I had this month all planned out.

I was going to pull Splitting Atoms out of its dusty hiding place, go on a rewriting blitz, and have this new edition at least halfway done by the 31st. And yet, here it is the 22nd (as I write this), and I've got 1.5 pages of complete and utter trash which haven't been modified in weeks.

Go me.

But, honestly, I'm not bothered. I'm not beating myself up about it. (or at least I'm trying not to) I'm not even sorry.

I hear a lot about "writing everyday", "not waiting for inspiration to write", and "write even when you don't want to". And, in general, I agree. Normally, I believe in forcing myself to write-- because if I didn't, I'd never get anything done.

But this month, every time I opened the document and looked at that blank space on the screen, perfectly complimented by the blank space in my mind, I didn't feel just indisposed-- I felt paralysed. Completely overwhelmed and stressed out and incapable of making my brain create words and transfer them to the keyboard.

Life has been hitting harder that usual, I guess. I feel like I've been drowning in school, and my Mom just keeps putting more pressure on me, academically. Which is a good thing, but it's stressful. Church and youth group have been intense lately, which is a good thing, but it's stressful. We're renovating our basement, which means strangers coming and going constantly and lots of loud noises coming from beneath my feet-- it's a good thing, but it's stressful.

And, outside of a couple minutes to talk to my friends at church every Sunday, my social life has been practically non-existent, which means my extrovert soul has been running on empty, which makes functioning in general just. hard.

With everything that's been going on, I don't really feel like forcing myself to work on an already complicated and stressful WIP. And honestly-- right now, writing isn't my first priority. I'm just a kid in high school, and if I don't write for a week or two, it's not going to kill the rest of my writing life. (probably)

So I've taken an unofficial break from writing. And I think that's okay. I don't think we need to beat ourselves up when we don't write regularly or when we don't accomplish our goals. Sometimes we need to step back and reassess what's really important.

Writing, or a much needed seven hours of sleep? A good night's sleep.

Writing, or a long overdue time to read God's word? The Bible.

Writing, or the loads of school work sitting on your desk? School.

Writing, or six hours binge watching Netflix? Uh-- probably writing. But not necessarily.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, don't stress it. There are things that are more important than writing-- like your physical/mental/emotional/spiritual health-- and if writing is getting in the way of one of those things, it is entirely justified to take a break.

My friends and I made a BIG deal out of this on FF.net-- maybe a bigger deal than we needed to. But then again, my fandom (Lord of the Rings) was renowned for churning out endless piles of 197 chapter fics, chronicling the tales of gorgeous teenaged elleths, bestowed with never-before seen powers (never-before seen in Middle Earth, anyway), who swooped into the Fellowship of the Ring and saved Frodo multiple times before finally destroying the ring themselves and riding off into the sunset with Legolas or Aragorn (or sometimes both).

It was stories like these that gave fan fiction a bad reputation, and we were determined to redeem ourselves. So no more Mary Sues. In fact, in my time on FF.net, I really only saw maybe five or six Mary Sues. Not so when I turned my eyes outside of fan fiction, and looked around at all the so-called "original" books and movies that were coming out.

Last night I watched Star Wars: The Force Awakens for the first time. And I should stop right about now and say there are going to be spoilers in this post because I'm assuming everyone's seen it by now. If you haven't, stop reading right here.

So you've seen it? You sure? Okay, keep reading.

I don't tend to like the girl characters in movies. They're usually wildly unrealistic, arrogant, and really only there for all the guys, both those in the movie and in the audience, to stare at. Girl characters usually just annoy me to death, because so few movies portray them correctly. And so something that really got me excited near the beginning of Star Wars episode 7 was Rey.

She was kind. She was feminine. She was good with machines and robots and space junk. She wasn't really that pretty and she definitely wasn't objectified. She was a perfectly normal and awesome human being (or alien, more likely), and it didn't take long before I was cheering wildly for her, screaming "You GO, girl!"

I liked how she was good with parts and machinery. It made up an interesting part of her personality and actually contributed to the storyline, so I was totally on board with it, in spite of the subtle hint at trying to be that strong female character. I didn't totally buy it when she beat up two guys at the same time in less than two minutes, but I supposed that it was probably good they didn't make Finn have to save her. I was extremely doubtful when she turned out to be a great pilot and a little bit upset when I found out that she had some kind of connection to Luke's lightsabre. But I still clung to the hope that eventually she'd get some flaws that would help even it all out.

And then turns out she's strong in the force-- stronger than Kylo Ren, who I'm assuming has been training since childhood (right? right?), and just-- nope. I was done.

And I'm probably more upset with Star Wars episode 7 than I would have been if Rey had just been the stereotypical strong female character that I honestly hate a lot, because instead, they created a really likeable, compelling character that I desperately wanted to be on board with. And then they ruined her, because,

a) she had no flaws, and

b) she could do anything

Nobody's perfect. I don't care if you need a mechanic AND a pilot AND a talented jedi. I don't care if you think that it will make the feminists happy to see a Mary Sue on screen. I don't care if you're trying to represent women in a positive light.

Representing women as perfect is every bit as annoying as representing them as weak. Want another shocker? We're human beings, people. We're aren't objects only there for the sake of men, but we aren't goddesses, either. We have character and personality and interests and hobbies and likes and dislikes and strengths and flaws and skills and things we're just downright bad at. Just like everyone else.

Of course, it's not just women who get painted perfect on screen. The Gary Stu counterpart isn't quite as common, but he still makes an appearance. He's still annoying. Surprise, surprise-- guys can't do everything, either! Guys mess up sometimes, too! Everybody does.

Just because you're not writing fan fiction doesn't mean you can get away with Mary Sues and Gary Stus. Thankfully, it's not that hard to avoid writing these types of characters. There's just one simple rule you have to keep in mind.

Nobody's perfect.

Nobody. Ever. So your characters shouldn't be, either. It's that simple.

(And, for the record, I did love the new Star Wars movie-- and I'm still clinging to the hope that Rey will shape up-- or down, in this case-- in the upcoming films. So don't kill me, please.)

So, what did you think of the newest Star Wars instalment? What are some Mary Sues or Gary Stus in pop culture that annoy you personally? Do you think it's ever okay to write "perfect" characters?

So maybe you're wondering, "What is an ENFP anyway? I know nothing of this type." In which case, my poor unfortunate friend, allow me to add a ray of hope and sunshine to your dismal life.

ENFPs, sometimes known as the "Champions" or the "Inspirers", are often stereotyped as being the "life of the party", having great social skills, and an infectious enthusiasm for life, the universe, and everything. And the stereotypes are there for a reason. ENFPs love new people, experiences, and ideas, and we love to get excited about the things we love. You know that one person who laughs constantly, is a notorious hugger, and might be a shape-shifting unicorn? You might just have yourself an ENFP.

We go way deeper than the stereotype though, and some ENFPs can get seriously annoyed if you act like their social butterfly side is their only (or even dominant) side, so do not try writing an ENFP character based on just the stereotypes. Just don't. We might be unicorns, but unicorns have horns and we can kill you with them.

I don't want to hurt you, though, so instead, let's talk about how to write an authentic ENFP.

ENFP: Core Traits

• ENFPs are often known as "the introverted extrovert". (This is because of the ordering of the functions, which would take too long to explain, but you can look it up if you want.) They require much more "alone time" than the typical extrovert, and are sometimes mistaken (and can even mistake themselves) for an introvert. However, they are extroverts, as they are energized and motivated by the external world of people and experiences.
• ENFPs are very curious. This is where the stereotype of the easily distracted, "Oooh-- shiny!" ENFP originates. They can come across as random and unfocused, but in reality, ENFPs are simply fascinated by every aspect of life and want to explore every opportunity that presents itself.
• ENFPs are often indecisive. This springs from their natural curiosity and fascination with everything (and I mean everything). They want to experience every possibility, and so when it comes to making decisions on which possibility they will experience, they are often caught in a dilemma. This is further aided by their Feeling function, as they want to make a decision that will make everyone happy, and this is often impossible.
• ENFPs value one-on-one, close relationships. As extroverts, they are stimulated by people and enjoy a wide variety of relationships, but unlike many other extroverted types, it is the emotional connections they make with others that they value most, not the sheer excitement and exhilaration of being with people. Because of this, close, personal relationships are more important to them than their wide circles of acquaintances.
• ENFPs are fiercely independent. "I do what I want!" is how they run their lives, and they feel stifled by norms and conventions. They desperately desire freedom to be creative and original. They are neither "leaders" nor "followers", but prefer to do their own thing and let others do their own thing. Control in all it's forms bothers them.

• Judgement. ENFPs hate being judged, and they hate to see others judged almost as much. They tend to be very tolerant people themselves (they are very set in their opinions, and are convinced they're correct, but they also realize that it's okay for people to feel differently on things) and so it especially irritates them when others don't return the compliment. (And, believe me, ENFPs can tell when they're being judged.)
• Manipulation. ENFPs believe in doing their own thing, and are extremely annoyed when others try to force them to conform to others' plans and ideas using unfair means. (Though it should be stated that unhealthy ENFPs are often quite skilled at manipulating others.)
• Conflict. ENFPs hate drama as a general rule, and will do a lot to avoid it, often to a fault. (However, remember that if someone goes to far and makes them mad enough, they can transform in a matter of seconds and become the scariest unicorns you've ever met.)

• Overly emotional. Anger, sorrow, happiness, depression-- ENFPs don't do anything by halves. They yell too much, cry too easily, and laugh too loud, and other people usually don't appreciate it.
• Get stressed easily. I'm not sure where this comes from-- maybe it's because they don't do anything by halves?-- but I know it's true in my life, and the research I've done is saying the same thing, so... any ideas why this is?
• Easily distracted. ENFPs want to experience everything, and there's never enough time to do it all in. They flit from idea to idea trying desperately to explore every possibility there is before it's too late, and often enough, they don't have time to finish with one possibility before another crops up and captures their attention.
• A bit too independent for their own good. Rules and authority are important aspects of life, but that's difficult for the ENFP to accept. Often times they are so set on their own way that they forget the rules are there for a reason and that breaking them rarely brings about anything good. This problem does usually diminish as the ENFP gains maturity, however. (And yes, a teenaged ENFP could quite conceivably fit into the "rebellious teenager" stereotype, but not necessarily.)

• Many ENFPs are easily bored.
• ENFPs tend to be very popular, because of their friendly, spontaneous, and accepting nature.
• ENFPs can shut up. Please stop this stereotype. I've known a lot of ENFPs, and while many of them (including myself) were the stereotypical obnoxious chatterbox when they were little, they all had pretty much grown out of it by high school. I'm sure there are older ENFPs who still talk way too much, but they are exceptions, not the rule.
• ENFPs are supposed to get along best with INFJs and INTJs. (And my best friend is an INFJ, so-- I dunno, there might be something to it.)
• That being said, some ENFPs do not get along with strongly expressed T types. This can be because they misunderstand a Thinker as being heartless, condescending, or just plain mean-- all of which traits are repulsive to the (healthy) ENFP. (Btw, personal note-- and, Thinker peeps, I love you and y'all are awesome people-- to be totally honest, I don't think I've ever met a T who didn't scare me to some extent.)
• Other people often think ENFPs are flirting, when they're really just being "nice".
• They procrastinate. A lot.

YES, these exist, and many of them are quite popular. It's possible to write a great ENFP, and here's a few examples you might want to check out of some very different characters who I think fit the type quite well.

• The Tenth Doctor (Doctor Who?)
• "Scout" Finch (To Kill a Mockingbird, by Harper Lee)
• Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader (Star Wars)
• Peregrin Took (The Lord of the Rings, by J. R. R. Tolkien)
• Anna (Frozen)
• Peeta Mellark (The Hunger Games, by Suzanne Collins)

Some other fun resources, if you want to write an ENFP:

25 Struggles All ENFPs Will Understand
If ENFPs Were Villains...

The Ten Stages of a Depressed ENFP

My ENFP Pinterest Board

And that's the ENFP. If you have questions, don't be shy-- ask away!

Just remember: everybody is different, and nobody fits in a box. So don't write your ENFP by the stereotype-- but don't stick to these guidelines completely either. Sure, this is what the ENFP looks like to me, but I've only met maybe 10 (myself included) in my lifetime. I'm willing to bet there's a whole lot more out there, and that they're all unique and special. The above are some general rules, but you can break one or two here and there with your character-- go ahead! It's okay!

This is a tag, so I get to spread the Meyer's Briggs love to:

Aimee @ To The Barricade!

A. M. @ The Authorist

Lily @ Life of Lily

If I tagged you, don't feel obligated to participate if you don't want to, but I really would love to read about your personality types (especially since I have characters in all of them)! If I didn't tag you and you'd like to do it-- don't hold back!! Just make sure you shoot me the link so I can read your amazing post!

Here are the official rules:

1. Link back to my blog and let me know when your post is up so I can fangirl over it.
2. Title your post "MBTI Blog Challenge: How to Write an [insert your personality type]". This should help other writers find this resource quickly and easily.
3. Give your MBTI personality type and provide a list of their core traits, likes, dislikes, strengths, weaknesses, and anything else you'd like to add.
4. Tag other bloggers to do the same.
5. Share your post with other writers to help them craft their characters.

Well, wasn't that depressing? Do you think it's possible to write a "perfect" novel? Are you okay with sucking?

Just from that one short review, I've got a neat to-do list to work on as I edit, plus a couple reasons why this story is worth my time in the first place. This review doesn't mention every single problem, but it gives me a starting place and makes the task seem a lot less daunting.

How do you read your stories? Do you ever get overwhelmed by the sheer suckiness of them? Or do no one else's stories suck as much as mine do?

What's your take on the "Strong Female Character" trend? Do you think there are some business and societal roles that are "stronger" than others (mechanic vs. babysitter)? Comment away, but do try to keep it polite, as I know this is a controversial issue.

• Divergent
• The Lightening Thief (Percy Jackson 1)
• Variant

Alternatives:

First off, why do you even have this game there in the first place? What purpose does it serve? And if it's to show off the protagonist's value, I'd say cut it. Put the MC in a real life or death situation, or break the abilities to us one by one, or let us know from the very beginning that he's awesome, but the whole trivial game idea is really overused. If you have some reason for making him play a game though, you have limitless options. Sardines, monkey in the middle, even follow the zookeeper to the zoo for those familiar with that game. Or why not a board game or a card game? 

Variations:

If you really have your heart set on capture the flag, though, at least give it a twist. Variant has already done a variation with paintball, and The Lightening Thief had monsters, but there are still lots of options available. You could add nerf guns to the mix, or make them play on ice skates or rollerblades, or make it a real war with guns and the intention of actually killing the opposition (this would be cool and horrible).

The Love Interest's Eyes

• Every romance book or novel with a romantic sub-plot I have ever read

Alternatives:

Be realistic. Is your character really going to notice how hot that guy is the first time she sees him? If so, would it really be the eyes she'd notice first? More likely she'd notice the hair, the smile, the way he talks, and be left with an overall impression of what he looks like, without picking out the details.

Variations:

If you really want her to notice his gorgeous eyes, though, wait til a little later in the relationship. Wait until she's already in love with him, at which point she might possibly be obsessive enough to stare at him long enough his eye colour. Or, if you're like me and enjoy making fun of tropes, do make the first thing she notices about the first hot guy she meets his beautiful eyes-- and then make him turn out to be the bad guy.

• Divergent
• The Kill Order (Maze Runner 0.5)
• Red Rising

Alternatives:

Well, you could just not do it? Or you could write a possible-win scenario where there is a way out, but it would result in thwarting one of the protagonist's dearest goals, which I think could be just as emotionally powerful as actually killing the friend.

Variations:

Playing on the "kill friend or friend kills you" version, which readers seem to find the most cool, you could have the protagonist incapacitate their attacker with out killing him *cough*still-believe-Tris-could-have-done-this*cough*. Or you could have the protagonist choose to die rather than kill his friend. And he does die. And that's the end of the story.

The Love Triangle

• The Hunger Games
• Twilight
• Everything ever? (It certainly feels like it.)

What are some cliches you've seen and can't explain? Would you agree with my list? What are some other alternatives and variations you've thought of/tried?

A lot of young adult fictions these days contain a similar scenario: the no-win scenario. This is the circumstance where the protagonist of the story is faced with an impossible choice: a choice between wrong and worse, evil and more evil. Some examples of this are a) in Divergent, when Tris Prior has to kill her friend or be killed by him (and therefore be unable to "save the world"); b) in The Kill Order, in which the protagonist must kill others to stay alive and (hopefully) find a cure for a dangerous virus; c) in The Hunger Games series, in which the same sort of thing happens multiple times. 

But is this a good thing to make happen in your story? If you are considering putting this sort of situation in your novel, you should ask yourself some questions. First, is it necessary? Second, is it realistic? Third, does it help get across the message you are trying to convey through your story? 

Let's start with... 

Before we ask this, though, we should consider why you would put it in in the first place. In most cases, I think that the author inserts a no-win scenario to either put out a message or to just give his protagonist some good whump* and angst. We'll look at the message of your novel in a minute. First let's discuss the whump factor. Every main character definitely needs some whump. Not only is it good for his character development; it also makes the reader feel sorry for him, which in turn makes the reader root for him. And you definitely want your audience rooting for your protagonist. But there are other and better ways of beating up your lead, physically, mentally, emotionally, and yes, even morally. Because is it easier to shoot a friend in order to stay alive so that you can save the world? Or is it easier to sacrifice your own life to save a friend's so that he can go on to save the world? I'm not saying either is easy, but I think the second has more feels packed in and it also helps show that the protagonist knows what's really important: others, not himself. The first choice could mean the same thing, but it makes one quite suspicious about the lead's true motives. 

Now for "is it realistic". Would your main character ever really need to either do wrong or wrong? I believe very strongly that there is always a right choice. 

I'm talking from a Christian perspective here, so you may or may not agree with me. But I don't believe that God will ever put a soul in a position where there is no right, good choice. He is a God of justice and purity, and why would he require a person to go against His commands? And if it wouldn't happen in real life, you shouldn't put it in your story. Not that your story has to be entirely realistic, but why put a situation in that gets across the idea that there can be no-win scenarios, and sometimes people are required to sin? 

That brings us to the last question: "Does it help get across the message you are trying to convey through your story?"

 When I read one of these no-win scenarios, I get the idea that there are times when there are only two choices: to compromise your standards (for instance, killing a friend), or to compromise them in a different way (letting the world burn because you won't kill a man). But if that's the message you're trying to get across, you might want to rethink your novel. 

Because after all, what defines a hero? What makes him different from a villain? 

It's his choice to do right despite the odds; it's his choice to have a code, to live by his standards, to not let evil become stronger than him. A hero may be faced with the same situations, struggles, and motives as the villain, but he makes the right choice, and the villain makes a wrong one. It's why we cheer the hero on, because the right choice is always harder, and because we cannot but respect someone who will sacrifice anything to do right. If you put a no-win scenario in there, then the protagonist is no longer a hero. He may have chosen the lesser of two evils, but there is always a right choice he could have chosen, and didn't. Not that the protagonist should have no flaws; but when he makes a mistake it should be portrayed as one, and in the crucial moment, the moment that defines him, at the climax of the story, he needs to make the right choice.

I'm not saying all books with no-win scenarios are bad. Some I have enjoyed quite a bit. But I think that the no-win scenario detracts quite a bit from the book's quality. It leaves me, at least, wondering what the point was to the novel; if the protagonist wasn't fighting for good, what was he fighting for? So while you're working on your novel, or when you read one of these cases, think about the message it's getting across. Think about your protagonist's motives. Think about how he feels and why he has to do what's right. Remember what makes a hero. 

Why do you think no-win scenarios are so popular? Do you think there is ever a time when one must do wrong to do right? What do you think makes a hero? All opinions welcome!

*Whump is defined by Urban Dictionary (prestigious, I know) as "A fandom term, commonly used by fan fiction authors (particularly in the Stargate genre) to describe physical and/or mental abuse laid on a character in a story." 

You've probably heard this one before, and your character may already have it. But if he doesn't, you need to pour some in right now.

Think about your friends. Why was it you developed relationships with these people? Chances are it was because you had something in common: a hobby, a fandom, or, if nothing else, possibly age. If you didn't have anything in common, you wouldn't have anything to talk about-- unless you were both the sort of people who love to argue, in which case, you had that in common!

It's important that you have something in common with your characters, something you can understand and identify with.

Think about your favourite character, your best friend, or your closest family member. What do you admire about each of them?

When I was trying to make Avis, my MC, more likable, I sat down and thought of all my favourite female characters in books, movies, and tv shows, the people I admired most: people like Martha Jones from Doctor Who, Ella from Cinderella, and Idril Celebrindal from the Silmarillion. Before long, I realized that they all had three things in common: they were smart, strong, and selfless.

Pick a few of the qualities that the people you admire share, and make them defining traits in your characters' personalities. It could be a sarcastic sense of humour, an eternally positive attitude, or an ability to take charge in any given situation. Whatever it is, take it and run with it.

Note: You probably admire a lot of people, and they may be very, very different. It helps if you take a small number of people who are most like your character and look for their defining traits. For instance, I love Maria Hill, but she in no way resembled Avis, so I didn't bother trying to give Avis the traits I admired in Hill.

I'm an extroverted feeler, and I highly value people and relationships. Stories where the protagonist has to learn to "believe in himself" in order to accomplish his goal don't ring true to me. I can believe in myself all I want and still fail. What do ring true to me are stories where one person isn't enough in himself-- where it takes other people to get him through to the end. That's why Avis is team oriented: she needs people, and she's knows it's important to help people as well.

What's something you value? It might be anything: peace, honesty, nature. Don't be afraid to make that a part of your character.

When your character is made up of things you care about-- yourself, your friends, your beliefs-- it's hard to feel disinterested or apathetic. You have to care. You have to relate. You have to love.

But before I fade out, I just need to say one more thing. Don't let what's "popular" and "safe" dictate your characters. Because if you just make your character into the type of person you think your reader will like, but don't particularly care for yourself, it shows. Write characters that you love, even if you think that they'll get lost among the Katniss Everdeens and Tony Starks. It's more important that you love them, even then that your readers do.

What are some things that get you fangirling over your characters? Have you ever tried taking characteristics from your favourite characters and giving them to your own? Do you think that's plagiarism (because if it is, I'd better get running from the law...)? What are some things you value which are woven into your characters? I want to know EVERYTHING (and yes, that was just the slightest bit creepy, sorry).

It doesn't just stop with the externals, either. We can make some pretty good guesses as to their personalities and the way they see the world, too. We can tell that Aragorn believes men are weak by the way he treats Boromir and even himself. Are you familiar with the Meyers-Briggs Personality Types? We can deduce that Boromir is an F(eeler) and Aragorn is a T(hinker), simply by watching the way they interact with each other and the other members of the Fellowship.

Give them a moment, for pity's sake!

(And yes, I'm talking way too much about Boromir in this post. But seriously!!! This guy!!!)

As writers, we tend to pay more attention to what characters are inside. We emphasise their mental or emotional turmoil by climbing inside their heads and hearts and digging it out to show the reader. We investigate every inch of our characters' thoughts and feelings from our nice little inside view. And that's totally cool. Readers love the emotional attachment that comes from being inside a character's head and seeing the world through their eyes.

But ultimately it's not about what a certain character thinks or feels. It's about how he acts, how he treats those around him.

It's important that you show what the character does and how he interacts with others, not just what he feels like inside. A person in a historical novel who believes all men are created equal and that the slave trade is wrong, but acts nasty and superior to all those he comes in contact with, still isn't a nice person. We learn most from the relationships. Show us how they treat other people, and we'll know what they're like.

Make the most of the relationships. They're not just there for feels and flails. They have a purpose. Use them to their full potential.

I think Celaena (Throne of Glass by Sarah J. Maas) wins the prize for the most Mary-Sue-ish character I have ever come across (and believe me, I've read a lot of Mary-Sues). Of course she's unbelievably gorgeous and unbelievably macho at the same time and has a weird name, but worse still is her point of view, which is what made me put down the book just a few chapters in.

For one thing, she never stops thinking about guys, or how pretty she is. In some of the first chapters she's talking to a guy whom she supposedly hates (at least the narrator keeps saying she does), and yet her thoughts the entire conversation are bent on how handsome (and evil) he is and whether he thinks she's pretty. I was just sitting there and thinking, "Why do you care? You ought to care more about getting out of your enslavement than whether or not he's disgusted by how dirty you are."

And let's not forget her bratty attitude and the fact that she acts like a victim when it's her criminal acts (assassination, people) that got her stuck as a slave in the first place.I quickly decided that I did not want to spend an entire book stuck in this girl's head and moved on to a different book.

Make your characters likeable--and by likeable, I don't mean pretty and macho. That's cliche, not likeable. Make them people we can relate to and care about. Don't make them murderers, for a start, unless you're really certain you can pull it off. Don't say they're "strong" and then make them do nothing but whine.

I quit a few paragraphs into the first chapter of Red Rising by Pierce Brown, simply because the narrator seemed to have an unexplained obsession with rather nasty things. He started out with sweat, which, while I don't object to, I derive no pleasure from reading about (I don't enjoy sweating--it's inconvenient and nasty feeling--so when a book reminds me what sweat feels like, I don't enjoy that either), and then he moved on to even more unpleasant things, which I had no desire to hear about. I've heard a lot of great things about that book, but I didn't feel like hanging around until the good parts, because the first couple paragraphs completely killed it.

We all know about how our bodies work. You have to be really immature to think that it's funny. You have to be really desperate to think it'll interest us. My advice: just leave it out.

Reading Divergent by Veronica Roth was probably the worst decision of my life. If I could erase one book from my memory, that would be the one. It was trash on a multitude of levels, but the one that stuck out the most was the romance.

Several times throughout the story I found myself thinking "Wait...why does she like him?". Tris mentioned that Four was handsome several times. He touched her once and she was all like "Oooooh, he touched me, I'm in luuuuuuv!!". But there was no actual foundation for a relationship. She didn't even find out what his personality was like until after she "fell in love". If their relationship was portrayed as a crush, this would make sense, but instead it was treated like a real, lasting relationship (at least before I quit, eight chapters to the end of the first book). You can't base a lifelong relationship on physical attraction alone. Especially when you're sixteen and have never had a handsome guy look in your direction before (cause guess what, you're gonna meet a lot more handsome guys in your lifetime, and--le gaspe--some of them might even touch you!!).

Plus, the whole thing was just gross. I'm an anti-hopeless-romantic, so I'm biased, but I felt like it was sappy and overdone. If you've read it, maybe you know what I mean. If you haven't, I honestly don't even know how to describe it.

Pare down the sap, and please make sure you've got a good basis for the attraction.

I desperately wanted to like Little Brother by Cory Doctorow. The premise captivated me, it was about a guy, and, reading the first chapter, I even fell in love with one of the characters. I wanted to like that book so much that I pushed through all the way to the second chapter, but after that, I couldn't keep going. What killed it? Um, guys, can we please not swear so much??

Some authors (and readers...and people in general) seem to think that swearing and other mature material is "cool" or maybe "realistic", and since it's for teens, supposedly they can get away with it. But when I read a book, I want to be edified, not have my mind pumped full of garbage.

There are plenty of people who won't mind if you put mature material in your book. Just keep in mind that you will be losing some portion of your potential audience if you put too much of that sort of thing in. (You may be losing part of your audience if you don't put it in, too--I wouldn't know. Personally, I don't care if that type of person doesn't read my books anyway.)

By "overly original", what I really mean is "obviously someone was trying to be original, but either he failed or it just ended up being cheesy", like, for example, in Maximum Ride: The Angel Experiment by James Patterson.

First, we have a main character named Maximum Ride. Oh yeah, you don't get much more obviously-trying-to-be-original than that. But what really got to me were the *scary music* Erasers. Erasers.

Okay, so first off, that just gives me a weird mental image of someone being chased by giant jumping rubber erasers. But when you add to that the fact that the reported "Erasers" are pretty much exactly the same thing as werewolves (part man, part wolf, evil, um...where's the difference?), you've got me floored. They're werewolves, dude. Call it what it is. (Or at very least make them part man, part skunk, so that you've made up something new which deserves a new name.)

Originality is great. Please be original. But please don't insult my intelligence or make yourself a laughing stock. You can over do this, people.

So, do you agree with my observations? Did I bash all your favourite books? Do you like cliffhangers? Sappy romance? Celaena? What are some of your pet peeves when it comes to YA books? Are you going to accept my challenge and write some great teen fiction? Based on my rants, do you have any suggestions on great books to read (I really need some book recommendations)? What really is the deal with teen fiction? Tell me in the comments!

It's such a huge let down when I've spent hours or even days looking up how it feels to be in a car accident, and I then end up cutting the car accident out of my story or brushing over it, since the character who goes through it is only a tertiary character and it's not really important how they feel about it. (And yes, I have done this type of thing many times.) If you're spending a lot of time looking something up, just pause for a moment and ask yourself "do I really need to know this?" If you don't absolutely have to research something, your time could be much better spent on something else.

If you're writing for NaNo or some other hefty word count goal, slowing down just so you can make sure that a semi automatic is the most practical type of gun for your character to be using just isn't worth it. Usually, when I'm drafting, I either write whatever comes into my head, accurate or not, or I simply press the enter bar a couple times and pick up the story after the problematic scene is over. When I come back to edit, I can then make sure my information is correct and my plot problems are believable.

I cannot tell you how many times I've done some research for a story, closed the tab, and then suddenly realized that I didn't collect all the information I need for the story. I do it multiple times for practically everything I look up. It's a real time waster. If you're researching, make sure you get everything you need before you close the tab. It's so much more efficient.

Contrary to popular belief, you cannot find the answer to every question on google, or even the internet at large. The novel I'm working on right now has a very small protagonist who is supposed to be able to fit places where the other characters can't. Googling "would a nine year old fit through a basement hatch window" hasn't been very helpful. What has been invaluable has been a ruler, cardboard boxes, and my little sister. If you can't find it online, experiment with the stuff around your house (or your friend's houses). You can find the answer to every question in real life, if you use your imagination.

Research is important. Really important. No one appreciates a book crammed full of inaccuracies and anachronisms. You need to research. But more importantly, you need to write. You are a writer, not a researcher. So don't let research steal your writing time.

Do you enjoy research? What are some ways you research efficiently? Does your first draft have to be perfect and have all the details already included, or do you skip the research and wait til later?