Various Writing Observations

“If only it were so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human-being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?”
- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

In a day, I embark on a wonderful adventure, and shall be away from my computer for five days.  The thing is, it's so very hard to write when you're so excited.  The brain swells and all you can think about is how close it is, and your fingers freeze and refuse to type, and of course your brain controls your fingers... so... I find it is so much easier to write when you have something to start with, and build off of it as if you were editing it, but you're really finishing it. 

There is so much to pray for.  Safety on a journey, a return home, someone sick, a family member dying.  The prayer requests on Facebook never stop coming.  The world keeps turning.  But prayer /is/ powerful.  Don't forget to pray for those you care about, and those you don't like too.  And don't forget to have faith that something good will happen.
In my experience, expecting God to answer a question increases the chance of it getting answered.  But he may not answer you in a way you expect.  He will not always do what you want him to do.  But he knows what we need more than we know what we need.  Also in my experience, the more I trust him, I see his faithfulness and goodness.
Just like a character in a book.  The way out isn't always the easiest.  If our characters knew what we the author put them through, they most likely wouldn't like us.  But God is always with you, ready to comfort you if you allow him.  The world needs more prayer warriors.

I wanted to post a few observations/opinions on writing.  Note: these are simply opinions.  Do not take them for more rules to follow, but possibilities to think about.

When you're learning/hearing/reading about a story someone is writing, don't compare it to something you've watched or read or heard about.  They may think it means their story isn't original enough.  But the truth is there is nothing that's original, only our individual voice/character/style of writing, and our approaches to writing.

When writing a character, there should be something unique about their look that draws the reader in.  In one of my stories this meant black-and-white-striped stockings, jeans that only went down to the knee with a few tears in them, and an old, purple backpack that my character Melody wore.  In the movie an American Tale, it was sleeves much too long for the little mouse, that sometimes get in the way.  In the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (movie), it was Lucy's chin-length hair that made her unique.  In the book of course, she had pig-tails in the illustrations, but I don't think C. S. Lewis ever really described his characters much, unless they were unordinary like a talking mouse or Prince Caspian.  He left much up to the reader to imagine, though this was hard because we had already seen the illustrations that showed the characters. hm.

Don't tell us too often what a character /didn't/ do, because it will make us think about the action they aren't doing, and sometimes we don't notice the "didn't" in front of it.  Only tell us what the characters /do/.  This is only opinion though.  Perhaps it's okay to do.  Maybe it's just a way to be more concise.  Sometimes it is important to focus on what a character isn't doing.

And don't forget the villain's humane side.  Nothing ever started out being evil, though bad habits form bad character from the very beginning if they're not pruned like branches of a tree.  My own villain has a conscience buried deep inside him, though he hates it and longs to be rid of it.  He easily overpowers it because he's fought against it for so long.  And because of this, he feels somehow more real/scary than say... Captain Hook in the book or Disney movie, Peter Pan (he's not scary at all... well... not very... and not for long... in Once upon a Time).  Or even... say... Maleficent in Disney's Sleeping Beauty.

The movie, "Maleficent", is a different matter. *spoiler alert* Their version was merely a woman who had been wronged and so we understand why she places a curse on a kingdom whose king is greedy and evil (he's kind of more evil than she is though).  And then she regrets it and tries to even stop it.  I wouldn't call her a villain.  A villain is someone who stands in opposition of the hero. *spoiler over*  Not that Maleficent is a bad movie.  I still want to see it.  (yeah... I'm spoiled by reading way too many movie reviews)

Into the Woods (a musical) is a good example of how even the people we think are the heroes and heroines of stories do bad things, and how those things have consequences.  And they /still/ don't have a trailer for the movie yet.  Maybe they'll get a trailer for it while I'm gone.  I do know Disney is changing it a bit to make it less sad (and I'm kind of sad about that :P ) but they're not /ruining/ it... hopefully.
What do you think of all this?

"Good" Books and "Bad" books Part 1: the Interest Factor/the Question of Violence

"If my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land." 
~2 Chronicles 7:14~

Tis May!  As I always say, a year goes by in the course of a week.  So you gotta use your time wisely.  I should too.  But that is not the subject of this post, so I shall move along with it.

What makes a book great?  And when someone thinks that "great" book is "terrible," does that mean they are stupid or mentally ill for thinking the book is bad?

Not.  At.  All.

It means they are different, and different does not have to be bad at all.

It makes one ask the question, "Is there such a thing as a good book, if everyone can't agree on it?"

People go about the question in a quite different way than you do.  There isn't just one equation to figure out a single, scientifically correct answer, because there's more than one way to go about the question, "Was this a good book?"
People look for different stuff in books.  Everyone has their own idea of a "good" book.   It is very hard to answer those questions.  But I shall attempt it.


A book that has a lot of suspense and made the reader want to know what happened next and had a surprise ending is what some people think of as a "good book".  That's it.
 For those people, a bad book is probably a book that's boring and slow, and hard to want to finish reading.  But there are some stories that must be slow.  Perhaps they could have been written better, or differently, so that the reader wouldn't realize they're reading a slow book because they're too interested in what's happening.

There are different definitions of "boring" as well though.  None of us will completely agree on it, because it's different for each of us.  And some of us just... don't have much patience in wanting to keep reading.  More people should be in book clubs with their friends and/or family (basically, each take turns choosing a book for everyone including the chooser to read over the course of a month, and then get together and talk about the book, and then the next person chooses a book).  It forces you to read books you may not be used to reading, and tests your attention-span/patience/perseverance in a good way, and makes you think about what you read in a way that can relate to the people you know.  And the more we discuss books, the more we realize just how different each of us is.

I personally enjoy slow stories, and sometimes even find suspenseful stories boring.  Not that I am completely immune to suspense, just that... if a story starts in the middle of danger, I won't know what's happening, and I don't always care, if there's nothing interesting to me in particular to keep me reading.  Or, if the characters don't feel... real... but like paper-cut-outs with no defining characteristic traits, it's hard for me to want to keep reading.  Because there's no heart in the characters, no feeling except for fear and shock, and sometimes not even that.  Those thrillers don't always feel like /stories/ to me, but just... action boxes.

Everyone is so fascinated in violence in stories... when we'd all agree we wouldn't like to see our own families and friends fighting to the death.  When you compare stories to real life... violence in the stories/movies doesn't normally have as many consequences as it should have.  Characters heal without scars (unless you're Frodo or someone who dies).  People are so unemotional about the violence, and some are even enthusiastic about killing the "bad guys".  But even the "bad guys" are people too!  Sometimes the only way to know if someone's a "bad guy" is if a character tells us they're bad.  We sometimes have to take someone's word for it.

Remember the movie Man of Steel (the new Superman movie)?  All those buildings destroyed, people dead.  That city was pretty much destroyed and will take a long, long, long time to get back on its feet again.  And we don't see the consequences.  The camera doesn't let us.  The internet would have been out... no jobs except rebuilding... lots of lost money.  The action was for "our entertainment" and not as a tool to reveal consequences.

Though Man of Steel was a good movie, with good character development showing Clark's weaknesses and fears for the people of earth, for example, and Lois Lane's curiosity, there was so much violence... it got boring for me whenever there was fighting.  Subtract the unnecessary scenes from the rest of the film... and I'll watch it and enjoy it a lot more.  I thought it interesting how the director knew he was making Superman a Christ figure, and didn't shy away from it.
We all want a hero.  That's why we make 'em up.  And sometimes, they're very much like Jesus.  Perfect.  Sent to earth from another world to be a good example.  Gives himself up to save everyone else.  But that's another post for another time.

My point here is, why is violence "fascinating" or "entertaining" to us?  Conflict, yes, but what about the physical aspect of the violence, minus the motivations of the characters?  The goriness, the blood.  Why are we drawn to it so much?  Why do we /like/ watching people die in disturbing ways?  And if we don't like it, why have so many movies been putting it out there?
 Remember the gladiator days, with the addiction to watching fights to the death and cheering/screaming in favor of some people and screaming/booing in dislike of weaker people.  How... unpleasant it must have been, and yet, our flesh embraced it.
Violent movie trailers have attracted people to watch them in the theaters.  I am curious about the ideas and marketing behind it.  But history repeats itself.  That's why someone wrote the Hunger Games.  And... I kind of wish it had ended in the first book with Katniss and Peeta both dying and people being ashamed of the games because of it.  That would have made a good enough point.  Though some would argue (and rightly so) that there are some themes that are better explored because there was a second and third book.

I myself am sensitive when it comes to gore, though I'm slowly getting over it (and getting shocked at myself for getting over it because I thought I would always be a child at heart, though I'm still growing up).
Of course, I do like a good cup of danger in a good story, and suspense and such.  But the actual gore that happens in stories is often unnecessary (or thrown in to conform with the world).  Unless the writers make it mean something, of course, the story in question could do without so much gore.

But that is my opinion.  What is interesting to me is not interesting to everyone else.  And this is where things get interesting to think about.
There is the interest factor when it comes to a "good" book, a book that keeps our interest and suspends our disbelief in the lie that is fiction.  That illusion that pulls us gently in and shows us a world that, even though it is fiction, reveals truth.


When I was younger I came to stories looking for adventure, and eventually becoming sad because I never wanted the story to end.  But then I realized that...  I was really longing for God, for Home, for heaven, that other world still cloaked in a mysterious curtain of shadows.  It is being saved for a special day when it will be revealed like a work of art is revealed before an audience by the creator pulling a curtain or sheet away from it.
Till then, I learn and leave behind clues as well, like all the others do, clues that lead to the ultimate mystery of God who is the answer to the question of existence.

I get an adventure every day now.  And I get to choose how I react to what happens in my life.  I myself am the main character of my story, and every day I learn something, and my character develops, even if only a little.
Most people's life-stories, if put on paper, may be considered slow books.  But they need to be filtered of anything that isn't important to the over-all story.

Because fiction isn't real life, we are told not to put any detail into the book that has nothing to do with the story goal, the development of the characters.  Everything has to mean something, or it has to go.

"Things mean things, and those things mean things."

On the flip-side of one of the first questions asked, what if a book you thought was terrible... someone else really liked?
This post was more about the difference in interests that lead us to the books we like, and future posts will be about: theme (that very important thing that makes a book so special, the very heart of the book itself) and how it influences the quality of a book.  Even though interests are not universal, good morals are, and those morals unite readers in a way.
What makes a story interesting to you?  What pulls you in and creates that illusion of reality?
And what do you think about all the violence present in many books and movies now-a-days?

What's in a Name? Advice on naming and a Rabbit Trail

But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.  To him the gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.  When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice.  A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers.”
~John 10:2-5~

Recently I've been seeing a lot of people asking for advice on naming their fantasy or sci-fi cities or countries, or characters.  So I decided to write a quick blog post (we'll see how long this takes).  Edit:  I went back and started reading this again to find it starts out very practical... then gets creative... then I got lost on a rabbit trail.  But I hope you find it entertaining!  And tell me your thoughts about it all.


Character names can be so creative and beautiful.  It is normally hard to find the right one.  Either that or you find the right name right away and it clicks perfectly.

First, I'll start with the don'ts for choosing character names. (you don't have to follow any of these "rules".  But it would probably be good to at least consider them)
1.  Don't choose a name if you don't think it would fit in your story.  If all the names in your story are oldish, medieval names, don't all of a sudden name a character something that sounds very modern, like "Jazz".  Unless there's jazz music in your fantasy/sci-fi world and it makes sense to the rules of your world, be it historical fiction, fantasy, science fiction, or contemporary.

2.  Don't use a name that is very common.  Like the name Josh.  I know at least ten boys who have that name.  Two of them are my cousins (one on my mom's side, another on my dad's side). 
The name Mary used to be a very popular name, and if this was being written long ago, people would criticize you for using that name in your story, but now it's a rarer-used name, so I suppose if it fits one of your characters, you could use it.  Find a list of the top one hundred names that have been used the most for the past thirty years, and avoid those names. 

3.  Don't use a name that is so rare (in books) that everyone knows which story that name belongs to.  Like Wendy, for instance.  Everyone knows she belongs in the story Peter Pan.  I don't know of any other stories that have a character who has that name.  Although it probably wouldn't be wrong for you to choose the name Wendy for your story. 
A side-don't that goes under this one: if you are writing a romance and do have familiar names we have all heard before, try not to use name combinations that are already used in other stories.  Like Jacob and Bella and Edward, for instance.  You already know what story they're from, even if you haven't even read the books!  For some people, even hearing one of those names will make them think of that story.  But everyone's different, and you are writing to please yourself, not your audience.

4.  Still, remember: you don't want just any name for your character.  Names bring life or dullness to your story, and you want your story to shine and sound beautiful.  You want to love every detail about your story.  Don't settle for anything you're just /okay/ with.  Kind of like how you choose whether to buy something or not.  If you don't love it, don't buy it.

Keep a consistent theme in the world of your story.  Remember, your world is fictional so you can do whatever you want.  You can make things realistic in an unrealistic way.  You /can/ do anything at all.  Stream of consciousness, a tragedy, comedy (though I must admit, comedy is hard for many people, but it might not be the case with you), or even create your own genre.  You can tell us everything you want to tell us in your story, whenever you want to tell us it.  And on the flip-side: you can keep everything you don't want your readers to know, to yourself, till the very end, or even not at all and make us readers figure it out on our own like a riddle.  Not that you should do any of these. It really depends on your style, if you have developed your writing voice, and if you have already written a lot and are ready to start experimenting.  

If you are a beginning writer though, it's a safe thing to say that you should stick to the usual advice of advanced writers (I'm not an advanced writer yet by the way).  That is, show don't tell (except sometimes), use correct grammar (learn your English, or whichever language you wish to master to write in, and cherish it), never get satisfied with how much you know about your writing craft because there. is. still. so. much. to. learn.

The masters say to read a lot, and think about the writing techniques used as you read.  We forget this one.  How much do you read?  One book a week?  One book a month?  Or do you check out so many books and barely get to read them before you have to take them back to the library (like me)?  Read nonfiction too, not just fiction.  Don't be prejudiced against nonfiction.  There's a LOT of really fascinating nonfiction out there!  There's a lot of dull stuff too but I'm currently reading more nonfiction books than fictional ones, and I don't feel like I'm missing out.  (Through a Screen Darkly by Jeffrey Overstreet, which is fascinating and about movies and art and Christianity, Walking on Water by Madeleine L'Engle, the one who wrote A Wrinkle in Time, and a few others)

Write every day is another one the professionals say.  This one will test you and reveal how far you're willing to go to be a great writer.  Writers write a lot of words, a lot.  And some of us are procrastinators who grow very very slowly in our skill of writing.  And some only write for a hobby.  But that's okay either way.  
Try to figure out what sort of writer you want to be now:
A writer that is very very good and maybe get published or self-published (I'll probably have to write another post about that in the future cuz I have a lot to say on both sides).
Or a writer who writes for themselves, sort of like how we sometimes write journals for ourselves only, or how I like to dance at home but not so much for other people anymore.  This sort of writer may show their finished story to a few friends and family, but not seek publication.  That's okay too.
Or a writer who posts all their work online for others to read and see what happens (there are quite a few websites where you can put your writing up and many people can read and critique your writing and review it and give it stars, plus fanfic.com if you write fan fiction).
 Oops.  I got off on a rabbit trail.
Back to my main topic!

If you want all your characters' names to be completely different, like one being Japanese, another being Irish, another being old English, for a special reason, then if it has to do with the story, or the characters' backgrounds, it may work.  

For instance, if your story was about five, say, teenagers who were thrown together from vastly different backgrounds, and the story was about them trying to communicate and relate to each-other while saving the world or something, it would make sense for them to have very different names, and it would then make your story more colorful.
 But if your story takes place in one particular place whose people are all the same nationality, your characters will probably all come from the same culture, unless a parent had a good reason for using a different name, or if it's modern day.  
Because nowdays, people use all sorts of names for their children, and are inventing new ones too.  Now, we don't care so much what nationality the name came from (unless it's something you really notice, like it being an Irish name or Spanish).

 
Try to find a sort of theme, the heart of your fantasy world, and build off of it.  Don't choose a name you don't like for a place that's supposed to be pretty. And for characters, just be on the look out for a name that just... clicks for your character/s. And sometimes the meaning of the name will directly relate to your character, or be ironic to the character's character, or be the opposite of their character for a certain reason.

Now the do's.  These are things you can do to find cool names.
1.  All the name websites.  They are time consuming but sometimes very helpful.  Babynames.com is one of them, and you can search for a name that starts with a certain letter, comes from a certain country, or has a certain meaning that you're looking for in the name for your character.
2.  Google translate.  Translate words into other languages and find something you like and maybe change it till you really like it.
Sometimes phonetics are the only way to tell if your name fits your character.
3.  The keyboard smash, in which you just randomly type letters and rearrange them to your liking. 
4.  Look in the Bible for random names and change them around.
5.  Take words you find beautiful, and change their spelling and pronunciation till you like it.
6.  Look for a name based on the meaning for the name.
7.  Figure out what sort of character your character is first, (ask them tons of questions -- I have a list of some of them on a separate page on my blog -- and see how they reply) then ask them what their name is.  Listen hard.  Take a walk.  Run.  Jog.  Drink water.  Be hydrated.  Get your mind off your character for a while.
8.  Listen to other people when you're at a park or coffee shop or anywhere.  Meet new people.  Pay attention to their names.

9.  Be a name collector.  Even if you can't find the right name for that particular character now, doesn't mean you can't find the names for other characters in the mean-time.  Bind a small book (it's very easy you don't even need to glue a cover on just stitch a few signatures together.  Google it or search on pintrest) and start listing all the names you love, what gender they're for, and the meaning of the name, and see if any of them fit a minor or major character if you need a name quick, or even a place-holder name.  Try to keep the names in alphabetical order but you don't have to.  Keep this pamphlet/homemade book nearby always.
Or just make a document on your electrical device.  But binding books is funnn... and it may be good for your brain to learn how to do it.  Here's a Scottish accented tutorial for a book. Quick explanation: a "signature" is a folded-in-half sheet of paper, and sometimes a folded-in-half sheet of paper inside one or more other folded-in-half sheets of paper.  Look at your books closely and try to figure out whether they were bound with thread, or if they were merely glued to the spine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=937rWn0YHfo

10.  Hurt your brain by trying to solve a rubix cube after messing it up.  :P (this is optional)
 There are probably many other ways to find names that I haven't thought of.
Tell me what your favorite method is.  (I borrowed a few of these ideas from a discussion on a writer's group -- Knights of the Silver Ink -- and expanded upon them)

A poem I wrote

Clues


Sometimes I am Red Riding Hood, going on a long journey.
Then I am Briar Rose too, sleeping in too much and yet growing up.
Cinderella humbles me when I sweep the floors.

Sometimes I am caught in Wonderland.
When this happens, I know I have learned
From stories of old that constantly change,
From stories retold anew, and ones that
Were forgotten long since.

When I am caught in Wonderland,
I learn something is amiss.
Not everyone is nice.
And nice is not always good.

Sometimes I am caught for too long,
And forget myself, my chores,
Forget my purpose, my quest.

But it is too late,
For the wolf has swallowed me up
And I am terrified.

Then my help comes,
And I learn.

Sometimes I am caught.
Sometimes I am lost.
Only then, the light I find is precious.
Only then, the dark around me hides.

Now I come out from the mirror
And face the world,
With new-found identity
And a glass slipper in one hand.

Weaving Stories into Music

"... God makes the man that makes the book, or the picture, or the machine. Would God give us a drama?  He makes a Shakespeare....  When he would have an epic, he sends a thinking hero into his drama, and the epic is his soliloquy of his Hamlet.  Instead of writing his lyrics, he sets his birds and his maidens a-singing.  All the processes of the ages are God's science; all the flow of history is his poetry."

~ George Macdonald from his book A Dish of Orts (I got the free ebook from Amazon)

(This is something I wrote quite a while ago but am just now finishing)

My family was all gone for the moment.  I was alone in my house, and there was silence and freedom.  So I timidly stepped over the bench to rest there, right in front of the black, silent, gentle monster.  But I didn't know why I was doing this.  It was in front of me, dangerous and awe-full.  Beautiful being.  Dead till someone breathes into it.  Like an imaginary friend.  Shining black armor, completely smooth all around, and pure white teeth with black gums.  A piano, grand indeed.

Then I laid my fingers on the keys.  But I didn't know why I was doing this.  I had already played it today.  Maybe I heard a whisper.  Maybe I was lured to the instrument.  When my family is here, I must restrain myself and not play so loudly or passionately, so as not to disturb anyone.  I release myself into the music whenever I feel sad.  Writing clothes me.  Music lays my soul bare.

I can lose myself here, in the music, if I stay too long.  It can be like a daydream when you're caught in one, floating amongst living sounds.  Sounds that paint pictures.  I know I cannot physically taste music, but I feel like I could if only I would open my mouth.

Not so much music that has lyrics, though those songs can be very thought-provoking and add dimension and reality to the song, but music that is wordless is the stuff that comes out of nowhere for me to happen upon and write.  Praying without speech, some call it.

And when I write music, I sometimes see a story behind it forming.

"What a beautiful thing, God, to give thanks, to sing an anthem to you, the High God! To announce your love each daybreak, sing your faithful presence all through the night, Accompanied by dulcimer and harp, the full-bodied music of strings."  ~Psalm 92:1-3~

In pursuing our creative passions, like painting or writing stories or playing music, we worship our maker.  They did say after all, to worship in spirit and in truth, outside of that other world called 'church'.  It can seem like another world after all.  A better one.  A place where God is welcome.  

But sometimes when we're at church, we become other people that don't even resemble ourselves.  We change ourselves for an hour or two, sometimes.  A moment later, it seems, we're back at home and nearly nothing has changed because we go back into our normal routines, as if we hadn't gone to church that day.  Unless we speak words into the day, and let them live in our homes, or unless we think about the message outside church, not much will change at all in your life.  You may have even wasted time going to church, if you are only going through the motions.

Recently, I realized how much church can cover itself in masks.  How sometimes our worship music is made exciting to make us excited, or made sad to make us feel serious, and in that way... the music make us feel like we're really worshipping God.  Only now do I better appreciate the original hymns that were simple, but their words profound.  I definitely like modern worship music too, when the words have meaning.  And I can't judge anyone else' heart but my own. 

It is not always the case, and certainly not in every church, but sometimes it is that way.

I realized it when a friend of a friend was brought to our church, who doesn't believe in God.  I suddenly saw everything through their eyes, and almost felt ashamed of the spectacle before my eyes that I came to, every week, without a second thought about what it looked like.  Though again, I can't know anyone's heart but my own.

For God looks not on the outward appearance of worship, but on the heart.  Or, looks at the lyrics and not so much the melody or rhythm of the music.

Sometimes we don't know how to feel when in church.  Church can be the most awkward place in the world, especially depending on the denomination, during worship.  We feel very self-aware of ourselves and think everyone is watching, when in fact they shouldn't be watching, and probably aren't paying much thought to you in the first place.

We think the music should show us how to feel.  But worship is not based on emotions.  Love should not be based on emotions.  It is an action, like worship.  A crush on someone is an emotion.  A fandom is based on emotions.  But church shouldn't be a fandom.  We're not supposed to merely be fans, on the outside rails, watching things happen and cheering people on and cheering whenever the truth is said.  We need to let God change our lives, by listening for him every day, and doing what we know we should do because we love him.  I know that when I pay attention, I learn things.  Something new every single day. 

I do apologize for not writing more blog posts lately.  I do have an idea of how to change that.  Would you like to read some of my poetry/excerpts from my writing?  At least that would be easy to put on here.  I do have a lot of blog posts already half-written and saved.  I only need to finish them. 

Would you like to read some of my story/poetry on this blog so that I can start posting more here?

How to be a Critic and/or Editor

 
"It is pleasant to listen to wise words, but a fool's speech brings him to ruin.  Since he begins with a foolish premise, his conclusion is sheer madness."
"The wise man's words are like goads that spur to action.  They nail down important truths.  Students are wise who master what their teachers tell them.  But, my son, be warned: there is no end of opinions ready to be expressed.  Studying them can go on forever, and become very exhausting!"  ~Ecclesiastes 10:12-13, and 12:11-12

I've been trying to post this for about a month now... never got around to finishing it till recently.  So yeah. (:

It isn't a sin if someone offends us.  It's uncomfortable sometimes and sometimes it hurts a lot, and we shouldn't reply in a mean fashion to someone who has offended us just to make ourselves feel better.  I've seen that happen over and over again on Youtube comments.  Some arguments aren't worth bickering over.  Then there are some that can turn from fiery to cooled down, and they become thoughtful discussions.  That's what I love about having discussions sometimes.  They may feel like they're about to become debates, and that's why it's important to be careful not to be mean or proud with your words, so that it can cool down to a thoughtful discussion with everyone on each side being truthful and humble.
One of our goals in life should be to humble ourselves in our search for wisdom.

Once, when I didn't have a Facebook yet, I heard a little bit about public school life.  Then I learned what a "comeback" was.  And "comebacks" can be funny or smart or make you look smart, but isn't that the only point?  To make you feel better by pushing someone off a chair that isn't there?  When I first heard about come-backs, they sounded good.  I mean, desirable.  You want the world around you to know you're smart, that you aren't witless, that you're here to stay.  So I started thinking about come-backs and tried to learn how to quickly think of a reply to say whenever someone said something that offended me.  Later, after a conversation happened, I'd think of something better I could have said instead of what I did say.

Comebacks are like high heels to make one look taller, makeup to make one look prettier, a mask to cover up tears or weakness.  Now I realize why the world sometimes seems so heartless: 

We're all trying to shield ourselves from being offended, even if the Bible offends us.  So we're constantly batting at people to keep ourselves standing taller than we should.  Reminds me of that spiderman movie.  The third one, however bad some people think it was.  People hurt people when they're hurt.  and those people hurt people in turn.  In cases like this, it is most important to forgive people, and not reply angrily or smart.  In other cases it is best to laugh at oneself.  No one is perfect.  We should stop acting like we are perfect like whenever we make one slip-up, we act like it is a big deal because we don't normally make mistakes.  But we do make mistakes every day.  We should accept correction and move on, even though it damages pride.  But we're supposed to be humble.  Humble like a servant.  Like Cinderella.  Like Christ.

And then there's the case of when someone else errs.
The Bible did say that if someone was doing something wrong, we should confront them.  The scripture about the spec in your neighbor's eye and the log in your own wasn't a forbidding to people to confront others.  It was so that we work on our own lives before trying to confront another person about what they're doing wrong, or at least to acknowledge that I'm not perfect before trying to help someone.  And don't confront someone else about something they're doing wrong just because you're annoyed with them or want to point out something bad.  Do it because you care about their future or the consequences of the something they're doing.
Then there's the case that it isn't any of your business because you don't really know the person that well.  If you haven't confronted them yet, maybe just pray for them.  And if you've already accidentally jumped into a conversation, try to understand from their point of view. 

And then there's the case of critiquing another's work.  You know how there are a lot of critics who are really harsh on films, and how some people (me included) don't like them sometimes because we feel the critic is way too harsh on movies?  I'm beginning to be thankful for those harsh critics, however offending they may seem.  Without criticism, people would think they can make whatever they want happen (in tv shows, movies, everything) and still get lots of money/good reviews.  I'm thankful for critics and editors.   Yes, sometimes they'll point out a flaw in a movie that you don't mind at all or don't think is a big deal.  Sometimes we get annoyed at those critics if we really want to like the movie or book they're talking about.  But I'm thankful even for those critics.

Without the critics we probably won't get better at making movies.  They push the limits, expect a lot of people who make movies or tv shows.  I wish we had more critics for books though, because there are a lot of self-published authors who want to make a lot of money.

Mind you, when I say a critic, I mean someone who writes reviews or helps edit someone's work.  A critic's job is to state the facts only and leave out opinion.  But most of the time they fail.  A review is not merely an opinion, saying "I loved this book SO MUCH YOU MUST READ IT!"  A review is an examination or observation about the work, about the style, about the accuracy, about the theme, and about the effectiveness of it.  And I do not wish for that to change.

 "Not everyone can become a great artist, but a great artist can come from anywhere." ~Anton Ego

A lot of the time there are only half-hearted writers, because some don't edit very well, or only write one draft and edit maybe twice.  I love critiquing people's works (if I have the time or if I'm interested in what they're writing.  I only want to critique something if I have something nice to say amongst a lot of criticism) because sometimes it feels easier than editing my own writings.  When I'm reading someone else's story, I'm looking at it for the first time, with my own lens.  I can try to figure out the overall basic point of what someone is saying.  When I'm trying to critique my own writing, I have probably already read it several times and the words have begun to loose meaning for me and it's harder to spot mistakes or clumsiness.
 I'm thankful for the freedom of speech, and therefore must endure some stupid things some people might say.  For though it's possible to say anything we want to, many things should be left unsaid.  One can determine their life by what they say.  One can give their death sentence if they say something mean before a King.

"Faerie is a perilous land, and in it are pitfalls for the unwary and dungeons for the overbold...  The realm of fairy-story is wide and deep and high and filled with many things: all manner of beasts and birds are found there; shoreless seas and stars uncounted; beauty that is an enchantment and an ever-present peril; both joy and sorrow as sharp as swords.  In that realm a man may, perhaps, count himself fortunate to have wandered, but its very richness and strangeness tie the tongue of a traveller who would report them.  And while he is there it is dangerous for him to ask too many questions, lest the gates should be shut and the keys be lost."
~J. R. R. Tolkien, On Fairy Stories (essay)

What say you?
~Emilyn J. Wood

The Truth about Grimm's Fairy Tales/Book Thief Movie

 
 "He heals the brokenhearted, binding up their wounds.  He counts the stars and calls them all by name.  Our Lord is great, with limitless strength; we’ll never comprehend what he knows and does." ~Psalms 147:3-5

Have you ever wondered about the Grimm brothers' process of collecting fairy tales and publishing them?  You might think that the tale was true, that they didn't change anything that they heard, that they collected purely German fairy tales, that they published the tales word for word.  Well,
we were wrong.  *cue dramatic music*
There is a book.  A book that is actually about thirty or forty years old, and it is called One Fairy Story too Many and it is by John Ellis.  In it is evidence of what really happened.

The brothers changed the original tales they collected (some weren't even German stories though they said they were "purely German"), the beginnings, and made them much longer than the originals.  The style was changed.  The original style was folk-ish and informal.  They changed the tales so that they were more literary. 
Mr. Ellis contrasted the original manuscripts (at least, the ones that were left alone.  Most of the original manuscripts were destroyed by the brothers...) to the printed 1st editions.  For instance, the step-mother.  In most of the original stories told, there was no step-mother.  Just a mother who had turned bad.  The brothers didn't want such dark material to get into these collections that were supposed to be "charming".  So now I am very disappointed in the Grimm's Fairy tales.  What stories I thought were purely German were mostly... not.  The Princess in the Frog, for instance, was French I believe. 
There are questions as to why the brothers did this.  They had been mixed up in a political debate at the time... also, they did write a book about purely German mythology that was actually accurate.  So why were these fairy tales changed?  Now I just want to know the real originals.  It's so sad...

But there is hope for accurate German fairy tales because five hundred fairy tales have been discovered a year or two ago and are being translated into English.  They were collected by someone other than the Grimm Brothers, and a lot of them are actually about Princes.  Interesting, isn't it?
Sad news: they are not translated yet.  So I want to learn German so that I may read them in German.
Other good news: Cornelia Funke is German and her books are good, specifically the Inkheart trilogy.  I am currently reading Reckless.  So far it's a little choppy at the beginning, but I'm sure it will get better.  I've heard good things about the second book.  Also, the illustrations are all the more interesting because Cornelia herself drew them.

Now on to the Book Thief.  I saw the movie (I've read the book and my review for it is here)
Cinematography/Setting: beautiful and accurate to the book.  Breathtaking at the beginning with the smoke and the train and the snow... Not sure I liked that it began in the clouds.  Felt just a little cliche, like something you might see in a movie about the afterlife/heaven...
The Narrator: He was death just like in the book, and he stayed true enough to the book though of course he couldn't have narrated every single scene.  I didn't like the voice very much, and sometimes I felt like they were portraying him as /almost/ a villainous person.  I wish Benedict Cumberbatch had done the voice because he would have done perfectly and the movie would have won movie awards and gotten more people to go see it, etc.
Liesel: she was well cast and well acted.  I liked the actress.  Near the end though, I don't know... she didn't seem as sorrowful as I thought she was in the book.
The other Characters: well cast and well acted.
Book versus the Movie: The book was much much better but this was still a good adaptation.  I really wish they had left in Max's story about the Word Shakers because it felt like it was sort of the heart of the story to me.  But other than that, very good and well made, and a good length at a little over two hours.  They couldn't have left everything in, as it's a long book, so I'm happy.
Another thing I really liked: the title.  I really liked that it was written in cursive in German, and then it translated to English "The Book Thief."  Also, there was a lot of German in the movie and I like that they translated Himmel to Heaven and just called it Heaven street so that the audience would get the idea that it was named after heaven.
Content: Much cleaner than the book was.  Nearly spotless actually contrasted to the book.
A note on the words contrast and compare.
Compare = talking about the similarities between two things
Contrast = talking about the differences between two things
I've probably already misused these words a lot... oh well.

I apologize for neglecting this blog.  I have many ideas for blog posts (a few are half-written already) for the future. This is a big year, aye it is.
God bless you all!