My Other Bad Habit...Writing

[Illiterati]

I've been working on a book for awhile now. It's a period piece involving (yes) vampires.

I'm finding that one of the most difficult aspects of writing period fiction is the research behind it, so I don't end up putting in anachronistic items and phrases. Meanwhile, finding colloquialisms from the period can also be a royal pain in the backside.

No, my vampires don't sparkle, though, like Stoker's Dracula, they can and do walk in the sunlight.

I've been remiss in my writing for awhile, and I'm working to get back into it on a regular basis. I've missed the characters. It seems, sometimes, when you've written about certain characters for long enough, they develop a life of their own, and if you're doing it right, they'll practically tell you when you're writing them wrong.

 

[Gatefan1976]

I've been working on a book for awhile now. It's a period piece involving (yes) vampires.

I'm finding that one of the most difficult aspects of writing period fiction is the research behind it, so I don't end up putting in anachronistic items and phrases. Meanwhile, finding colloquialisms from the period can also be a royal pain in the backside.

No, my vampires don't sparkle, though, like Stoker's Dracula, they can and do walk in the sunlight.

I've been remiss in my writing for awhile, and I'm working to get back into it on a regular basis. I've missed the characters. It seems, sometimes, when you've written about certain characters for long enough, they develop a life of their own, and if you're doing it right, they'll practically tell you when you're writing them wrong.

Ohh, period peice and vamps, You have My and Mrs GF's attention. What period?

 

[Illiterati]

Ohh, period peice and vamps, You have My and Mrs GF's attention. What period?

Early 1840's, during the period of western expansion in the US.

I'm a history nut. Plus, I like the idea of writing about vampires in a time where computers, etc., are not commonplace, and information takes a long time to get from point A to point B.

It's the research that can be a bear. LOL

I've never been one to embrace (with apologies to Kindred: The Embraced) the idea of mindless, bloodsucking vampires -- but I hate angst, too.

Will there be drama? Yes. Will there be danger? Yes. Will there be whiny, moody teenagers you want to shove out the period equivalent of an airlock?

Hell no.

 

[shavedape]

Don't worry too much about being away from the writing. Your subconscious uses this time to work out problems and develop plot and enhance characters, etc. Nothing like giving yourself a mental breather to make coming back to the project a joy.

As for getting the period style precise I'd recommend reading stuff that was produced during the period you're writing about. There's nothing worse than reading a period piece and coming across current/modern vernacular. Ugh! Recently read a Sue Grafton mystery that takes place in both the 1960's and 1980's. I don't know where the hell her editor was but a few modern colloquialisms and terminology made it into the book. It ruined it for me. I was rent from the story by reading something someone in the 60's wouldn't have said. It was jarring. I implore you to avoid this at all costs.

A good example of getting a period's terminology correct would be the Amelia Peabody Mysteries by Elizabeth Peters. They are these Victorian era archeology/Egyptology romps that are fun and cheesy and a bit soapish but they are always spot-on with terminology. I think it's because the author has a doctorate in Egyptology and is used to doing research from that era. I'm sure she has steeped herself in publications from the period she writes about. She tends to use certain words like "criminous" which is a legitimate word that was used during that period but has since fallen out of favor. It's little things like that that make her stories work.

So, don't just read about the period you want to write about, read stuff from the period you want to write about.

 

[Gatefan1976]

Early 1840's, during the period of western expansion in the US.

I'm a history nut. Plus, I like the idea of writing about vampires in a time where computers, etc., are not commonplace, and information takes a long time to get from point A to point B.

It's the research that can be a bear. LOL

So "the great rail" type time period?

I've never been one to embrace (with apologies to Kindred: The Embraced) the idea of mindless, bloodsucking vampires -- but I hate angst, too.

From your avi, I'd say V:TM actually.....

Will there be drama? Yes. Will there be danger? Yes. Will there be whiny, moody teenagers you want to shove out the period equivalent of an airlock?

Hell no.

That would be the caboose my love

 

[shavedape]

Illiterati's avatar reminds me of the cover for "The Bloodletting" album by Concrete Blond. It was "vampire" before vampire was cool!

 

[Illiterati]

Don't worry too much about being away from the writing. Your subconscious uses this time to work out problems and develop plot and enhance characters, etc. Nothing like giving yourself a mental breather to make coming back to the project a joy.

As for getting the period style precise I'd recommend reading stuff that was produced during the period you're writing about. There's nothing worse than reading a period piece and coming across current/modern vernacular. Ugh! Recently read a Sue Grafton mystery that takes place in both the 1960's and 1980's. I don't know where the hell her editor was but a few modern colloquialisms and terminology made it into the book. It ruined it for me. I was rent from the story by reading something someone in the 60's wouldn't have said. It was jarring. I implore you to avoid this at all costs.

A good example of getting a period's terminology correct would be the Amelia Peabody Mysteries by Elizabeth Peters. They are these Victorian era archeology/Egyptology romps that are fun and cheesy and a bit soapish but they are always spot-on with terminology. I think it's because the author has a doctorate in Egyptology and is used to doing research from that era. I'm sure she has steeped herself in publications from the period she writes about. She tends to use certain words like "criminous" which is a legitimate word that was used during that period but has since fallen out of favor. It's little things like that that make her stories work.

So, don't just read about the period you want to write about, read stuff from the period you want to write about.

I have always loved using archaic words. I figure that if you keep using them, they never truly disappear, though you may need to explain their definition once you've used it.

Throwing modern jargon into a period piece is as brilliant, I think, as having all but perhaps one character in a movie based, say...in Crusades-era England...speak with an English accent. The one remaining character, of course, should sound as though he has spent most of his time on the beach in say...modern Southern California.

It really brings a ring of reality to something, does it not?

You should read King's 'unabridged' and 'original' version of The Stand (1980) sometime. It was released many years after the originally published version, and claims to be published as King wrote it. Funny, though...in that "original and uncut" edition, he refers to AIDS in a time when it was actually referred to as GRID (Gay-Related Immune Deficiency). I've always had a bit of a grumble about that. They didn't start calling it AIDS until 1982.

 

[Illiterati]

Illiterati's avatar reminds me of the cover for "The Bloodletting" album by Concrete Blond. It was "vampire" before vampire was cool!

I took that picture myself.

http://illiterati.smugmug.com/Flowers/Roses/16154700_i5EPc#1212969894_UPnLQ

 

[Illiterati]

So "the great rail" type time period?


From your avi, I'd say V:TM actually.....

That would be the caboose my love

It was a great shame that the lead actor from V:TM died so tragically. I believe the series might have had a chance if that had not happened.

Pretty much that time period, however I'm having fun with the idea of those people who decided to set up shop along the wagon routes, providing supplies to those who were heading further westward. Travel was still very rough and difficult. Imagine being a vampire who is also part of a vangard of those moving west...

 

[shavedape]

You should read King's 'unabridged' and 'original' version of The Stand (1980) sometime. It was released many years after the originally published version, and claims to be published as King wrote it. Funny, though...in that "original and uncut" edition, he refers to AIDS in a time when it was actually referred to as GRID (Gay-Related Immune Deficiency). I've always had a bit of a grumble about that. They didn't start calling it AIDS until 1982.

Don't get me going about Stephen King. GateFan1976 turned my crank the other day about King (not intentionally). It's too easy to go off on a tangent about him. The guy is part genius/part hack -- and lately I haven't seen much of the genius. As for "The Stand" it should have remained edited as it was. The first half was genius, the second half was a literary cop out. When I was younger I reread it a couple times but haven't had that desire in ages. It doesn't surprise me that his editor (whoever the hell that is) did nothing to stop King from adding the erroneous AIDS reference. And it doesn't surprise me that King himself had no problem with it. He strikes me as an arrogant SOB at times and an insufferable prick at other times. I mean really, he added like 300 pages to "The Stand" for no reason other than to feed his vanity. Less is more. Too bad King doesn't know that.

 

[shavedape]

It was a great shame that the lead actor from V:TM died so tragically. I believe the series might have had a chance if that had not happened.

Pretty much that time period, however I'm having fun with the idea of those people who decided to set up shop along the wagon routes, providing supplies to those who were heading further westward. Travel was still very rough and difficult. Imagine being a vampire who is also part of a vangard of those moving west...

You mean a solo vampire or one part of a vampire community making the trek westward?

 

[Illiterati]

You mean a solo vampire or one part of a vampire community making the trek westward?

He's a currently solo vampire who has essentially been sent out to pave the way for other vampires to also make the move.

 

[Illiterati]

Don't get me going about Stephen King. GateFan1976 turned my crank the other day about King (not intentionally). It's too easy to go off on a tangent about him. The guy is part genius/part hack -- and lately I haven't seen much of the genius. As for "The Stand" it should have remained edited as it was. The first half was genius, the second half was a literary cop out. When I was younger I reread it a couple times but haven't had that desire in ages. It doesn't surprise me that his editor (whoever the hell that is) did nothing to stop King from adding the erroneous AIDS reference. And it doesn't surprise me that King himself had no problem with it. He strikes me as an arrogant SOB at times and an insufferable prick at other times. I mean really, he added like 300 pages to "The Stand" for no reason other than to feed his vanity. Less is more. Too bad King doesn't know that.

I've become convinced that he's just got some computer program where he enters names, locations and a situation, and the program writes it for him.

He's nearly as prolific as James Patterson, the mystery writer.