal sent her from the beauty of Minnesota's winters to Atlanta to begin anew. But just a few months later, Todd walks back into Andie’s life – asking for her help. The stone quarry they jointly inherited is for sale, and a good price would secure the future for both of them – paying Andie’s tuition and buying freedom for Todd to concentrate on his sculpture. They need to sell now, but the prospective buyer believes he can pick up the quarry at a discount while Todd and Andie fight through a divorce. Todd wants Andie to rejoin him at the family home, Amberley, and put a false face on their failing marriage to convince the buyer and sell the quarry. But is Andie risking her heart if she returns to Amberley?

Writing Between the Sexes

Men and women think, talk, and act differently -- which causes problems for writers who are trying to create characters of the opposite sex. When we understand the difference between masculine and feminine qualities and habits, we can use those behaviors and patterns to create characters who are plausible and unique, but not stereotypical. Writing Between the Sexes will help you to identify your own gender-specific behaviors, notice those of the opposite sex, and use both to make your characters realistic and believable.

A question from a reader about creating and using secondary characters prompted me to think about the people in a book as though they were actors in a movie -- complete with pay scales.


If an actor speaks in a movie, even if it's just one line, the pay scale requires that he be paid a great deal more in terms of money and screen credit than if he just walks through as an extra. And of course, the more actors you hire for your movie, the more money you're paying out -- even if most of them don't talk.


So authors can often benefit from asking themselves this question, before they create yet another character: "If I had to pay this person to show up and say these lines, would it be worth the money? Or could I give that comment to a character who's already in the story, and save the fee?"


In writing, of course, extra characters don't actually cost money. But we "pay" for them with space, and word count. Each new person has to be established and identified, and that takes up room on the page. But if we can use a character we already have in the story, then we can save the space it would take to create that second person -- and use it to further develop the hero, the heroine, and the love story.


Though this is especially true in romance novels where we keep a tight focus on the hero and heroine, it's something for every author to think about. Sometimes (like with a cozy mystery or a romantic suspense) we need to have more characters so that the bad guy isn't obvious. But even when the cast is bigger, it's wise to ask -- "Do I need this person? Does he play a significant and unique role in the story?Or can I combine his attributes and his contribution and his dialogue with someone else, and keep things simpler for the reader?"

Chief Wapello Comes Down

A storm packing heavy rain, lightning, and 70 mile-per-hour straight-line winds hit my town this weekend, tearing up trees, tearing down power lines, and tearing a bronze statue off the top of the county courthouse where it has stood for 120 years.

 

The statue of Chief Wapello, for whom Wapello County, Iowa, was named, used to stand on the tall peak just to the left of the crane arm (above). During the storm, the statue tore loose and slid down the roof peak to lodge in the valley three stories up, head aimed toward the street, with nothing much holding him there.

























After much maneuvering, the crane operator gently lifted the statue free and swung him to the ground as the storm clouds gave way to a beautiful sunset.

Free book on Father's Day Weekend

I often write about glamorous characters who eat very fancy food -- which is why I keep my elaborate cookbooks in my office and not in my kitchen. :-)  As a working writer, I need an easier way to keep my husband fed -- so the cookbook I actually use is one I put together years ago and published, mostly so I'd have extra copies whenever one got splattered up. (Do you have any idea of the mess it makes when a pumpkin pie doesn't make it into the oven? A whole lot more than if it was dropped on the way out!) However, as the years go by I've found other recipes, fine-tuned some of the earlier ones, and moved on to an e-reader instead of hard copy... so I redid the cookbook. It's going to be a free download on Amazon this weekend -- June 16 and 17. http://www.amazon.com/Simply-Good-ebook/dp/B007XIZLVU/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1339426867&sr=1-1   '  You don't have to be a member of Amazon Prime to get the free download (though it's only free on Saturday and Sunday). And you don't need a Kindle to read it -- you can access it on your regular computer if you have the Kindle for PC or Kindle for Mac free software.

To give you a bit of a preview, most of the recipes I've shared here in the blog are included in the Simply Good cookbook.


I hope you'll enjoy sharing some of my favorite food! 

If Margaret Mitchell submitted GWTW today

From: Today’s romance publishers
To: Margaret Mitchell
Regarding: Your submission, currently titled Gone With the Wind


Dear Ms. Mitchell:


Thank you for the opportunity to review your Civil War novel. We regret that we must take a pass on the book at this time. However, since you are an excellent writer, we are happy to take the time to make suggestions in the hope that a revision would be more likely to meet with a positive response from publishers and readers.


We find that the era for saga novels has passed, because readers today have a much shorter attention span. In its present form the novel is far too large and unwieldy, and we suggest that you think hard about which story you are most interested in telling. Right now there is far too much war and too many potential heroes for the story to be a romance. Honestly, does Scarlett really need to collect every man she meets? 


Perhaps you’ll want to consider dividing the experiences which you have given to Scarlett among the three O’Hara sisters and creating a trilogy. We have found that trilogies about sisters sell well in today’s publishing climate. This would allow you to deal with each story at a more manageable length and create a true romance with each sister having her own hero. (Of course, sell-through figures on the first book would determine whether the second and third were of interest to the publisher.)


We find that our readers do not respond well to Civil War settings, so perhaps you would find it an inviting challenge to re-envision the novel as a Regency, set in England against the background of the Napoleonic Wars. Rhett would be a natural as a rakish earl, and Scarlett might be the spoiled daughter of a duke. We suggest modifying his signature line to "Frankly, Lady Scarlett, I don't give a damn."


You might also consider strengthening the paranormal elements which already exist in the story (you have hinted that Scarlett is something of a witch).


Furthermore, we don’t understand your title, and since there doesn’t seem to be a single wind metaphor in the entire novel we suggest renaming the book The Southern Rebel Blockade-Running Rake’s Gold-digging Bride.


We hope that you find our comments useful and that you are eager to tackle this revision with an eye to strengthening your story and possibly making it saleable. These suggestions, of course, should not be interpreted as an indication that we would actually buy the book if you revise it along the lines we have suggested. 


Yours sincerely,
The Editors


(My thanks to the students in my Gotham Writers Workshop Master Class, who contributed ideas and enthusiasm to this project.)

Spotlighting the Speaker

The rule of thumb you usually hear on paragraphing dialogue is to start a new paragraph for each new speaker. But there are actually so many exceptions that I think a better way is to think of dialogue as if you’re watching two actors on stage.

As we watch the play, we look at Actor A and listen to what he says, then we turn to look at Actor B and see what the reaction is and listen to what Actor B says. But even if Actor B doesn't say anything, we still turn our heads to look at the reaction (the expression, the glare, the physical motion, the deer-in-headlights stare). In other words, we've changed our focus from one actor to the other one.

When you're writing dialogue, picture the two people as if they’re on stage. Where you turn your head to look at the other person, start a new paragraph – even if that person doesn't say anything.

Whenever you want the reader to change focus – to “look at” the other person – start a new paragraph.

Then put everything about that person’s reaction into one paragraph. What he says, what he does, the attribution, all goes together. (If it’s a long paragraph, consider breaking it up by returning to the other person for a moment mid-stream.)

Keep going back and forth – helping the reader to turn her head and look at the other person – and you’ll have a more lively dialogue.

Welcome to Greystone Manor!

Welcome!


Above is the view which greets the visitor just inside the front door of Greystone Manor. That's the back door you can see; the front door would be behind you. Off to the right through the french doors is the living room. Yes, those are two tiny sets of armor perched along the stair railing -- and if you look closely, you'll see that the center of each wooden tread is worn from the traffic of the family running up and down. The intricate molding on the stairs was created with one tiny toothpick-sized piece of wood at a time, by my husband the master builder. (That's his thumb below, showing the scale of the wood, before the walnut stain and finish were applied.)  The rug is counted cross stitch on aida cloth. 

Barons & Baronesses

Barons are the fifth and lowest level of the British peerage, coming right below viscounts. Barons may well be the oldest of the ranks, with the titles of earls and marquesses and viscounts originating after barons were already well established. Frequently an earl or marquess or viscount is also a baron, and the lesser title is often the one used by a titled gentleman's eldest son as a courtesy. Often -- but not always -- the baron's title is directly derived from the family name, so that if Henry Smith were to be named a baron, he might be Baron Smith.

He would be addressed as Lord Smith or my lord, and his wife would be Lady Smith (but -- oddly -- not my lady.) The baron's children are known as The Honorable Firstname Lastname.

In modern times, there are a few women who have been named baronesses in their own right, for service to the crown. Former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, for instance, is Baroness Thatcher -- most often referred to as Margaret, Lady Thatcher.

(Lady Margaret Thatcher would be a different individual entirely -- the daughter of a high-ranking nobleman, rather than a peeress in her own right.)

Surprise, or Suspense?

Today I'm turning over the blog to an expert -- Alfred Hitchcock. Here's what he had to say about creating suspense:

There is a distinct difference between 'suspense' and 'surprise', and yet many pictures continually confuse the two. I'll explain what I mean.

We are now having a very innocent little chat. Let us suppose that there is a bomb underneath this table between us. Nothing happens, and then all of a sudden, 'Boom!' There is an explosion. The public is surprised, but prior to this surprise, it has seen an absolutely ordinary scene, of no special consequence.

Now, let us take a suspense situation. The bomb is underneath the table, and the public knows it, probably because they have seen the anarchist place it there. The public is aware that the bomb is going to explode at one o'clock and there is a clock in the décor. The public can see that it is a quarter to one. In these conditions this same innocuous conversation becomes fascinating because the public is participating in the scene.

The audience is longing to warn the characters on the screen: 'You shouldn't be talking about such trivial matters. There's a bomb underneath you and it's about to explode!'

In the first case we have given the public fifteen seconds of surprise at the moment of the explosion. In the second case we have provided them with fifteen minutes of suspense. The conclusion is that whenever possible the public must be informed. Except when the surprise is a twist -- that is, when the unexpected ending is, in itself, the highlight of the story.

Though Hitchcock was talking about films, what he says about surprise and suspense is equally true in books. And nobody could have said it better.

Little Things Mean a Lot

Last night I had the joy of sharing my love of miniatures with a friend. As I watched her tour through my miniature house (the equivalent of a 3,500 square foot Georgian), I remembered the fun of building and furnishing it, and going from this:

to this:

As a child, I had dolls but no dollhouse. This house -- it's called Greystone Manor -- is anything but a toy, but I can relive a bit of childhood as I play with it.

In future weeks, I'll share more views of rooms and furnishings. Or you can get a sneak peek on my website:

http://www.leighmichaels.home.mchsi.com/leigh's%20house.htm 

Viscounts and Viscountesses

The rank in the peerage below earls and above barons is that of a viscount -- and though it's tempting to pronouce the S, it's actually silent.

A viscount is often be the oldest son of an earl or a marquess, holding his title as a courtesy based on his father's rank. Or he can be the holder of the title in his own right, if it's the most exalted title in the family. A viscount's wife is a viscountess.

His children don't hold titles, other than being formally addressed as The Honorable Firstname Lastname, and the oldest son of a viscount -- unlike the heir of a higher-ranking peer --is treated no differently from his younger brothers.

Today a viscount's daughters are simply called Miss Lastname, regardless of their order of birth. In the more-formal days of the Regency and Victorian eras, the oldest daughter was given a bit more status by being called Miss Lastname, while her younger sisters were known as Miss Firstname Lastname.