this is what i resort to when i have no creativity for edits

How to Improve Your Dialogue

Hey all! I work as an editor, so I decided to start including more writing advice on my blog in addition to my own writing. I hope this article is helpful to some of you.

One of the biggest problems I see in beginning fiction writers’ dialogue is a lack of conflict.

(Come to think of it, one of the biggest problems I see in general is a lack of conflict, but that’s another post.)

Good dialogue, like a good story, should be rich with conflict. There are exceptions – most notably in a story’s ending or in brief, interspersed moments when you want to slow down the pace. But as a general guideline, dialogue without conflict gets boring very quickly. Here’s a classic example:

“Hi,” Lisa said.
“Hey,” José said.
“How are you?”
“Fine. You?”
“Doing all right.”
Lisa handed José a turkey sandwich. “Would you like a sandwich? I made two.”
“Sure, thanks.”

Okay, that’s enough. I won’t continue to torture you. Not only is there no conflict between the two characters who are speaking, but there’s no conflict anywhere to be seen.

The bad news is that if you write something like this you will bore your reader to tears.

The good news is that there are lots of ways to add conflict to dialogue. Once you know how to do it, you can make just about any scene pop with tension.

Keep reading

Instinctual Stackings and Creativity: SO Blindspot


Blindspots can make a work stand out. It’s often the wound or omission that makes a piece haunting or idiosyncratic. It’s hard to say when a strength becomes a weakness; there is usually a time period in which their typical stack (ranked in order by neurotic focus, relative comfort zone, and blindspot) has high impact, but after that, they need to adapt or they risk becoming caricatures of themselves.

As artists mature, they tend to improve by drawing on the neglected final instinct; otherwise they become entrenched in their first and lose edge. Their work achieves more layers, added depth, and a more informed perspective by drawing from their blind-spot instinct.

SO blindspot

  • Strengths that arise from this can include highly personal work, combining the tools of SP structuring with SX intensity. Lush, vivid, sensual, or confessional. But a lack of access to common archetypes or shared cultural symbols, or an inability to read the audience for anything other than the magnetic energy they bring, can lead to solipsistic, narcissistic work. There may be short-sightedness or tunnel vision, an ignorance of the big picture or a lack of perspective. An inability to translate personal material can cause a disconnect between artist and audience. These types might claim not to be concerned with outside opinions, dismissing those who don’t “get it” even though the rejection hurts.


  • sp/sx especially tends to grow claustrophobic, moody, inaccessible in their work. SP formatting plus a lack of SO dialogue can alienate a potential audience. Sometimes this is intentional, and a sp/sx creator may throw out some nonsensical meaningless work just to force other people to deal with it, to trick them into thinking there’s a hidden message under all those damp, impenetrable layers. Not all sp/sx creators resort to this and many do have an intended purpose to their work, which they are likely to actively obscure rather than explain.
  • Left to incubate, sp/sx work can grow thick, heavy, obscured by structure, hard to follow.
  • At first the social instinct is used only to expose the underbelly or the inner workings behind facades. When it begins to be integrated, a once clumsy or cynical blanket-statement commentary on the outer world can deepen, and compassion for distant subject matter develops.

Consider Twin Peaks, a joint venture by David Lynch and Mark Frost. After the series was cancelled, fans were left wanting more. Lynch released a movie; it flopped. Fire Walk With Me lacked the social playfulness Lynch’s co-creator Frost seemed to have helped bring to the series. People went into the theater to live a while longer in the intriguing and quirky town of Twin Peaks and instead got treated to a hyper-sp/sx David Lynch feature film. Only with time and distance have critics begun to concede the movie wasn’t necessarily an artistic failure, it just didn’t match expectations for the time. More than that, actually - it was woefully blind to what it needed to be to satisfy Twin Peaks fans, which, combined with the behind-the-scenes struggles, made its dull flop against audiences much more pronounced.

Firstly, the narrow focus on Laura’s troubles means that the picture suffers from a distinct lack of humour. While references to damn fine cherry pie and stray fish in Pete Martell’s percolator aren’t essential ingredients in and of themselves, losing that type of material en masse means that the film becomes unremittingly grim.

A second, and possibly more damaging, effect of this narrowed focus is that downplaying the broader cast, and by definition the geography of Twin Peaks, Lynch ultimately lessens the impact of Laura’s death. By not showing Laura interact in a wider sense, we not only fail to see how important she was to the town at large, we’re also robbed of the chance to see her doing much that isn’t fundamentally venal and self-obsessed.

From this thorough review, I bolded the parts that point to an under-utilization of SO creative tools. This is still a movie I enjoy as-is, but it’s understandable why it let fans of the show down–no reassuring references to the broader community of Twin Peaks to soften the uncomfortable, harsh circumstances of Laura’s abuse and death, nothing to ease the descent.


  • For sx/sp creators, neglect of social tools usually entails a loss of perspective. Using high impact for a narrow focus helps give sx/sp the reputation as creative powerhouses, and their often soulful or yearning, dramatic styles are what a lot of people imagine when they think of “creative.” But the problems of too much sx (plateauing at continuous peaks) and the short- or narrow-mindedness of under-utilized soc can eventually wear thin. Where sp/sx becomes claustrophobic, sx/sp becomes overbearing, hammering into the audience without really paying attention to the effect they have. What was once a powerful and heart-wrenching creative voice becomes tiring and self-absorbed.
  • Tapping into the social bank of diverse and shifting shared symbols does not require selling out, or trying to appeal to a broader audience. It means understanding what their passion means to other people. Are they stuck in a rut? Are they over-doing an idea in order to stay hooked on its rush, long after its meaning or relevance has been played out? sx/sp can often draw from sp to give a more directed or quiet frame to sx, but in the long run that may not be enough to avoid becoming creatively restricted by their own need for everything to be BIG to have any meaning for them. Incorporating social creative tools could inspire transformation within the artist’s own process by reducing that tendency to hold out a single earth-shattering note. It could help avoid becoming overbearing or stale by stepping outside self-involved themes and incorporating variety into their work. Tapping into open, accessible spaces–reducing sx/sp tunnel vision–can make their natural punch more effective; and having an awareness of the broader map of the creative landscape in which their work exists can offer more creative tools to pick and choose from.
  • Sometimes sx/sp needs to be told: “You’ve said this before. Several times, in fact. It feels like you’re addicted to this one big note, and maybe it’s time to grow past that.”

Florence Welch’s praise and criticism often mention her powerful voice. Critique for her second album, Ceremonials, points to the sx/sp creative problem. One reviewer notes:

The more weight and length […] given to the songs, the less impact they have and the more wearied they leave you – it’s probably best not to listen to the 20-track deluxe edition in one sitting.

Pitchfork’s review expands on this idea, first mentioning the kind of sx/sp voice that, when combined with raw talent, can blow people away:

Growing up, Welch was met with stern eyes when she was caught singing her favorite hymns with a bit too much verve. Her unbridled talent is the type of thing producers of TV singing contests fantasize about. It’s soulful. It’s instant. It’s blaring. On “American Idol”, contestants like Welch are invariably deemed “quirky” and doomed to runner-up status. [..] Even the hopelessly hip crowd that showed up to see Welch at Vice’s Creators Project event last month saved one of their biggest ovations for the moment when she held out one piercing note for an exaggerated period of time– a primal sign of skill that banks on nothing less than sheer audacity.

And yet,

The same can be said of Florence and the Machine’s second album, Ceremonials, which can feel like Welch simply holding out a single note at top volume for an hour. […] Instead of Lungs’ largely charming yet discombobulating diversity, Ceremonials suffers from a repetitiveness that’s akin to looking at a skyline filled with 100-story behemoths lined-up one after the other, blocking out everything but their own size. […] by the midway point of the LP, its endless crescendos start bleeding into each other, and the loudness soon tires itself out. […] Ceremonials is so hell-bent on providing such “bright moments”– that flash of overwhelming emotion resulting from ramped-up strings or a frantic harp or a particularly audacious vocal run– that it never zooms out to consider its own listenability.

The review points out that a track from the deluxe edition, “Remain Nameless,” is “allowed to breathe, and is all the better for it.” The advice often given to sx-first creators–back up, slow down, don’t be so infantilely melodramatic so often - doesn’t necessarily mean they must dampen their passion or message. But sx/sp creators can improve their skills by being aware of the context of their work, so that it doesn’t end up crushed under the heavy weight of a solipsistic intensity-first, communication-last approach.

swmystery27  asked:

How do you feel about the use of retcons in Magic's story, past and present? "Retcon" in this sense meaning the overwriting of previously established canon, such as the changes to Ravnica and Mirrodin when we went back to those planes, and the Gatewatch histories in Origins (e.g. Nissa always being an animist, being horrified by the Lorwyn elves, etc).

This is another great, complex question. I’m glad you defined retcon to make it easier to tackle (y’all know I will drone on).

So, the first thing to remember is that Magic’s entire history is retcons. Without going too deep into the history, early magic didn’t have a cohesive story at all. The Great Revision is a name fans gave the effort to unify all that lore into something way more cohesive. The earliest example I can think of is that the Brothers’ War (Antiquities) had two comic series and a novel each tell the same story, and tell it differently.

The other thing is that Magic is a card game, and if they say “Hey, we’re going back to Mirrodin”, creative can’t just say “Sorry, no, everyone is literally gone.” I will get around to talking about this in more detail someday, but we have to remember that the story is tied to processes beyond the Creative Team’s control. So I’m way more forgiving of those things than some others.

So, let’s talk about the specific examples you mention, and if anyone wants me to discuss other retcons, let me know.

Ravnica: I’m not sure there are really any major retcons with Ravnica. Ravnica’s flavor issue was that the story specifically said Niv-Mizzet was the only dragon on the plane, and the original Block had two besides him (another three were printed in RTR block). Nothing else springs to mind, unless you’re talking about the dissolution of the Guilds, but them coming back together makes a lot of sense, ultimately, and is explained well in Ravnica, Then and Now.

Mirrodin: Right out of the gate, anyone existing on Mirrodin was a retcon, and they were very clear in redefining ‘the Vanishing’ as exclusive to the elder generations. SoM block was a mess because it was originally supposed to start with New Phyrexia and then reveal that it was Mirrodin. That kind of thing causes havoc with the story, especially when it changes the timeframe for New Phyrexia’s rise. I don’t really have a problem with it, because most of the discrepancies I can headcanon away (Venser had taken slow-time water, We never actually saw that the surface was empty, we were only told by a character). The Creative team’s predecessors kind of screwed them by going with the Vanishing story in the first place. They never stopped to consider they might be going back. I also love the Mirran Goblin design change.

As for the Gatewatch’s histories, most of them are much smaller retcons than you’d think. Jace’s discrepancies are because he messed with his memory so much. Chandra’s was never retconned, but instead it was revealed she lied to Gideon. Gideon’s is likely the same (he didn’t tell her the truth because he didn’t want to talk about his dead friends). Liliana’s didn’t really change anything significant. Nissa’s… I’ve talked about Nissa’s a lot. Nissa’s comes down to how much emphasis you put on a character bio created before a character ever got an actual card, and how little emphasis you put on narrative hints in later stories. I disliked it a lot at first, but when I went back to re-read In the Teeth of Akoum, there wasn’t anything there to support my arguments. It was all in that character bio. Personally, I don’t really have a problem with it anymore, because having gone back and re-read all of her stuff to ‘prove’ my point when I didn’t like it, there wasn’t anything to support it. I’m not going to argue this point, because people still have strong feelings about it.

The one retcon I hated was vampires on Zendikar. There was a stealth edit made to the Lithomancer than removed reference to Vampires on Zendikar before the Eldrazi were sealed. So when Stirring from Slumber said they didn’t exist, it felt like gaslighting. For reference, here’s the original:

Nahiri spread word throughout the plane of what was coming, to the merfolk, the kor, the humans, the elves, even the vampires.

Now, I don’t mind the change for story reasons. Having them created by the Eldrazi is pretty cool and changes almost nothing (what Zendikari Vampire lore existed was bleh). What I didn’t like is that the end of the article wasn’t amended to say “Updated such and such a date”. They don’t even need to say what changed, just let us know that we’re not crazy without resorting to the wayback machine.

Basically, I’m fine with retcons, so long as they have a good reason. You can debate what a ‘good reason’ is, but in my view you have to view the story through the lens of what was going on behind the scenes of the game.

anonymous asked:

Mom, I need help. I follow a lot of writing advice blogs but so much of it is conflicting and I just don't know what to do, if I try to do one thing it kills my idea but if I do my idea Im worried no one will like it :( what do I do?

I dislike a lot of writing advice posts that start with “DON’T DO THIS IF YOU WANT TO BE A SUCCESS” because I’m pretty certain at some point someone told Tolkien no one wants to read about the origin of a language he just invented and also “wtf is a hobbit? Can’t the elves at least have some resemblance to their original mythos?* Ugh fine…”

I’m not sure which blogs you are following, but I can guess at some of their “helpful tips and advice” based purely on what I have seen at a glance. Funnily enough most of them are my pet peeves, both as a writer and an editor, so if you’ll indulge me, lets go on a little ramble, anon.

“Editors hate Prologues and will dismiss you if you have one!”— only the shitty ones do this. The ones doing their job will tell you whether or not the prologue is in fitting with your genre style (yes there are styles withing genres *inception foghorn*) or whether you’re giving away too much foreshadowing and character back story which might be better explored throughout the rest of the narrative as a means of garnering depth and substance. Sometimes the prologue isn’t necessary at all, sometimes it can easily be made into chapter one, and sometimes it can be edited out entirely. Figuring this out is part of the editor’s job. You are not writing to appeal to the personal likes of the Editor, you are writing to tell a story which the editor will then hack apart to find the backbone of and say “here, here is what we need more of”.

Editors hate Epilogues!” — see the above.

Be original, no one wants the same story over and over!” — other than creating a flamethrower guitar, humanity has remained pretty much constant in it’s use of fire. Heat things, cook things, destroy things. We’re a simple bunch, us homo sapiens. We like our fire and we like it hot, and occasionally there might be a flamethrower guitar thrown into the mix which sets out little brains to buzzing. But mostly we’ll be happy in the morning if we can use it to cook bacon with and possibly set fire to the neighboring campsite. That’s why religion is so successful. It tells the same story over and over, validating our existence, our tragedies and our hope. Which is not to say be bland and never try to be experimental or creative. Instead lets agree to use the word “interesting” rather than “original”. By this point fire has been invented and it’s not going anywhere, the original concept idea of fire is very much rooted in human psyche ever since cave people figured it out and quite possibly thought they’d captured something wild. (And it’s that little bit of imagination that makes humans so very special, it’s the same part of us that names stuffed animals and worries about hurting their feelings. We’re great at inflicting the human condition onto perfectly undeserving inanimate objects.) Screw “original”—lets be the ones who make things interesting. Throw some napalm into the mix, or find a way to make fire dance over ice, take the fire and go to the moon if you want to. Just because something has already been done, doesn’t mean you can’t do it over and over again in interesting ways. If that was the case we’d have neither faith nor human ingenuity and we’d still be banging rocks together and peeling bananas with our toes.

Editors make a decision based on the first three sentences!” They might do this, but chances are it’s the editor’s assistant who has just read the exact same opening sequence written by ten different people and hopes to spare the sanity of the publisher who is going to sign off on authorizing your book from subjecting them to one more “she was an average looking girl with luxurious blonde hair and blue eyes the color of deep water, but totally average…so average she’d never get a boyfriend…” (You cannot write an original romance novel. Sex is older than fire and romance probably just as much so from the first moment Grog realized this plant smelled nice and gave it to Grognita and she also thought it smelt nice and let Grog put his feet under the stone table in the cave. You can however write an interesting one that does more than follow “{girl with self confidence issues} + {young interesting man with a dark history and a secret need to be coddled} meet in unlikely but totally likely circumstances, confusion and emotions ensue” equation. Flip the table, have a love triangle that turns into a happy polyamorous fun time for all without one of them being killed off and leaving the ‘true’ pairing to survive. (I once edited a book that did that, the words “our true love can finally flourish” made me vomit in my mouth).)

It’s true, you need to be interesting and engaging from the start to get the attention of your intended audience. But what’s more important is your cover letter detailing the summary of your book, whether you intend it to be a dark fantasy or a rip roaring comedy or something in between. It’s the cover letter that gets read before your manuscript is ever even downloaded. It’s also the promise of future revenue. You want this book to be part of a trilogy? Tell them that, and tell them you have rough drafts planned for those books. Even if they’re only rough drafts on the back of napkins, it’s still technically true. Which is the sum and all of being an author, you’re telling fiction to tell truths, and any editor worth their salt knows this. Side-note to this section as well, most editing companies will dismiss unsolicited manuscripts right off the bat. It has nothing to do with your first three sentences, and everything to do with needing a representative who has a good reputation to stand up, wave a flag and say “hey, this isn’t garbage!” Get an agent, find one who specializes in what you want to write, chances are they already know which publishing houses to send your stuff to.

Readers hate that!” Oh thank god, I’m so glad someone finally knows what every single human being on the planet wants to read, I’m…oh you have no idea what a relief this is, finally I can stop writing what I wanted to write and write one specific trope for the rest of my life, thank you, thank you. /scathing sarcasm (Unless you’re killing off the third character in your romance book to teach a moral story about true love, in which case go fuck yourself, readers really do hate that.)

Don’t worry about spelling and grammar, that’s what editors are for :) it’s content not quality :)” — if you listen really closely you an hear the sound of my sanity shrieking through the void of editorial hell. If someone hands you a bag full of shit, regardless of how great the bag itself is, it’s still a bag of shit. Editors don’t expect you to have gotten everything right by yourself, that is why they are there, for when you’ve read your own book so many times you no longer catch the subtle things like “thought” and “though” or you’ve given up on using comas and resorted to the em dash out of mad desperation. I once received a copy to line edit which was so riddled with spelling mistakes I had literally no idea what  was going on. The response from the author was “isn’t that you’re job? to figure that out?” (complete with spelling mistakes) to which I replied, “no, I am here to take a walk through your garden of words and point out where the roots are being strangled and the pond might need some cleaning out”. Then added on to myself, “not run screaming madly through a jungle being pursued by hornet-bears with a suicidal grasp of sentence structure.”

Editors are not expecting perfection, but they do expect some form of competency that implies sentience beyond a loaf of moldy bread. The majority of good storytelling comes from the actual words, not the idea. To suggest otherwise is like expecting an operatic masterpiece to sound good whilst being sung by a tone deaf goat. So try your hardest, cross your t’s and dot your i’s. It helps more than you’d think.

“No one likes a Mary Sue”— DC comics and Batman would like to disagree with you, but what is really being said here is “no one likes a female hero” which is blatant bullshit. You got yourself a bad ass Amazonian queen who also likes to embroider? Cool, go for it. Male heroes have never had to explain their brilliance. Neither should female. Anyone that tries to put your writing down because the women seem “too over powered” aren’t the kind of people you want to be dealing with.

“You should only ever write what you know.”— Whenever I read advice like this I can’t help but feel like Mary Shelley had some fucking weird anatomy classes I never got at school, and that I’d like to try whatever Tolkien was having. Just long enough to find the Shire and be among people of my own size.

Yes, writing from what you know sounds like good advice, but only so far as you take it metaphorically as well as literally (Like a sort of zen). Otherwise dragons could never be slain and the stars would go untouched. I understand why it gets said, I really do. No one wants to read more “noble colonists meet noble savages and it was a grand old party and nothing bad happened ever”(—every history book ever written). Similarly no one wants to read more fiction appropriated by others in order to claim diversity. It is not the place of a cis straight person to represent the LGBTA community in order to claim progressive thinking on their part. It’s why having cis people portraying trans people goes beyond problematic and into the realms of “people are all different, an idiots guide to using your brain”. By all means we should be allies and make all efforts to be diverse in our work, but we should not seek to take their stories from them when there are so many creators from the LGBTA community who go ignored in favor of mainstream medium, and who would give a far more accurate  account and portrayal of their stories. The same goes for race. In that instance, write what you know is applicable. Otherwise, feel free to frolic with imagination and try not to tread on any toes too much. Common sense and decency will guide you better than any magic star.

“You should always try to impart meaning”— this is one of the staple quotes thrown about by literary snobs. “Impart meaning” as though everything you do will somehow shake the foundations of humanity, rather than slide off the side with nary a wobble on the Richter scale. What they really mean in that instance is “beat people over the head with morals and show how witty you are by making these observations” when what a really talented writer ought to be able to do, is slip them in under the radar and make the reader’s brain go “ping” through the subtle art of story manipulation. Tolkien wasn’t writing about the grandeur of war and kings, or even that good and evil is inherent. He was writing about the horrors of war, and that even the sweetest most lovable creatures (hobbits, fyi, who party and drink and eat and fulfill the role of little children in all their innocence)  can be corrupted by the greed of others and that corruption can span across the centuries to hurt the ones you love so you best do something about it now or else.

It was about love, and wanting to heal people. It was about understanding that if you have to fight, do it to defend the people you love. Power and influence fade, but somewhere where the hills are green and the sky is bright, someone is watching for you, so come home. If you missed all that I suggest you go back and read it all again. And again. And every time you do I bet you’ll find new meaning. Because that’s what good writers do. By all means impart meaning, but don’t imagine it has to be something great. It can be about the sum of humanity if you want it, but it can also be little things, like not treading on ants or that it’s okay to cry. You’re not writing to make people think you’re a genius, or if you are, you’re already writing for all the wrong reasons and I’m afraid there’s nothing more I can help you with.

“If you’re not having fun it’s not worth it”— This is the advice given by hobbyists who like to tell people they write but what they really mean is “I like the thought of it but it’s too much like hard work, but I do have clever ideas…” and I have just one thing to say to them. Buuuuuuuullshiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit.

Writing is hard. It is incredibly hard. It’s like trying to pin down the inside of your brain to a storyboard and not lobotomize yourself at the same time. Writing is hard and there are times when you will hate it. There will also be times when the story carries you and it’s immensely fun to ride those waves of heady creating. But behind that wave is invariably a tsunami of self doubt, followed by a drought of ideas, and you’ll lie dehydrated in the tundra of your own work, wondering what ever possessed you to grab your raft and try to make it upstream without a paddle. That doesn’t mean you should give up however. What it means is you pick yourself up, dust yourself down, find a bloody great big stick and you try again. If you do it for long enough you’ll eventually find you can make your own waves. The act of writing is like a habit. If you do it long enough, eventually it’ll become second nature, and more than that, a craving. It’s my one true vice and like a vice, some days it will tear me apart. On other days however, I get to walk with angels. It’s entirely worth it.

So you want my definitive advice about writing and what you should do?

Don’t give up. Do the thing.

(*Fun fact, elves are ungodly vicious bastards, and it wasn’t until about the 19th century that they became less terrifying and more cute and benign. Funny that.)

mmfr thoughts/observations

The Capture & Escape Attempt:

• Max isn’t standing still in the opening shot of him. He’s actually rocking back and forth slightly, and fiddling with his hands.

• He gets caught really close to the Citadel. You can see it in the background right before they start dragging him behind them on the chain.

• That tattoo probably took hours to do. At least two. And because it was such a hack job, when it heals he’ll be able to feel the letters raised as scars.

• The guy with the brand was behind Max. He didn’t see it coming. He must’ve felt/sensed the heat of it.

The Blood Shed:

• Max seems to be the only blood bag with his stats tattooed on his back. 

• I get why they left Max his shirt (so they could use it to cover Tom’s arm tattoos), but why did they leave him with his knee brace?

• Continuity error! Max has boots on when we first see him in the cage, then no boots when he’s hanging upside down, then boots again when he’s a hood ornament.

• There is a blood bag next to Max’s cage who isn’t hung upside down. He has an IV cuff on his wrist similar to what Nux wears, but other than that he isn’t tied up, so at least some of them seem to have completely accepted their lot in life and don’t fight it anymore.

• Max isn’t the only muzzled blood bag. The guy that’s hanging nearest to the Organic Mechanic seems to have metal or cloth over his jaw and eyes. 

• The film reverses for a split second when that War Boy says to Nux “An imperator gone rogue!” which is… a very odd editing choice.

• Slit refers to Max as an “it.”

Furiosa & Crew:

• “Fukushima kami-crazy.” Niiiice worldbuilding. 

• We see Furiosa doing part of the kill-switch sequence even before we’re told there is one. 

• I find it interesting that Joe allows a) his Imperators and b) a couple of War Pup helpers to dress him and see him for the diseased old man he really is. Kind of ruins the façade. 

• Joe says about himself: “I am your Redeemer!” What was it that Furiosa and Max spend the whole movie looking for again?

• I very much enjoy this trend of women in positions of authority in movies giving orders and not being questioned. The Martian had that too.

The Chase:

• The audio synch of the dubbed “First it’s my blood, now it’s my car!” line is laughably bad. (Headcanon: Is he actually vocalizing, or is it just in his head?) 

• Continuity error! The length of the metal bar Max is cuffed to changes lengths a couple of times throughout the chase.

• I love the look Max gives Furiosa. Like: “You’re the reason I’m strapped to this car right now. Screw you very much.”

• He looks like Daniel Craig here:

The Toxic Storm:

• I also love the look in Joe’s eyes when he realizes that Furiosa means to drive through the toxic storm. A combination of “oh fuck” and “I really wish I hadn’t hyped everyone up to believe I was indestructible right about now.”

• When Furiosa punches Ace, the rest of her crew starts shouting in confusion.

• I think the Imperator who puts the breathing mask on Miss Giddy is Asian.

• Slit tried to bite Max’s boot/ankle, lol.

• The lightning flashes are in black & white.

• I love the beat of utter disbelief in Max’s face before he shifts to pure survival mode and starts punching the window. 

• Also, the whole suicidal fanatics who follow a religious cult leader shouting catch-phrases before they kill themselves (“Riding to Valhalla!” / “Witness me!” / “I live, I die, I live again!”) is such a product of the times we live in, but I wonder if it would have been included in the film if it had been made back in the early aughts (remember the flack the 2nd Lord of the Rings movie got for including the “suicide bomber” orc?)

• The final shot of the flare being snuffed out was so artsy and creative. I fucking love it. 

The Meeting/Fight:

• I could listen to the sound of the sand and the chains rustling as Max wakes over and over again. 

• I love the foley effect of the water glugging inside the rig for the close-up of the water hitting the mud.

• Max smiles and laughs eagerly right before the water hits him in the face.

• This is the best fight scene ever and Furiosa is so fierce and competent and tough and I love it.

• The part where she pins him against the rig and curls his finger around the trigger in order to get him to shoot himself is so hot, haha.

• The sound of the gun scraping against the side of the rig is my favourite sound effect in the whole movie.

• He makes a hilarious “mmph!” sound right before accidentally faceplanting into Furiosa’s crotch.

* Capable wears little slipper-boots with curly toes.

The Rig:

• Furiosa picked up and carried the metal thing she’d been using to clear sand all the way up until the point she reaches the rig, and then throws it to the ground just before she approaches the door.

• The look on his face after Furiosa says “You’ve got about a 5-minute head start” tho, because he’s clearly terrified and just being stubborn for the sake of being stubborn at that point.

• The look on her face, when she realizes this stubborn fool would rather sit there and let himself get caught again rather than let them in, and she’s at her wit’s-end and decides to appeal to his id rather than his conscience as a last resort: “You want that thing off your face?!”

• (The fact that she tried to appeal to his conscience at all just shows how adaptable and quick-thinking she is. This is a man who chose warning shots over the more efficient/logical rout of shooting her and Angharad after all)

* People have already commented on how everything from Furiosa’s voice to the sound of the chains have an echo effect during then scene where Max confiscates all the guns. I just love how everything sounds so crisp and sharp once he lets them back inside, even the creaking of leather.

• I’m pretty sure that’s a knife attached to the corner of the door/windshield on the driver side, next to the little squirt bottle.

• The way he holds the pistol close to his face is so damn strange, and yet also the perfect visual cue for how stressed/afraid he is. It’s a shield as much as it is a weapon.

• Continuity error! The lighting and makeup is just so completely wrong on the first shot of Max using the file on the lock. Just flat yellow lighting and there isn’t even any dirt or sweat on his face.

• Side note: Every single copy of this scene posted on YouTube has guys asking some variant of “What does ‘schlanger’ mean?” (as if they don’t already call their peens the most ridiculous things).

To be continued~

Something that has annoyed me so much but made me discover the most amazing thing...

So, I’m not one to blog extensively about ‘life’ stuff, but this thing has been niggling at me recently and it is getting worse, but an amazing realisation has also overcome me. I think blogging is an amazing way to get stuff out, write things down, and express yourself, but obviously I’m pretty conscious because I know people who follow this page of mine are more than likely doing so to see music related things. So i’m sorry if you don’t want to read these kinds of things, but hopefully some of you guys can take something from it. Maybe.

This will be lengthy, but stick with me on this one, I promise!

Before I vent and try and explain what’s annoying me so much, I just want to say that of course we all look at blogs, websites, instagram accounts etc. and think 'Wow. Their life is so awesome. Everything they post is so cool which means 100% of their life is the best ever!’ I’m a culprit. I do exactly the same thing when I’m aimlessly browsing the internet. BUT I’m also on the other side. I have an Instagram account where I post pictures, and of course I’ll only post good stuff, why would I post a photo where I look bad? Or A photo of me cooking? We all filter what we post and I think we should all bear that in mind before judging ourselves and not being grateful for our own wonderful lives!

That leads me onto part of my annoyance. I’ve noticed recently, that (not naming names, i’m not that cruel!) but people that I once called very close friends are trying so painfully (and embarrassingly!) hard to stay relevant, 'cool’ and 'desirable’ by using the internet. Posting heavily edited photos of all the MEGA FUN they’re having just to let you know that maybe they’re having a better time than you’ll ever be having. When we all know in reality that they’re only doing said activity purely to post the picture online, and then resort to spending the remainder of the day twiddling their thumbs waiting for the next Facebook notification so they can talk about the COOLEST TIME EVER with their 'friends’.

The thing about this that annoys me most, is not that they’re posting what they’re doing online. I LOVE to see what my friends are doing. It’s the fact that its so painstakingly obvious that they’re not having a good time. They don’t love what they’re doing for the right reasons because if they did they wouldn’t be trying so hard to make sure everybody knows about it. 

Next thing (this is all connected i swear. Stay with me!) is people’s incapability to accept they’ve made a massive mistake, accepted they’ve potentially ruined a lot of their opportunities and relationships. Ive seen it a lot recently. Someone’s made a mistake, and instead of feeling guilt and sympathy for the person or people they’ve hurt, their main priority is what they are going to be losing as a result of this. And they wonder why they feel so bad about what they 'love’ doing all the time. (!?)

Ive seen people recently hurt someone and then put themselves first. Instead of trying to build bridges or maybe just completely stepping away, and having enough respect to realise it’s not their place anymore, they try to find different ways back in so that they are still connected to what they’ll be losing. Whether it’s suddenly being pally with people who do the job that you want, people who do what you do, people who have some kind of status, names that you can drop to make yourself seem important… It makes me feel stupid for once admiring these people that were manipulative, it makes me feel used and naive, but its made me a whole lot wiser.

It leads me back to social networking. Would these people who are trying to get to somewhere and don’t care who they’re hurting actually befriend these people if they worked in, lets say, Greggs? No, they’re befriending them because they are a stepping stone closer to what they want or where they want to be. Is this facebook status really what’s on their mind? No, they just want to still be relevant. Do they actually really love what they’re doing? No, they just want to be in on something and they’re worried their mistake is taking it away from them so they’re desperately trying to have their eggs in as many baskets as possible - Regardless of self respect or pride for their work. They’ll take whatever they can get.

For example, would someone who loves music and creating so much go online to post negative things about an artist and their work? No! They do it for the reaction. They know there’s at least one person who will agree and think they’re the coolest person ever.

I’m constantly making sure that of all the mistakes I make, I don’t put myself first and feel sorry for myself for feeling guilty, but feel sorry for the people I could potentially have hurt. And to see people I know not take their passion or the people around them seriously and fairly while accepting their punishment for what it is does make me wonder.. In the music industry it’s hard to stay focussed and I’ll admit that. For example I love fashion, I think it’s an incredible way to express yourself, and I just generally love putting colours, patterns, textures and shapes together. I love being creative! But I’m aware there is a fine line between loving fashion for those reasons, and just loving it so people can compliment you on how good you look. The same way that an artist loves the act of painful pleasure they get from painting some that means something to them more than the compliments they receive after. The same way there’s a fine line between a musician loving to play and craft words and melody purely because it makes their soul feel good, and just being fanned by endless people who worship you as a person, not for what you create.

It feels like I’m going nowhere here.. but what I’m trying to get across, really, is that people are constantly wondering why their dreams aren’t coming true, why its so hard to create what they want and I really believe it’s down to the reasons you’re doing it for. If you want to be a musician because you just want to be famous, then great! But don’t expect it to make you feel fulfilled, wholesome and happy. 

Basically, loving what you do will make your dreams come true. I’ve realised this. If you’re complaining about how much you want to be a successful musician but it’s just not happening, your writing doesn’t seem to be going where you want and it’s frustrating you and you can’t stop thinking about what you get at the end of it then DING DONG you don’t love it. And it’s not going to happen.

If for example, your dream is to be, I don’t know, a painter, and you enjoy painting so much that you’d happily smash up your painting when you’re finished and not even show anybody then your dream has already come true. You can sit and paint all day long and no one will ever see your work but you don’t care, you’re a painter. You’re the happiest when you paint.

Same with music, if you can happily write a song that you loved writing, loved creating and loved singing but happily hide it away never to be heard and not feel like you’re wasting something, then you’ve succeeded. 

I have hundreds of songs that no one knows about. Literally hundreds. I think some of them could do so well, but I don’t care. No amount of success, money or fans could match to how good I felt to just create it in the first place. And that’s why I’ve succeeded. My album could’ve charted at number 12456779935784 instead of number 2, and I’d still be happy as larry. Because I did it for how good it makes me feel to just be a creator.

I hope any of you guys who have trouble with your hopes and dreams can take something from this, and manage to step away from our ever towering and blurred expectations of ourselves given to us by the media to really appreciate what you do and why you love to do it. Love is the source of happiness, success and abundance and it’s something that’s become so fluorescent in my life.

Big love everyone x

dollarwilliam  asked:

Hello. I've been taking a break from my the editing of my current wip, and I've been having trouble feeling motivated to jump back into the revision process. What do you recommend to regain the desire to continue with revamping my story?

  • Set a goal. I find that, when we have that light at the end of the tunnel, we find it easier to keep going. Therefore, set a goal for yourself. What do you hope to accomplish with editing this draft? Publishing? Personal fulfillment? Think about how happy you’ll be after you have a great, polished story in your hands. Think about what you can, or want, to do with it. Think about how you’ll be able to brag to others “Hey! I wrote an awesome book!" 
  • Why did you fall in love with your story in the first place? What motivated you to write that first draft? What did you love the most about the story? Remind yourself of all the great characters and plots and settings you have, and maybe you’ll understand that you actually need to do them justice and give them a polished version of their stories.
  • What do you like the least about your story? So, maybe you have that one character that’s underdeveloped, or maybe you have this inconsistent scene where a character takes off their coat twice. If you find the rough spots of your story, those you can think of right at the top of your head, then you might feel the urge to go and correct those things that are getting on your nerves.
  • Think about it - but not too much.  I find that, when I don’t have the motivation to write or edit, what works best for me is to think about my story while I’m doing some boring activity. Brainstorm ideas regarding what you could do with a certain character, scene or plot, and you might get so excited with your new prospects that you’ll want to run to your first draft and start including the new ideas. Act out conversations between characters, imagine a new setting… Anything that gets you excited to start writing again works. But be careful: if you think too much and never get to editing your work, you might just get tired of your story.
  • Take a break. I know you’ve taken a break already, but if you feel like it hasn’t been enough, don’t be afraid to take another break. But don’t do so without making sure you have plans to start working on it again. Take a break, but this time set a time for yourself to get back to editing, like "Okay, so, I’ll take a week off, but after that I will have to start editing this again”. 
  • Force yourself to edit, then reward yourself. This won’t work for everyone, and it might be used as a last resort, but it’s worth trying if you feel like it could help you. Sit down with your manuscript, and force yourself to scratch paragraphs, add new ones, rewrite scenes. Even if this first edition sucks - you will have time to edit it again later -, at least you’re working on something. Maybe this will allow you to get back on the edition pace again, and motivate you more. Don’t forget to allow yourself to take breaks to do anything you please. However, if you feel like this is making you miserable and pushing you even further away from your story, stop.

I know editing can be boring. After all, most of the creative process is now done and now it feels more like business. However, you’ve managed to get through the first draft phase, which is a great achievement - so congratulations! If you’ve made it this far, it would be a pity to let your story go to waste, right? Do it justice, edit it to the best of your ability, and then allow yourself to take a break from writing or focus on a new project that motivates you more than this one. Good luck!

For further reading:

DeanCas bed-sharing :)

“Jesus, Cas!”

Castiel rolls his eyes, turning angrily on the mattress and purposefully taking all the blankets with him. He may no longer have the strength of an angel, but Dean has time and time again underestimated the power in Castiel’s arms and legs.

This night is no different, and Cas ends up a glaring blanket burrito inches from the hunter’s face.

Dean glares right back. “You dumb blanket hog, stay on your fuckin’ side!”

Me?” Castiel demands. “You’re the one that ends up half on top of me during the night! You basically crushed me yesterday!”

Keep reading

Carmilla's tweet was not okay

It’s ridiculous to me to think that the idea of using OCD as both an insult could have made it past the production QC - but what grieves me is the response to a very legitimate concern about a harmful stereotype has been silence and excuses.

We had a taste of this scenario last season when Carmilla’s line about stuttering made it both into the final script as well as in web series itself. Back then the same responses play out much as were seeing now. Legitimate offense and concern by fans for the cavalier treatment of speech impediment played off as Carmilla’s acerbic wit. Then, just as now, we heard a rationality that while the creators and writers are sensitive to the offense and to harm caused, Carmilla herself lacks the same awareness. Thus while apologizing for the misstep, there was also a distancing of the show and the writers in an attempt to separate the intent of the line from Them and The Character.

But the reality is that creators are responsible for the messages embedded in media, not the characters flaws. Anyone with an intro to media class under their belt knows that this is the reality of the creative process, and anyone at the level of professional production certainly knows it too. If there is racism, sexism, and prejudice in a piece of media, we hold the media makers responsible for perpetuating those - and ableism* is one of those. The original gaff reflected a ignorance and insensitivity to fans with speech impediments and reflected an internalized ableism we had hoped would lead to more scrutiny and self reflection. However this is clearly not the case.

There is no excuse for the tweet’s existence, as a fictitious character was not the one who wrote it and ultimately not to blame. Using ableist language and minimizing a disorder like OCD are severe strikes against the production as a safe, forward thinking, feminist one. Additionally, as viewers we can tell the writers so far have been excellent at characterization in the scripts, so why resort to cheap and harmful language in the transmedia canon?

Clearly the reaction and commitment to representation of POC was high on the priority list for the team this season, a response to the early criticisms of their audience. So why was this facet seemingly ignored? If the show wants to promote itself as feminist, they have a responsibility to provide a safe environment to those with all conditions, disorders, mental illnesses and disabilities. And the fans with either certainly deserve a better and faster response to their concerns. Especially when it could be as easy as an apology and an edited tweet.

edit: I have taken the time to change the wording and language I use to better respect those with OCD, and I hope if anyone sees this they’ll either delete the other version or reblog with one instead

*I use ableism here to refer to the larger systematic oppression which includes mental illness and neuroatypicality, not to imply that OCD is a disability, as many with OCD do not identify as such.

Okay, this is what I’m going to say with a fresh mind after a good night’s sleep and having calmed down.

  • Tyler Posey has an opinion and I think everyone should respect that. Not liking Sterek is really no big deal. If Tyler feels like that about Sterek then no one can stop him from it. He has every right to. He can feel like that about Sterek and in the same way, sterek fans can feel whatever they want about what he’s said as long as they’re respectful and polite about it.
  • I still haven’t seen the hate towards Posey that people are talking about, but I don’t condone if there has been any. On the other hand, I’ve seen posts of fans talking about what happened and that is not hate. That is having an opinion. Let’s draw the line.
  • I’ve seen people invading the Sterek tag to bash the fans. Oh well, I think some just took the change. There are some bitter bullies in the Teen Wolf fandom and that’s it. 
  • Fans can be upset about what he’s said. They have every right as well as he has. Being upset does NOT mean that they are going to send hate messages to him. Fans CAN and WILL talk about what happened in their own space, yes, their blogs and the sterek  tag that some people has so blatantly invaded. You cannot police someone on how they should or shouldn’t feel about something and that goes for BOTH the parties, Tyler and Sterek fans.
  • You cannot expect people reacting happily about what he’s said or jumping for joy right now. After all he did say that something a big group of fans likes, is twisted and weird.  People can react and feel bummed, or sad, or angry about it, as long as their reaction doesn’t include hate towards anyone. 
  • I personally think it wasn’t what he has said that bothered people. It wasn’t him saying that he doesn’t like Sterek, it was HOW he’s said it. Twisted, bizarre and weird are to me words that were uncalled for. Yes, that was the part that hurt me the most (My literal words were: Thank you Tyler. Way to go and make me feel like shit). that is until I’ve realized that I really souldn’t care about them and that he’s only human and he could just have said that when he was in a bad mood.
  • In my opinion there’s no “true reason” for watching a show. It’s a show, you watch it for YOUR OWN entertainment, and if you are only entertained by a particular character or a particular ship, or a particular aspect of a show entertains you more than other aspects, YOU GO DEAR!  There’s no instruction book on how you should watch a show and no one should tell you otherwise. So I think I can agree to disagree with the second thing that Posey has said.
  • After reading this post [X] I feel like Tyler having this strong feelings against Sterek might come from him not feeling appreciated enough by Sterek fans and not because of the ship itself? I think we should do something cute and fun for him. I think sterek fans that are also Scott fans should all come together to do something positive next Monday. I don’t know… maybe we should trend something like…#SterekfanslovePosey or…#SterekfansloveScott… I’m not really creative with hashtags? Any suggestion? Would it be a bad idea? I would like for him to feel that our love for Sterek doesn’t doesn’t take away from the love we have for the whole show and the main character. We have enough for both. It could be a good way to move on from the drama in a positive way. I think Tyler could really appreciate seing our creative tweets where the concept is “Both, Both is good” and see us in a different light. :) I think the Sterek fandom needs to step up his game and show him our love. ( I think I could even edit a little video to promote this if people think this is a good idea) 
  • To sum up:
  • Everyone can have their own opinions and respect that.
  • Everyone can feel strongly about something as long as they do not resort to hate.
  • Everyone should respect the different fandom spaces and tags.
  • Everyone don’t be a dick. 
  • Sterek fans, let me know what you think about trending for Posey :)