I got a critique on a story this week that has gotten me thinking. The critique was for my story, "Second Sight" which I hope to start sending out in the next week or so, and its from the perspective of a blind girl. I was very concerned about it because it took a great deal of effort to make that perspective readable. Everyone who critiqued my story did a brilliant job, but one persons critique made me think a bit more than the rest.

To be honest I think the person critiqueing the story has a chip on his shoulder when it comes down to disabilities. He felt that to accurately portray the perspective of a blind person I should all but handicap the reader as well. He wanted me to have the character identify people by smell, even by the smell of their sweat, feel every waft of air that tells her someone is going by, brutally cut every word that has to do with vision, and make the reader feel completely blacked out.

The critique was good, but at the same time I don't think the person who critiqued it really knew what I was trying to do with the story. I didn't want to write a story about BLINDNESS and how awful it is to be HANDICAPPED and the main character is a CRIPPLE who can't see anything because she is BLIND and you as the reader should feel BLIND too because its hard being HANDICAPPED.

I wanted the story to be about the actual plot, where the MC happens to have a problem. She can't see. That's part of the plot line, but its not the whole deal. I didn't want the focus to be on the fact that she's blind. I wanted the people reading to see the character, to feel her personality, and to accept the fact that she can't see without focusing on it.

Its true that everything he said was true. I have no doubt that people with severe vision loss end up depending on their nose as much as their ears. I did not use the MC's nose or, tongue nearly as much as I used her ears. Why? Because its easier for the reader to identify with someone who recognizes a familiar voice than it is for them to identify with someone who can tell where someone is standing by smell alone. The last thing I wanted to do is make someone feel alienated from the character because she was BLIND.

So I was careful about the words I chose. In the very first paragraph I had her refer to the beach she was sitting on as a very 'visual' place. I felt the word worked well for the picture she could form with sound, smell, and touch. Its a word that readers can understand, and I don't feel they're going to become confused about whether she can see or not when I've just spent five or six sentences explaining how its visual.

It ended up making me think though. How much do we owe our readers when it comes down to accuracy? Is the correct portrayal of a character more important than all the details? Is what the writer intended more important than what the facts allow? Where do you draw the line between accuracy and art?

Sometimes I hate writing. The more I develop and grow and find out, the more questions I have.

Happy belated New Year everyone! I hope 2008 is shaping into as good a year for you as it is for me. On January 2^nd, I got an email from Sniplits accepting Dragon Psychology. I'm thrilled to be one of their authors, and I can't wait for it to be available to the public. As soon as it is I will post a link for everyone.

Looking back over my posts this last year, I'm amazed at the progress I've made. I've gone from an unpublished author with no plans for the future accept to finish some of the manuscripts I'd started, to a published author with a fairly bright future.

I still use too many adjectives. I still whine about getting rejections. I suppose you can't have everything, right?

I'm hoping this year to top my accomplishments last year however. Since last year I succeeded in meeting, and indeed overshot my publication goal, I have decided to shoot for an even loftier goal this year. Since I am effectively trapped in the role of a fulltime student, I am hoping to try and pay for my move to Washington State in November of this year with my writing.

It's impossible. I am aware of that. I am still going to try. The worst thing that can happen is that I fail. Wish me luck everyone. :)

I really feel good about how my writing is coming of late. It seems that I'm learning something new or growing in some way every single day. I've settled into a routine of writing two good quality short stories every month, and sending them out the next month. My goal being to send out 30 short stories before the next Narnia movie comes out. Doesn't matter if I get rejected, its just getting over the stress of sending them out that is important.

So far I've got one rejection, one that hasn't had so much as a peep since January, and two out with no response. I've got high hopes for both the stories currently out, and the two new ones I have for June are just plain beautiful. (Yeah I know, trust a writer to sing her own praises)

Seriously though, even the people in my critique circle have given them a positive review. I just wish I could write like that all the time.

Happy early Memorial Day everyone, and God bless our vets!

writ·er [rahy-ter]
–noun

1. A disease that strikes normal human beings and changes them into antisocial paper and/or computer addicts. Symptoms include carrying a small notepad at all times, obsession with plots and characters, inability to not write, and inability to keep to normal sleep hours. People with classic writing symptoms may reflect their characters moods, be easily scared after writing their first horror, and actually cry if they forget a cool dream that could have been made into a story.

Cures: None.