Top Ten Tuesdays - Trends

Top Ten Tuesdays is a weekly meme from The Broke and the Bookish. Today's TTT is on trends: ones we like and ones we don't.

This was a little tough, but I wanted to see if I could name five trends I'd like to see more of, five trends I'd like to see less of.


Yay: Racial Diversity, especially in couples/families - The only character I can think of who is half-anything, yet with race not being a major factor, is Jake from DragonHaven. Seriously, I love mixed-race characters. I just do. There need to be more. And I have a Hispanic friends who really wants to date a black guy - sounds awesome, right? Diversity is cool. **After School Special Over**

Yay: Sub-genre fantasy - vampire detectives, comedic ghosts, etc. It annoys me when fantasy/supernatural characters are shoved into the dramatic/romantic/horror roles: the base characteristic of being such-and-such a creature doesn't have to restrain the roles a character can play. Mostly, I see this subverted in kidlit, sometimes YA. But there's always room for more in this fantasy-lover's book.

Yay: Fairytale Adaptions - They have to be good, of course, but in my mind there can never ever ever be too many. Not so sure how I feel about things like the Jane Eyre modernizations, but then I haven't really explored that yet. Also, I'd love to see people adapting Biblical or other religious stories.

Yay: Local diversity - especially for hauntings. I want to see someone whose apartment is haunted, instead of the big old house way out in nowhere. I feel like a lot of genres make use of out-of-the-way locals too much. I don't get to the city much, I want to read about cities!

Yay: Boys being kidnapped - Like, not trying to hate on boys or anything, but it is always the girl that gets kidnapped. I really like the complexity of the kidnapping trope, whether it's a the whole plot or a sub-plot. But I can't think of one example where it's a boy being kidnapped, or a woman doing the kidnapping. I can think of real examples, but not in fiction. Isn't anyone curious about how that dynamic plays out? Or, say, Stockholm syndrome between homosexuals? I mean, so many options. Explore, people. (Although, from what I myself have written, I have very little room to talk.)

Nay: The one-thing-that-changed-everything - because it is not events that change people so much as their reaction to those events. I feel like this isn't explained enough. Bella did not become a zombie because Edward left: she became a zombie because, once Edward was gone, she focused on his absence instead of the other things life had to offer her. This was not dealt with in a satisfactory way, for me. (I will make an effort not to use more Twilight in my bad examples.)

Nay: Stock Christians - So, you need to a stock unpopular for someone to bully. He could be the science geek, the band geek, the theatre kid, the alternative, the quiet one, the socially awkward. Or he could be the Christian. There is nothing wrong with having Christian side characters be bullied, but, to say they're a Christian at all, you're going to talk about religion. If that's not going to tie in somehow, then it's probably just going to get people mad and not add anything. Like that quote about not mentioning the gun on the wall if it's not going to go off. (I'm looking at you, Watching Alice.) And, is it just me, or are these characters always boys?

Nay: Non Co-dependent Relationships - as in, guy always protecting girl, never really needing help even when she's trying. Or girl is staking her whole identity on boy, and he's, well, not. Or one party is always bending to the other party's will, and when it goes the underdog's way, it's because the alpha is placating. Now, these are great examples of bad relationships, but I don't find this kind of thing appealing or romantic. A good relationship is two people meshing, each offering something, bending to each other.

Nay: Chatrooms/texting - Not a fan of textual communication, really, unless it's short and really important/interesting. That thing in Beastly? That was okay. Could've lived without it.

Nay: Bad good friends - it's one thing to have bad friends and know it. It's another to have bad friends and pretend everything's okay. It seems like, especially in romance, the main character's friends sometimes aren't very friendly. Or their relationship is so underdeveloped it's hard to tell what's going on. I mean, not everything has to be Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants, but really.


What trends do you love, and what are you sick of? Link to your posts, and remember to visit the original post at The Broke and the Bookish.

New Things...

So, I'm generally not an, let's say, adventurous person. So I'm kind of excited that I've let myself slip into a subdued fangirl state for two things I never thought I'd watch/read: Glee and Harry Potter.

I basically watch Glee for the Puck and Kurt, though I've always had an affinity for really good cover songs. I was surprised by how much I liked it, but really, I shouldn't be. I'm stubborn about avoiding things, but once I'm exposed to it, usually I can find the good side. And when the good side is adorableness and catchy music, that's enough for me.

Now, for Harry Potter I have an excuse. I've not been allowed to read it before. Don't have a panic attack, I've read a lot of other equally controversial books with my parents' consent, they just held a particular suspicion for Harry Potter. Don't ask me why. But I made a case that trying to write MG fantasy with having read Harry Potter was like trying to write Christian books without having read the Bible, and I got The Sorceror's Stone out of the library. Happiness ensued.

Speaking of new things, I decided to skip senior year of high school and go straight to community college. Is more important than reading my first Harry Potter? Maybe. But I'm going to act like it's not.

So, while thinking about doing new things, I stumbled upon a plot for a YA. I'd already had the character and a few other details, but now I've actually got something to go on. Now I just have to decide if that's the project I'm going to focus on next.

English Journal: Paranormalcy #3

Let's not mention last week. It was a bad week.

As always, beware of spoilers, read good books, and happy holidays.


Evie works for IPCA, an international organization which attempts, with mixed success, to control various paranormal creatures and keep them away from humans. They are just a little anal about this. When Evie leaves IPCA later in the book, 'organization does not equal justice' becomes something of a theme. She joins what might be considered an anarchist faction, if the book had been more political. Though it's run by a normal man, the principle is for the paranormals to keep each other in check, rather than having Big Brother constantly peeking over their shoulder. There's understandable animosity in the faction toward IPCA, made more reasonable when you discover some of their less lucrative tactics. Still, the tension between the "anarchists" and Evie is practically palpable for a while, until she comes to terms with her friends being her enemies, and vice versa.

Evie tried to explore other species' positions a little, earlier on, but she's quickly distracted by her own duties and opinions. Joining the faction wakes her up a bit. I was glad she didn't flip-flop - "They're good, I like them, oh wait, they're bad, I hate them." She does become something I'm constantly working toward: objective. She reconciles with the fact that even the people she loves are at fault, and even those at fault can be loved.



That's it for the Paranormalcy journals. The next two, if I keep going in order, will be on the incomparable Living Dead Girl by Elizabeth Scott.

English Journal: Paranormalcy #2

It's Wednesday. I'm getting a little less dismal at this. *I wish*

So, neglecting speeches and schoolwork and a few Christian-themed blogs I promised to do for a friend, I'm here to post another journal from my English class on the incomparable Paranormalcy. I'll try to keep the Christian themes to a minimum when posting here, since this isn't that kind of blog, but bear with me - this journal didn't come to a very good end without it. Until next time.


There was a theme running through the book - subtle enough that I didn't notice at first, but I'm sure it's intentional - about judgment and worldview. It's kind of a common theme in fantasy recently. Actually, it's borderline cliche: don't judge a vampire by his fangs, and whatnot. I think White went a little deeper into it. Because Evie works for the government, the idea of allies and enemies seems more true than in some books (title redacted) because there's actual authority and duty and power play going on, not just an angsty teenager thinking the world's against her.

Anyway, White really isn't dealing with the nature of evil here - well, she is if you count the multiple reestablishings of the heroine's "personal evil", thereby defining what pure evil is not. Eh. I hope that makes sense.

Evie even mentions once that fairies, minor to major reoccurring baddies of the book, are not so much evil or amoral as they are other moralled. What's important to humans, not so much with the Fae. There are even two clans of fairies which are differing levels of nasty, and they seem to consider each other evil.

I think it's an important point, especially for Christians: it's not reasonable to expect people to conform to our standards if they don't believe in them. Like the organization Evie works for, depending on other moralled people to do what we want them to do isn't very wise, or very fair. And it's not very good for our reputation, either.

Englih Journal: "Rose Daughter"

Did someone here say something about posting journals every Sunday? What a little liar that person must be...

So, today I have another journal. I'm still trying to pick things that are at least a little known, which seriously limits me choices. This one is rather long, though I'm not sure if this is more of a downside for me, or for anyone reading this self-indulgent tripe.

Without further ado, an English class journal on Robin McKinley's "Rose Daughter."

McKinley has a real "thing" for Beauty and the Beast. Good thing, too, because I'm the same way. I've read both her adaptations, "Rose Daughter" and Beauty", and another book with definite connections to the tale. So if there journals end up being about all three instead of just Rose Daughter, it's because I can't quite keep them straight in my head.

I've been reading a lot of books about magic lately. It's a little unusual for me, since I generally have little interest in it; my interest is in fantasy. The fact that the two often go together has softened me to warily accept the occasional magician. But the magic in these books is... quiet, maybe. Very Chronicles of Narnia, in a way. And I actually like it quite a bit. Particularly when magic is attached to the story in non-otherworldly ways. For instance, in "Rose Daughter" there are an awful lot of, who would've guessed, roses. (McKinley loves roses. I know this because I am now slightly obsessed fan of hers, and I read her blog every day.) In the story, roses are a symbol of, and a blessing for, love. "Not silly sweethearts' love," but real, true love. It's said that only wizards and greenwitches can get roses to grow because people didn't have enough love to give them. It's a continual question n the book whether our heroine, Beauty, is a greenwitch without knowing it because she got the roses in her new town to bloom again.

I'd kind of given up hope on roses - they're dreadfully overdone, in fiction and real life - but this has brought me back to them again. I think that's proof enough that "Rose Daughter" is a piece of literary magic.

The Chronicle of Late Night Doubts

Dear non-existent reader,

It's about three thirty A. M. and I am not, unfortunately, sleep-typing, but completely awake. This is going to be one of those posts I hope I can look back on, one or two or five years from now, and laugh (either because I've proved myself wrong, or because I've proven myself right and gotten over it).

Lately, I've been wondering why I wrote Accidents. Which is really a stupid question - I wrote it because I realised that my last series, Colorblind, was a horrible dead-end idea, and I needed something new I could throw myself into with everything I'd learned up to that point. I'm not exactly sure when this was anymore - maybe summer/fall '07? I'm not saying I regret writing Accidents or Colorblind, because I learned alot from practical application that I couldn't learn in English class. I discovered my areas of fault, learned to be my own editor, developed the desire to be original, to be great, because I hated looking at what I'd written and not being able to say, "I love this. This is amazing. This is my best work yet, and even when I've become a better writer, I will not be able to make this any better. This is perfect." It's kind of the unattainable dream, right? I know that nothing I write will ever be perfect, but that has to be my goal, or there's nothing to shoot for. I don't want to just be as good as anyone else.

I know that some of my best writing so far has gone into Accidents. I don't think it's a bad book, or a bad concept, or that it wasn't worth my time. And I still think it's a good book to enter the market with. But the more I think about it, the more I feel like, why am I doing this? What connection do I feel to these characters? What am I trying to say?

Truthfully, I say a lot of things in the novel - little tidbits of myself, tucked in here and there - but in the grand scheme of things, the theme of Accidents is overcoming all the cr*p that life throws at you. It's something I care about, obviously, but I don't know if it'll really speak to other people in that way, because my MC has a rough time with that - the overcoming. It's not so much how a person should do it, but how my MC does do it, which isn't a perfect or healthy method at all. Maybe it'll be a warning to people. Maybe, if I get a chance to see the series to it's end, it'll give people a little hope that the passage of time really is a good healer. I just don't know.

People who've read it, or part of it, say things about the characters, the writing, the plot, but I haven't heard any thoughts on the theme. I'm worried that I've written a book that will not stay with you. But now that it's done, really the only thing I can do is keep moving forward with everything I do from now on.

I am always learning. It's a little painful.

Sincerely,

Shadows