Confessions of an Aromantic Asexual Conservative Christian

I've been sitting on this post for a few months, and I think it's time to bite the bullet and confess: I am an aromantic asexual.

It's something I've been confused about for quite some time, due to various factors. Lack of familiarity with the concept. Misunderstanding of what "aromantic" and "asexual" even mean. My mother's reaction when I casually suggested "Hey, this kinda sounds like me."

But waaaait a minute. If misunderstanding "aromantic" and "asexual" has been a problem for me, shouldn't I define my terms?

Yes. Yes, I should.

In fact, there are several terms I need to define before we continue this discussion, which I've found useful as a person and as a writer. Not all of these terms are "official" or widely used, but they're handy for comprehending the full issue, which has a lot more involved than many assume or realize. (I realize that the Bible only recognizes two biological genders. I'll address that in a bit.)

Definitions:

orientation

what classification of person you're attracted to, sexually and/or romantically

gender

biological sex + self-identification + orientation

binary

conventional male/female distinction

The traditional heteronormative male/female biology/self-identification + attraction to the opposite sex is called "binary gender" and is indicated by a prefix of "cis–".

libido

desire for sex

notice that there's no mention of sexual or romantic attraction here—this is independent of that

sexual attraction

interest in a sexual connection with another person

romantic attraction

interest in a romantic connection with another person (ex. cuddling)

---

intersex

born with biological features from both genders

this is more common than you probably think; evidently some places auto-sex assign without even explaining to the parents

transgender ("trans")

someone who identifies as a gender other than the one they were born with

Note that at least some of these are intersex folks who were given a sex assignment at birth and later realize that they're actually not that gender—and that an intersex person who transitions to a binary gender actually counts as "trans"

heterosexual ("het" or "hetero")

being sexually attracted to the opposite binary gender

homosexual ("homo")

being sexually attracted to the same binary gender

asexual ("ace")

feeling infrequent or no sexual interest in anyone or anything, as your natural state unaffected by biological issues or emotional stress

demisexual ("demi")

able to feel sexual attraction to someone ONLY after a strong bond has formed with that person

gray–asexual ("gray-A")

mostly asexual, but feeling sexual attraction on occasion

Note that "demi" is a form of gray-A, and someone who feels attraction on occasion" might call themselves an ace or a gray-A.

bisexual ("bi")

being sexually attracted to 2 different genders

Notice that this is specifically 2—so a woman who's sexually attracted to heterosexual men and asexual men actually qualifies as bisexual

polysexual ("poly")

being sexually attracted to multiple different genders

This could be used for everything from 2 to all.

pansexual ("pan")

being sexually attracted to all genders

So if you're sexually attracted to every type of person, you're pansexual—and notice that this has nothing to do with fetishes or being attracted to animals or things.

---

transromantic

someone who is romantically attracted to a variant or ambiguous gender

heteroromantic

being romantically attracted to the opposite binary gender

homoromantic

being romantically attracted to the same binary gender

aromantic (aro)

feeling infrequent or no romantic interest in anyone or anything, as your natural state unaffected by biological issues or emotional stress

demiromantic

able to feel romantic attraction to someone ONLY after a strong bond has formed with that person

gray–romantic

not on the extreme end, but on the spectrum of aromanticism

biromantic

being romantically attracted to 2 different genders

notice that this is specifically 2—so a woman who's romantically attracted to heterosexual men and asexual men actually qualifies as biromantic

polyromantic

being romantically attracted to multiple different genders

This could be used for everything from 2 to all.

panromantic

being romantically attracted to all genders

So if you're romantically attracted to every type of person, you're pansexual—and notice that this has nothing to do with fetishes or being attracted to animals or things.

What a mess, right? Raise your hand if you actually read all that.

Now, why did I go into all that to talk about my own aromantic asexuality?

People are complicated. Labels only work to give broad strokes—and even then, they require the party using the label to use the same definition as the person hearing it.

It's like me being an outgoing introvert. Many people conflate "introverted" and "shy", so they insist I'm an extrovert. But introversion actually has nothing to do with shyness—it's where you get your energy. I like people just fine. I just find them draining. So if I need to recharge after a long day? Going out to a party is the worst thing I can do, to get that energy back.

In my own case, calling myself an "aromantic asexual" is the simplest label I can use (and if I want to be more accurate, I'll still have to define that I'm on the extreme end and feel very little or no romantic or sexual attraction to anyone, but it works).

Where it gets sticky is in that "very little or no".

See, I have never been sexually attracted to anyone, nor do I have any libido. I'm admittedly curious, but as a Christian who believes that sexual intercourse should be reserved for marriage, it's not gonna happen unless I ever marry—which is something that could potentially happen someday, because although I feel no sexual attraction whatsoever, I may, on occasion, experience romantic attraction…

But that "romantic" attraction seems to be more appreciation for being respected in conversation and enjoying others' company. I don't get desire for anything beyond that. (And though I do have a hormone disorder, but this has been true even when my hormones are in order. When my hormones are acting up, thoughts of sexual or romantic relationships actually repulse me.)

But let's assume that my appreciation of respect and enjoyment of others' company is romantic attraction. If that's true, can call myself aromantic, because "infrequent romantic attraction" suffices to describe what I experience—but I can also call myself "heteroromantic" (because I get it with guys), "demiromantic" (because it's guys I have another bond with already), or "gray-romantic" (because I do feel it sometimes). Any and all of those labels work, and that's just a side effect of labels' limitations.

Labels work as descriptors, not as definitions.

A person who is their label is a stereotype, and while stereotypes exist because there's some truth to them, that truth tends to be true of a small subset of the whole group—and sometimes, the stereotype actually says more about how people view the group being stereotyped than it does about the group itself. (Case in point: In the US, nationality of the most recent influx of immigrants is always derided as dirty and lazy, regardless of what that has to do with reality.)

In my own case, I'm definitely an aromantic and asexual…but I might also be heteromantic, demiromantic, and/or gray-romantic, depending on the definitions.

Wait—my sexual orientation and romantic orientation may not exactly match up?

Nope. And that's actually not entirely unusual.

For instance, it's completely possible to be heterosexual and homoromantic, with or without a libido. You can be completely asexual and aromantic and have a libido. You can be completely Xsexual and Xromantic—where prefixes match—and lack a libido.

If you're a writer, stop and think about that for a moment… What would that do to your characters, to give some of them inconsistent romantic vs. sexual orientations, or to make their libido not coincide with their attractions?

Even as a hormone-ridden teenager, I had to learn to look at someone and consider their aesthetics. I was harassed about it quite a bit, by peers and family alike, who would ask if I found someone attractive and insist I was being coy when I answered, "I don't know."

(News flash: I actually didn't know, because I didn't—and don't—naturally think in those terms.)

These days, I've made a habit of asking myself about aesthetics upon observing people, but if I'm distracted or sick or tired or some other thing has my attention, I won't notice. Or I might think of it twenty minutes (or two hours) into a conversation.

But people like random compliments, and I like making people happy, so I seek to notice things. I'll walk up to strangers and say things like, "I like your boots" or "That color suits you."

The little problem with that is that…

• What I say: "Hey, that was a great discussion. I enjoyed it."
• What girls tend to hear: "Oh! She wants to be friends!"
• What guys tend to hear: "Oh! She's into me!"
• What I mean: "Hey, that was a great discussion. I enjoyed it (probably because it was intellectually stimulating). Maybe we could converse again sometime (but I don't yet know you well enough to cross from 'acquaintance' into 'friend')."

There is a reason more than one friend has joked that I'm a Vulcan.

For me, noticing that someone has an aesthetically pleasing face is no different from noticing, "What lovely architecture! or "Oh, I love the way the blues pop in that painting!"

Suffice to say, I accidentally ran face-first into some awkward situations before I realized the disconnect between what such compliments mean to me and what they tend to mean to other people. (Sorry, people I've misled. I wasn't trying to!)

I therefore pretty much stick to complimenting females and children, these days, and as a drive-by. (Walking up to strangers then passing on, or as a cinch to a conversation before I excuse myself.) That works out best.

What does this have to do with your writing?

First, I have an idea for a serialized novel set in the same world as the Overhill stories. I'm still hammering some of it out, but it looks as if it would be a mystery or thriller in an urban fantasy setting, with the female main character (FMC) as a werewolf. Avery Williams, to be exact, who was the first character I came up with, years ago when I first started plotting in that story-world, and I'm still not sure if I've finished anything with her in it.

Warning: Some spoilers ensue for a WiP, which will likely not be completed for at least 6 months.

This planned serial (which is tentatively planned to be 3 books of 7 episodes each) would feature her as FMC. The first one would have her at 13-ish, but the second and third would be later, with male main characters. For one of them, I knew from the start that guy would end up attracted to her, but I realized pretty quickly that she wouldn't return his interest.

But try as I might, I couldn't figure out what would interest her. I thought about all sorts of guys, dismissing one after the other… I even started considering if she might swing to her own gender, which also got a "Nope."

I finally realized that Avery Williams is an aro ace and does not experience any romantic or sexual attraction whatsoever.

And realizing that, she came together as a character I understood. I'd been assuming she would be interested in a relationship someday—in a spouse, in children.

Nope. Not a whit.

I suspect I'll be able to write some of her stories, now.

Mulling on sexuality, particularly the types of interest and the assumptions others make about it, has also given me ideas for some other stories (like one that I think y'all might really enjoy, because everyone I've mentioned it to has perked up even at the title—not that I'll be able to write it for a while).

It's also made me realize that I've already written more than one character on the asexual and aromantic spectrums.

Which now has me mulling on how to use that sort of thing consciously in my writing—no to preach about it, in my stories, but to be aware of it so I can demonstrate it overtly when appropriate, because people are people, and people are messes.

But the Bible says…

Yes, there are genetically 2 genders, recognized by Scripture—and interest is distinct from that. Per many of the conservative descriptions/definitions/assumptions about the differences between men and women, men are considered more sexual than romantic, and women are considered more romantic than sexual. That doesn't invalidate the labels as descriptors for people. People don't fit in perfect little boxes, unless you're speaking of specific defined either/or choices, like "trust in Christ as your savior vs. trust in something else"—but even then, you still have situations where, from the human standpoint, it's not that simple—because the humans have different nuances in their definitions for "trust", "Christ", "savior", etc.

There are intersex persons, which are a completely to-be-expected result of shoddy genetics stemming from the sin-infested world / from the second law of thermodynamics / from some other pertinent scientific factors that I won't bore you with. And then there are the folks attracted to the same gender or who perceive themselves as a gender other than what their bodies seem to be.

I honestly suspect the imperfection of genetics accounts for more of the confusion than many Christians want to consider. Whenever I've attempted to bring that up in conversation, it's promptly been dismissed as only accounting for a teensy-tiny number of people.

Well…that may be true, but dismissing it as a small percentage, without even bothering to check the actual numbers, is outright prideful. And it dismisses and ignores just how many people are affected by this.

At least 1 out of every 2,000 people is born intersex, if not 1 out of every 1,500. By some definitions of "intersex", more than 1 out of every 100 people is born intersex!

That means there are at least 157,000 intersex people in the the USA alone, and probably more. (That's with the lowball estimate. If you count 1 of every 100, that's 3,140,000 intersex people in the USA. Not world. USA.)

Even with the lowball estimate, that's about half as many people as are members of the Presbyterian Church of America, and 5 times the number of people who are members of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church denomination. Hey, 157,000 is even more more people than are known to have neurofibromitosis. In comparison, there are an estimated 700,000 transgender people in the USA, and 3,140,000–7,850,000 homosexual. (Again, I'm working from USA numbers, here.)

When an infant is obviously intersex at birth, sex assignments can be automatic—and from first-person accounts I've read, parents aren't always informed properly, either.

Let's assume that, for those 1 in 2,000 people born intersex, doctors get the sex assignment right half the time—and ignore the detail that an intersex person who's had a sex assignment is technically transgender. That still means that a minimum of 78,500 people have been assigned the wrong sex, through no fault of their own.

That's a minimum of 78,500 souls in the United states alone that can legitimately qualify as transexual or homosexual for physical biological reasons that even the most conservative Christian should accept.

That's nice. But what about the millions who don't have that excuse?

First, before I offend anyone further, I need to point out that I am quoting the conservative Christian standpoint, here. If you are not a conservative Christian, I expect you to disagree and to not abide by the scruples of a conservative Christian. (I would actually find it really weird if you did agree with the reasoning I'm laying out, here.)

Seriously, expecting someone to abide by the standards of your faith—whatever that faith is—just "Because it's right" is one of the idiotic things that makes a person come across as a hateful, spiteful bigot, even if they mean well. Even Jesus bothered to, well, help the adulterous woman brought out for stoning, and chat with the Samaritan woman at the well, and guided the conversation into pertinent openings to instruct them in what to do from there.

He didn't walk up to them and say, "You're living in adultery! That's evil and wicked, and you need stop now!" That's the argumentative equivalent of telling a kid to stay away from a fire "Because I said so!" Sure, the fire will eventually hurt the kid, even if they're careful and think they know what they're doing (because it'll dry their skin out). But the kid enjoys the fire, liking the warmth or thinking it looks intriguing, so you have to give them a reason to trust and believe you before you can expect them to heed you over what their own senses are telling them ("It's so pleasant and fun and won't hurt you if you handle it properly.")

Since that "Because I said so!" method doesn't work on even small children, why does anyone expect it to work with adults?

I am admittedly concerned about the commonality of homosexuality, but that's due to Romans 1:26–27, which calls the desire for the same binary gender a sign of God's wrath/judgment on a nation (not individual). Do I believe the practice of homosexuality is a sin? Yes—but homosexuality is listed with things like lying, murder, fornication, idolatry, adultery, stealing, envy, drunkenness, and extortion (I Timothy 1:9–10, I Corinthians 6:9–10—all sins that Christians can experience and struggle with and still be Christian (I Corinthians 6:11).

Wait—what's my point?

My point is that everyone has their failings, and everyone has sins they're prone to.

The nature vs. nurture debate is irrelevant to a Christian. I've grown up being told to my face that I can't be telling the truth even when I am, which led to some years of me intentionally, habitually lying, because I was going to be accused of it, anyway. Whether those lies stem from biology or conditioning is irrelevant in the face of lies being of the devil, according to my faith. No matter how or why my childhood habit of lying (which I worked myself out of years ago) developed, I was still responsible for those lies—and even now, if I admit to that old failing or see someone who remembers it, I have to deal with the consequences of having been a onetime habitual liar.

(I believe one of the causes of the original accusations is my memory can be a bit delayed. If you ask me if I did something this morning, my memory's equally likely to not remember that I did it or to remember a time I did it two weeks ago as if it happened in the past 24 hours—so I not infrequently might give one answer, then say "Wait…" and try to puzzle it out. Due to some changes in my life that are resolving the causes for that, it's getting better, but it's still "off".)

So maybe a Christian lusts after someone of their own binary gender—or maybe they lust after all/any genders. So what? That's no different from a Christian being predisposed to drunkenness, jealousy, idolatry, or breaking one of the other commands, such as those found in the Ten Commandments.

• If a person claims to be Christian and abide by the Bible as God's word, then accepting those commands logically ensues. We all are imperfect and will fail sometimes, but we'll at least attempt to obey.
• If a person doesn't claim to be Christian, then the Bible's commands are irrelevant to them, from their perspective, and expecting them to abide by Scripture is ridiculous.
• If a person claims to be Christian then ignores parts of the Bible for whatever reason, then that can be problematic. Why they ignore certain parts of the Bible and how they chose what to keep and what to ditch? It's an awkward situation that necessarily indicates that God's too ineffectual to protect His word, and that humans are so much smarter than He is, which means He's ineffectual. And there isn't really any reason to follow an ineffectual god.

No matter your perspective, retorting "You're wrong!" isn't going to open an intelligent, reasonable discussion—and again, the only people I can recall Scriptural precedent of Jesus outright rebuking from the get-go are the people who knew better (like the Pharisees).

So what's my point of speaking on this as a writer?

So I'm starting to be bothered by the fact that I'm willing to write murderers and thieves and adulterers and yet shy from writing someone who isn't heteronormative. It's inconsistent of me—hypocritical, in a sense—and I don't like it.

I don't write to reflect life as the Christian ideal, but as what it is, and how everyone's struggling in their own fashion. Cherry-picking specific faults while ignoring others entirely is downright cruel of me.

I honestly started thinking about this back when working on A Fistful of Earth, when I was writing scene where Lallie's taking Aidan and Evonalé to the river crossing. Their trip through dockside (the part of Saf near the docks—so the northeast part of town) would of course encounter more rowdiness than they were used to seeing. I started writing a heteronormative pair, then realized that changing it would give another peek at how sheltered Evonalé has been.

But one…well, problem with writing a homosexual MC is that I would show problems with it, like I show problems with everything else (because everything humans fiddle with is necessarily imperfect). Homosexuality is prosecuted and vilified so much already that I fear that any such work won't be able to be received in the spirit I intend it.

I've been harassed for merely suggesting I might be asexual, and that's an acceptable orientation under conservative Christian theology. I'm physically attractive and apparently have an appealing personality—both things that some others have used as "proof" that I can't be an aro ace. (Don't ask me how others' attraction to me has anything whatsoever to do with my attraction to others.)

I'm certain other orientations get treated worse. I don't want to contribute to harassment of others.

Are you telling me you're going to start writing protagonists who aren't straight?

No, I'm telling you that I may possibly do so in the future—and if I do, it's a comparable choice to writing murderers, liars, and thieves.

And like any of my work, it would be up to you if you're going to be interested in reading it or not.

Have you noticed the aromanticism and asexuality in my work? What are your thoughts on genetics and how those affect attraction?

—Misti

When Your Body Betrays You

I had four migraines last week. I'm still having dizzy spells.

This is despite the feverfew and sunglasses and excessive use of antihistamine. I even have a very good idea what's been causing the migraines, since I also have had severe sinus pressure and the pollen count's on the high end. (Though not actually high, which has me realizing that 10-months-of-grass-pollen South Carolina likely isn't the best place for me to live. But that's another issue.)

On the bright side, a few other (unexpected but problematic) health things are now under control or stopped altogether by a single (fortunately inexpensive) medication. So that's nice.

The health stuff is a pain, literally and figuratively. It interferes with my life, giving me less time to get anything done, and I actually dropped and broke something on Saturday. I was probably slept a good % of my work hours, last week.

Time management. This is why I like timers, to catch me when I'm distracted.

But even then, I feel as if my to-do list is growing faster than I can get it done. It's temporary, I know, and everything will get done (just maybe not as quickly as I like), and it's doable, but I'm praying to God that I can be unusually efficient, today. Because it'll make my life a lot easier if I can tune out the raw throat and ears and occasional wobble of the room.

Again, doable, but I'm getting so frustrated about it that I'm having trouble doing it.

But the problems aren't even serious, really. Just a bunch of little things that affect my life and that I have to cope with.

And they can be coped with or treated. It's just a matter of figuring out that treatment. Pau d'arco, for example, is helping with the remaining allergies. (Just realized that I forgot to put some lemon juice in the last batch. I'll have to fix that.)

That puts me at an advantage over many people, and many writers have health problems that make it difficult to have other work. Poor Holly Lisle has essentially untreatable virtigo and migraines. Kristine Kathryn Rusch and her husband, Dean Wesley Smith, have health issues of their own.

In a sense, the nature of writing and other creative industries can suit those of us with unsteady health. It gives us the ability to flex with the bad days, while also giving us material and incentive to take advantage of on the good days.

But the thing about bad days…they really make you appreciate the good ones more. I suspect that Scripture writer Paul's "thorn in the flesh" (II Cor 12:7–9) is much of why he accomplished so much.

And to look at me, you often wouldn't even think me sick at all. Likely a mite strange, if you caught me at a time when I was wearing sunglasses indoors, but I look healthy. Enviably so, with how little I am (in bone, height, and weight). A good friend of mine has neurofibromitosis (NF), a condition that means a bunch of benign tumors are growing throughout her body. Another good friend knows her, knows she has NF, knows what NF is…and actually didn't realize that meant she had those tumors before I pointed it out. (Which cleared some things up.)

There are so many people with essentially "invisible" thorns in their flesh, where people ridicule them, call them lazy, harass them because they look fine. If you don't know what you're seeing. Or if you are looking at the wrong things.

(I have a fast metabolism, and one of my friends fights anorexia. Our "enviable" thinness is actually a bad sign. Fortunately, we know other people who are aware of that and comment when we've lost weight, so we can promptly seek to put it back on. There is a reason my MCs are often on the too-thin side…)

If you're such a person—or if you want to better understand such deceptively healthy-looking people, check out ButYouDon'tLookSick, a website and community developed by such people, for such people. Because we need support, sometimes.

(I'm so allergic to strawberries that I react just from trace amounts in the air. Sadly, many people can know but not actually realize that until they bring a strawberry salad somewhere I am and, without even seeing the strawberries, I'm promptly running out the door into the grass-filled outside (which I'm also highly allergic to, but better to risk a migraine than to be unable to breathe).

One benefit to attending a small church with a lot of folks with allergies: Enough people understand, know, and remember enough about my allergies to give me heads-up. ("Don't go downstairs to the potluck! I'll make you a plate. You can have taco, right, as long as I make sure there's no tomato?" [And don't ask me how these people remember. There are so many allergies in my small church, that if you make anything, at least one person in the church can't eat it. That includes the Communion bread.])

In any event, I try to look at it as evidence of how we're all different. God made me (and everyone else) the way He did for a reason. At least it gives me good fodder to mine when writing my stories, to try to make sure my characters have a variety of issues and strengths.

Are there health issues, visible or invisible, that you suffer from, fear, respect? Are you familiar with ButYouDon'tLookSick?

—Misti

News on A Fistful of Earth + some author recs

A day late (but hopefully not a dollar short), here's the announcement I didn't get to make yesterday:

The e-ARC is out for A Fistful of Earth, for those who participated in the Kickstarter campaign!

What's that mean for those of you who weren't around or who were unable to participate? The official e-book should be out soon—"soon" meaning "in the next two weeks".

And with that, the POD books will also be coming out. I'm working the kinks out of A Fistful of Fire now, which gives me the template for formatting the POD for A Fistful of Earth, too.

So, here we are! Despite so many delays that I am downright embarrassed, the end is at hand! (And I will not run a Kickstarter for an incomplete book again, until I get a better handle on how long it actually takes me to finish a rough draft, rather than just math based in how quickly I'm capable of finishing a rough draft.)

Thanks for bearing with me!

On other, sort-of-related news, Lindsay Buroker (Emperor's Edge series: steampunk fantasy), Seanan McGuire (October Daye series: urban fantasy), and Shanna Swendson (Katie Chandler series: chick lit fantasy) all had books release recently, all of which I highly recommend. (I think there's a theme going on…)

If y'all want me into go into more detail than "I liked 'em. If the blurb interests you, you should like them, too," I will, but I'll say this much about those authors: Despite getting several books into all three series, I find the most recent books just as good if not better than the predecessors. (In fact, I'd argue that all three series get better with every book.)

Of course, having read all those in release week (and thanks to an ARC from Lindsay, I read that one pre–release week…), I'm now chomping at the bit for more.

What about you? Do you have any books or series that you're eager to see continued or eager to read?

—Misti

To Penname or Not to Penname?

A lot of writers angst over how many pennames they should use, or even if they should use one to begin with.

(Yeah, my post has such an original title. I know.)

/dry tone

So why might an author use a penname, a pseudonym, a name other than their* own to grace that gem they've written?

• Their name is common enough that they will have problems differentiating themselves from the others with that name.
• Their name is uncommon enough that nobody will be able to spell, remember, or pronounce the name.
• Their name doesn't match their genre, like an author of chick lit romance named Marc MacRobertson. (Note that I'm counting name type and gender under the same point, here.)
• They don't want their writing career to potentially interfere with their day-to-day life, sometimes because they write in a genre some object to (erotica?) or due to how employers or clients will view their writing (like a doctor writing medical thrillers).
• They want to protect their privacy. (This has been called a "silly" reason by some folks, claiming that anybody can find an author's legal name after a few minutes with Google. That isn't necessarily true. Find mine.)
• They want to escape some bad sales numbers or reputation they've developed under their previous name.
• They want to attempt a new genre or publishing method without affecting their career in another genre. (Example: A traditionally published author of children's fantasy might decide to self-publish adult mystery stories under another name, to avoid potential issues with their publisher.)
• Their contract might contain a nasty non-compete clause** that prevents them from publishing anything in a remotely similar genre or even under the same name for an extended period, forcing them to use a penname if they want to keep the bills paid.
• They might want to avoid the stigma of "Fast writing = crap."
• Their name might be built as their "brand", so stretching into a different genre or type of writing means creating another "brand" name.
• They don't want readership to accidentally cross-pollinate, between the two. (For an example, keep reading. For some of my work, this is me.)
• They want to clearly delineate their different work to make it easy for folks who want to stick to one type of story to do so. (Also me.)

Why might an author not use a penname?

• None of the above reasons apply or matter to them.
• They feel that the "brand" of their name is them, not a specific genre or writing type, and that's more important to them than splitting themselves up into multiple identities for easy classification.†

If you've checked out my website at all, you may have noticed that "Misti Wolanski" is my penname. It's probably more accurate to call it my "Internet identity" or "Doing Business As (DBA) name". I use it so much that I probably get called "Misti" more often than I get called by my legal name. (My legal name is one of those odd rare ones that you've probably heard of, though likely not with my spelling. Even if you know my first and last name, you'll get a mere handful of hits on Google.)

I've never wondered, "Do I stop using my penname?" No. I'm not writing under my legal name. I don't want to. My name gets slaughtered enough in person, thanks, and I like my privacy.

No, I've pondered, "Should I use another penname for my adult fiction?"

See, I have some works in progress (WiPs) that enter "Every character's a sociopath" territory. Some of these stories, my friends have actually confessed to being a bit scared just hearing about them. I don't want some teenager who's comfortable with the dark undercurrents in A Fistful of Fire to pick up one of these completely dark, humorless, more gruesome titles and have nightmares. I mean, these things creep me out! (If you're familiar with the Bible, think along the lines of, er, Judges.)

Then again, my Darkworld titles get… gruesome, for some folks. And even the more light-toned Aleyi titles touch on such themes as insanity.

But that's the distinction, I guess. These adult WiPs are darker than my YA+ titles. More psychological. More disturbing. More graphic. (Though in a minimalistic graphic way.) Between that darkness and the detail that I also work as "Misti Wolanski," I'm thinking it likely wouldn't be the brightest business move to release psychotic titles under the same name.

Particularly when some of those planned psychotic stories will also cross into politics. But then, I've been looking into entering that more as a freelancer, too, so that's not a good reason for using another penname.

As you might guess from my use of the same name for my YA fiction and my freelancing, I don't really believe that "Using the same name for different types of works dilutes your brand" argument. As I pointed out to Kristine Kathryn Rusch in an e-mail: "Your works all interest the same writer, so why is it such a surprise when they interest the same readers?"

(A little background: I found Rusch originally from one of her few Star Trek novels; years later, I was browsing my library's limited adult fantasy collection and happened upon the first Fey novel, and that name recognition made me try it out despite the cover. I liked Sacrifice enough that I sought the author out online, which is how I found the blogs of she and her husband, Dean Wesley Smith—and I have yet to encounter a title of Ms. Rusch's that I haven't enjoyed reading. And that includes the cute paranormal romances she writes under the Kristine Grayson penname.)

Sure, some readers don't pay attention and will flip out when they don't receive what they thought they were buying. But some readers flipped out over that Homecoming graphic novel that Patricia Briggs released, too, because they were expecting a novel—despite the detail that it was clearly marked as a graphic novel everywhere you looked. That misunderstanding was their fault, not Patricia Briggs's.

Some folks will misunderstand you no matter what you do to prevent it.

So reader confusion isn't that big a deal, in my book, and the assumption that readers won't cross-pollinate is also silly. (Not that every reader will cross-pollinate, but some will.)

But for some stories, I actually don't want my readers to be able to easily cross-pollinate. Adult readers? Sure. Mature teens who like thrillers and horror movies? Okay, if your parents are okay with it, too. Your average teen? Absolutely not.

So I've decided to use another penname when I do release adult titles. (By the way, I always suspected that I might end up using at least one other penname, which is why I use that "Carradee" handle everywhere.)

Also, some readers won't cross-pollinate. They won't want to. So while "Misti Wolanski" is a name that might release anything from a non-fiction how-to article to a fantasy movie script to a YA novel, everything under this name will be… me, balanced. There won't be dark without light. There won't be grim or serious without humor.

Stories that are skewed (or in usually male genres), will have other pennames. In those cases, though, I plan to openly link my names. Just not the names for my psychotic stories or the ones for which I'm not in the intended audience.

(Note: If you are trying to decide if you want to use a penname, check with your local laws: country, state, municipal, etc. I don't have to register a DBA name. You might.)

What are your thoughts? Do you use a penname? Can you think of a reason for using a penname that I missed?

—Carradee (AKA "Misti")

*There are historic linguistic grounds for using they as both a plural and singular pronoun, so I'm using it.

**Beware of non-compete clauses. Seriously. Beware. Get pro legal help (which I'm not) to deal with them. Maybe the horror stories are rare; maybe not. I've heard them since I was in high school, and between freelancing and short story markets, I've seen enough nasty rights-grabbing contracts to suspect that more writers have fallen prey to bad non-compete clauses than are willing to openly admit it.

†This I-am-my-brand thing is why I'm even willing to write book reviews, positive and negative, under my author name. It's also why I've been reluctant to pull out another penname.††

††No, I am not intentionally channeling Robin McKinley's blog style.

On Dreaming Small

I've always thought of myself as realistic. I had some "impossible" dreams when growing up, but I only ever halfheartedly attempted to accomplish them, because I knew they were impossible. Just my imagination running wild.

I ideally wanted to earn money from home, writing my own fiction—or from editing others' books, preferably fiction. I had some age goals that I missed, but I didn't try to hit them, either. I worked on my ability, only halfheartedly submitting my work anywhere. I assumed I was too young to be any good at it.

So I dreamed of making money writing and proofreading/copyediting from home, and thereby blundered into the joys of freelancing through happenstance I can only thank God for.

And I tumbled into that dream before I'd even left my teens. Then discovered from a local company that I was better at proofreading than folks who were older and had more credentials, the year I was old enough to legally drink alcohol.

So I developed another dream. I saw the possibilities in self-publishing (particularly e-books) years ago, and I kept an eye on POD and e-publishing. I dreamt of a day when self-publishing would be affordable.

That dream's now here, too.

And I'm currently editing fiction regularly as part of my day job—something I'd once never thought would happen, since I couldn't afford to take an internship at some press.

So here I am, coming up on my 25th year, and I've accomplished all my dreams but making a living from fiction writing.

And I wasn't even trying all that hard.

How much could I have gotten done if I'd tried? Even this past year, I spent entire weeks sick and unable to work, but I got so much done.

I don't want to look back on the latter half of my twenties and wonder what on earth I did, those years.

Lord willing, I have years ahead of me. I keep working at it, and I'll eventually earn money—even an income!—from writing fiction.

It's time to dream bigger.

But my habit of dreaming small is hindering me. A 6-figure income by age 30, or 3 concurrent titles on the NYT bestseller list, are dreams I develop, then wave away. They're too insane. (What would I do with all that money, anyway?)

I can't help but feel that it'll do me good to keep them in mind, though.

Even if the only dream I can bring myself to reach for is a dream of earning enough passive income from fiction by age 26 to comfortably pay my bills. ("Passive income" meaning "royalties".)

At least I'm reaching.

What are your dream accomplishments? (Remember, "dreams" are things you can't control.)

—Misti

Where Are the Genetic Diseases in Fiction?

Two weeks ago, I talked about the different kinds of allergies, how they work, and their conflict potential. Genetic diseases are another area that doesn't often make an appearance, except for maybe the occasional high-profile condition, but there are far more types of genetic conditions than autism and Down's syndrome.

(Alert to the queasy: biology talk ahead.)

There's a condition that means you have to stay healthy and avoid infections, else risk gangrene and amputation (diabetes). There's a condition that mean a bunch of benign tumors grow throughout your body, which can destroy tissue and turn malignant at any time (neurofibromatoses, NF). There's a condition that means you have to carefully watch your diet or else you'll end up with brain damage (phenylketonuria, PCU).

I haven't even scratched the surface.

You might know I'm a proofreader. What you might not know is that proofreaders also tend to be good at genetics, and vice versa. My original career plan was to become a research geneticist as a day job, while I wrote fantasy on the side.

See, I have a genetic disorder.

Oh, I look normal. Put me beside just about anybody, compare how much I eat to what I weigh, and I'll seem enviably healthy. Okay, so I have to watch the ingredients in what I eat, and I sometimes wear sunglasses inside to nip a migraine in the bud, but no biggie. Lots of women have allergy and migraine problems.

You know your endocrine system? The one that makes and regulates the hormones, that keep the rest of your body in order?

My endocrine system can't even manage itself.

The condition I have is misnamed, presumed rare, and often described incorrectly. It's either insulin resistance that causes the endocrine problems, or endocrine problems that cause the insulin resistance. Doctors keep changing their minds. (Insulin resistance is what causes adult-onset diabetes. That means anyone with my condition is probably prediabetic, too.)

What I have is PCOS, PolyCystic Ovarian Syndrome. And according to a study done more than 5 years ago, 5-10% of women have it, and it's genetic. Guys can have it, too (though the study didn't specify what guys' symptoms were.) And doctors still call it rare.

The problem stems from genetic expressivity and penetrance. You can have the genes for something that doesn't actually show up. You might have the gene that says "Add another finger and/or toe", but it won't necessarily penetrate. So you won't have that extra toe that your uncle had.

Once a condition does penetrate, it may not be 100% expressive, meaning it might show up to different degrees. If you cross a pea plant with red flowers with a pea plant with white flowers, you'll get a pea plant with a specific shade of pink flowers. But if that flower color gene were less than 100% expressive, you might end up with different shades of pink.

PCOS (and many other conditions) are not 100% expressive, and they possibly might not completely penetrate, either. That's why diagnosis and treatment are such a nightmare.

So now doctors say women can have the cysts on the ovaries without having PCOS, and completely ignore the variety of symptoms that can stem from having a messed-up endocrine system. I was diagnosed by doctors researching my condition. Since then, I've had more than one endocrinologist be skeptical—even though I have symptoms like metabolism trouble. My metabolism's just hyperactive; usually the metabolism is hypoactive.

In other words, most women with PCOS have very slow metabolisms. That's why they struggle to lose weight. My metabolism's overactive; I have to fight to maintain my weight. Imagine having to eat even when you're not hungry—and having to buy enough food to feed someone 2-3 times your weight. It gets expensive.

Endocrinologists are skeptical and won't admit I have it, these days, because I never had my testosterone levels checked—even though I have particular symptoms of elevated testosterone levels. (You know those big hairy women who were shown off in freak circuses, once upon a time? High testosterone. Fortunately, most of us with the condition aren't that furry.)

I also started getting hot flashes when I was 20 years old. That isn't a typo. A few years ago, at the end of a hot flash, I lost my cold sensation. I can detect cold, I get goosebumps and shivers from getting too cold, but I don't feel cold, myself.

Imagine discovering you're cold because you realize your feet are numb and your toenails are turning blue. It's kind of scary.

The loss of cold sensation may not be related to the PCOS, though I think it is. The hot flashes? Definitely related. (If you get hot flashes, try putting an ice brick on the back of your neck the next time one flares. If one isn't available, sticking your head in the freezer also helps, but it probably isn't very good for you.)

I'm not saying all this to complain. I'm used to my body, so it doesn't seem so bad to me as it does to someone else. I'd rather have my condition than NF. My friend with NF would rather have her condition than mine.

I'm saying all this to point out that genetic conditions, like allergies, have variety and implications that can make your story all the richer.

Does your teen girl with PCU drink the diet soda because she thinks it'll help her lose weight, even though she knows the aspartame is poisoning her neural system? Does your character with NF envy her healthy sisters and daughter because the tumors have misshaped her face, making her feel ugly?

What's your favorite example of a character with a genetic condition? Have you written any characters with genetic conditions?

Personally, I like Graysha Brady-Phillips in Shivering World by Kathy Tyers. Graysha's genetic disease is slowly killing her, it limits what she can do, and it affects the entire story—but only because it's an integral part of who she is.

—Misti

Where Are the Allergies in Fiction?

Allergies are greatly underrepresented in fiction.

On one hand, I can understand why. Many folks don't have any allergies and therefore know little about them. (I'll distinguish contact allergy, allergy, and intolerance in a minute, but right now I'm referring to all three. And if biology talk makes you queasy, you should probably stop reading, now.)

On the other hand, allergies add another layer of realism and potential conflict to a story. In the rare event that you do see an allergy in a story, it's either a fantasy creature's sensitivity (like silver burning werewolves), or full-blown anaphylaxis (windpipe closing up) from sesame seeds or peanuts. But people can be allergic to anything, and there are many different types of allergies and reactions—and then there are intolerances and contact allergies, which are entirely different ball games but can be just as problematic.

Many folks can be excused for not thinking of this topic, but not me. I had friends and family with severe allergies long before I developed any of my own.

I first started developing allergies about 7 years ago, with a stressful… situation… that essentially shut down the portion of my adrenal gland that protects against the development of allergies. My adrenal gland still isn't functioning right, and as a result, I have a huge list of allergens (things I react to).

An Incomplete List of What Misti Reacts to:

• grass
• acetaminophen (Tylenol)
• mold
• stevia (the natural sweetener)
• strawberries
• tea tree oil
• nitrile (the common latex-free gloves)
• rice
• eggs
• almonds
• …

And yes, that's an incomplete list. Some of those are allergies, some are contact allergies, and some are intolerances.

Some things, like antibacterial soap and spring flowers, always gave me a hint of trouble. There's one soap in particular that's always made my skin itch. Spring flowers always made my nose itch to sniff them. Now, even minor exposure to one of them causes cracking skin or full-body itching.

The thing is, those are my skin reacting, not my immune system, so those aren't "allergies" in the "Call the allergist!" sense. "Contact allergy" is a good way to describe those; my reaction happens upon contact—but even a contact allergy can be serious. I can't even be in the same room as strawberries without the traces in the air irritating the interior of my windpipe, which makes breathing uncomfortable, even painful. It isn't anaphylaxis, because my windpipe doesn't actually swell (or at least the allergist told me it doesn't). But it still interferes with my breathing, and the reaction won't go away without antihistamine help.

If I touch tea tree oil, my skin peels off—but tea tree oil is a fantastic antibacterial and antifungal, even better than vinegar. My mom sometimes uses it for disinfectant. I live with my parents. You can imagine that I'm very careful with spray bottles that have homemade contents. Usually, they're vinegar. But sometimes… (Oh, and castor oil causes the same thing for her, so I have to be careful about the special antibiotic-free soaps I buy.)

Allergists enter the picture for what could be called "true" allergies, when your immune system attacks the allergen in your system. Such allergies usually get worse upon repeated exposure, though it's possible in some cases to retrain your immune system to accept the allergen. That's the premise behind allergy shots: load up the allergy sufferer with antihistamines and trace amounts of the thing they react to; the antihistamine will keep the person from reacting (much) to the allergen, teaching the immune system that the allergen is okay.

But allergies aren't something to take lightly, even when your reaction's mild. If you ignore the allergy, it might go away, but it's far more likely to get worse. Reactions can include itchy skin, hives, swelling, dizziness, headaches, seizures—as well as other weird things you wouldn't expect. I used to know a girl whose brain swelled upon exposure to her allergens, which was murder on her equilibrium, among other things.

That brings us to intolerances, things that the body can't process properly. These will build up in your system and get worse if you keep eating/touching/encountering them, but once the thing you react to is out of your system, you'll be back to normal. Your reaction won't be any worse if you react to it, recover, then react to the same amount of it again.

Often, an intolerance causes pain that's resolved by expulsion (vomiting and/or the runs), though sometimes it's just pain. (Imagine sharp stones are bouncing around in your stomach whenever you move. That's how I feel for a full day after eating a mouthful of rice; day 2 is a severe but tolerable stomachache; day 3 is back to normal.) But intolerances can also cause reactions like arthritic symptoms and general fatigue.

As an added bonus that an author can play with, there are also psychosomatic allergies. These happen when someone's so afraid of something that they'll react when they expect to, say if they taste it (even if that taste is imitation) or see it (without realizing that it's fake).

I've been accused of being psychosomatic, but there are two problems with that theory.

1. I react even when I don't know my allergens are present. If I were psychosomatic, I'd see the item, then react, not start reacting and have to wonder what on earth is going on.
2. I don't react to artificial versions even when I've tasted the flavor and am worrying about allergen exposure. If I were psychosomatic, I'd react even to artificial and imitation versions. I eat strawberry Twizzlers just fine.

See? I have no excuse for not writing characters with allergies. I know so much about them. I pop homeopathic antihistamine pills up to 6 times a day. *takes one* (This stuff works great, by the way. Conventional antihistamines suck; they only last me a week, tops, before they stop working.)

I was musing on this earlier this year, trying to figure out where to fit the different types of reactions into my stories. I realized…

I'd written a character with a food sensitivity into Destiny's Kiss without even realizing it. The character has hints of the allergy in the book, if you're familiar with the particular sensitivity s/he has.

No. I'm not telling you who it is; that would spoil the fun. I will say that it isn't the narrator, and it's looking like she won't discover that this character's an allergy sufferer until book 3.

But I'm also concentrating, now, and making sure I consider my characters' allergies, contact allergies, and intolerances when I write. There's so much untapped room for allergy conflict outside of the "Oh, noes! Hero's throat swells shut from one of the most common allergies! How original!" I look forward to exploring it.

Who's your favorite character with an intolerance or allergy? Have you written characters with intolerances or allergies?

—Misti

Rudeness Is Intention, Not Action

It seems like a lot of people have a set belief that X action is rude, and they're quick to call out others for it. Shoot, I've even alerted others that something they said could be interpreted as rude, in a way I found polite, only to have someone else scold me.

But this isn't (exactly) about me. This is about what I've noticed in life.

I've noticed that rudeness is relative.

For some people, in some cultures—even in some parts of the USA—any kind of bluntness is rude. If you don't couch everything in a sweet cutesy "politeness", you're unspeakably rude. But for others, that insincere nicety is rude.

If your hair looks like a crow's nest, I'm one of those people who's naturally inclined to say as much. I've learned to adjust it to something more innocuous, like "How was your morning?", which can get the full story of you didn't sleep well and woke up late and didn't get a chance to brush your hair. (Or that you got a new hair stylist, which might get me asking who just so I can avoid that person.)

But don't expect me to feed you what you want to hear. If your hair's a mess, and you're looking for someone to deny it, I'm the wrong person to talk to for moral support. Even if I get the clue (which is unlikely), I find dishonesty rude. So if you say "My hair looks terrible," I'll agree and remind you that you can brush it later, not soothe your pride.

I live in the southeastern United States, a part of the country renowned for its "hospitality" (meaning the cultural norm is to be sugary sweet to your face, no matter what's said behind your back). You might suspect that my bluntness costs me friends.

Actually not. I have a lot of friends, and I get along with a lot of people. (Probably in part because I'm as willing to volunteer "That color likes you" as I am to give a forthright opinion when addressed.) From others' comments, I really think that "rudeness" and "politeness" have more to do with intention than action.

See, I've been told by some folks that they stopped thinking me rude when they realized I expected them to speak to me the same way I spoke to them.

What is rudeness but treating others in a way you would never allow yourself to be treated?

What is politeness but treating others the way you want them to treat you?

Thoughts?

—Misti

ETA: Just realized that this headache is actually a budding migraine, so please let me know if something doesn't quite make sense. (I only started getting migraines this year, and I'm the only one in my family who gets them, so I'm still working on recognizing the warning signs.)

5 Reasons You Want Harsh Reviews: How to Take Negative Reviews (3 of 3)

Wait wait wait—you want harsh reviews? Harsh reviews?

Yes, you do. Even if you can't handle reading them. You want harsh reviews, be they earned, partially earned, or entirely unearned.

Ask me why. *waits*

Glad you asked. The reasons are fivefold:

1. Harsh reviews balance the effervescent ones. You know that gushing 5-star review from your MMO guildmate that you just know people are assuming came from your sister?** (Especially if you don't have a sister.) A harsh review provides a dissenting opinion, letting folks consider the feedback and decide what matters to them.
2. Harsh reviews help you nail your target audience. Oh, I'm sure you think you know who your target audience is, but there's nothing like a harsh review to make you realize that a particular type of person is not part of it. Or maybe that there's a disconnect between what you're writing and the audience you intended to reach.
3. Harsh reviews can help you grow as a writer. A harsh review can be like a highly critical critique partner, except the space constraints generally force the reviewer to focus more on big-picture issues than getting hung up on the details. Like any critique partner, the critic won't always be right; sometimes they'll attribute a problem to the wrong source, or they'll be entirely off-base about a problem. But sometimes they'll be spot-on.
4. Harsh reviews can strengthen you. I don't just mean as a writer; I've already addressed that. I mean as a person. Nobody likes accepting blame, but forcing yourself to evaluate negative feedback for the germs of truth that might be buried within it can help you handle mistakes you make in life, too.
5. Harsh reviews provide you with resource material. If you have the nerve to study them, even a troll can provide handy content for you to pull from the next time you need to make a complete donkey of a character. I honestly used to beg for flames when I was a teenager; they were so inspiring.

Now, I'm aware that some people are so depressed by a single harsh review that they'll mope and fret over it and possibly ruin their writing trying to make that single reviewer happy. Don't do that.

There's a secret to being able to handle harsh reviews: You can't make everyone happy.

Got that? You cannot and will not make everyone happy, even in your target audience.

A good friend and I have similar tastes in reading: we both like particular story types, genres, and plot elements. You would think that we share favorite authors.

We don't. In fact, we generally hate each other's favorite books. She loves Vicki Peterson; I prefer Patricia Briggs.

It's taken many attempts to read each others' favorite authors and more discussions on the matter for us to realize: We like different writing styles. On a technical level, something between Vicki Peterson and Patricia Briggs makes each of us love one and dislike the other. Both are fantasy authors who write snarky characters, subtle development, and great humor.

My friend isn't a writer. Okay, so she dabbles with writing, but she's actually an artist. Her paintings are gorgeous.

Imagine if we both were giving feedback to some poor writer. As soon as one of us was elated about a story, the other would go "Meh" or "Ulgh." That writer would have to pick and choose which pieces of our advice to listen to.

Remember: You will not please everyone. Don't try to.

Have you ever entered the "Please everyone" trap?

—Misti

**If you're reading this, Shallon, I do love getting your reviews. I just know that some folks don't take 'em seriously.

A Case Study on Earned Critique: How to Take Negative Reviews (2 of 3)

Some of y'all might remember my post on why I pulled my self-published short "Butterfly Boots". The long answer went into my exposure to fan fiction vignettes and international literature making me produce something that didn't fit my audience.

The short answer? I screwed up.

Now, I realize most of you haven't read "Butterfly Boots", but that shouldn't be necessary. My 2 critical reviewers kindly gave me permission to reproduce their reviews here.

This is a Real Story? July 13, 2011

[by Michael P. Gallagher]

I'm not really sure what this was, although I do know I was struggling to figure out what was going on while reading it - and when the ending came I mentally said, "huh?" This something really had no plot, no beginning, and no end. It's almost as if someone just cut and paste a section from something and slapped it into an eBook.

I found it ironic, and chuckled a little, at the end of the story: there is a brief snippet on the author and it says the author is described as a person that "...took her a while to figure out that `finish a story' thing." No kidding. Can I have my five minutes back?

As I type this review, this book is free in the Amazon Kindle store but that shouldn't make you want to try it - there are several hundred short stories for free right now (just type in "short story" as your search term in the Kindle store section of the Amazon website, and sort from lowest to highest price); most of them are pretty good. This one deserves a wide berth, free or not.

Well... the cover is pretty... July 15, 2011

[by Betty Dravis]

I like the cover and the title of this "little offering," so thought it would be a fun read, one that I could pass on to my granddaughter Melissa's mother to read to her. She loves butterflies and has some cute boots of her own.

I've been warned that some E-books are not up to industry standards and can slip between the cracks easily, but this is the first time I've encountered one. Well, I have seldom been so disappointed in a book. It actually doesn't make much sense, which is too bad because the germ of an interesting idea is here... It is just not developed; the dialogue is jerky, it has no structure, and the punctuation is definitely not up to par. :-(

I hate to look a gift horse in the face (since "Butterfly Boots" - a short story (Aleyi) (Tales from Aleyi) was one of the FREE Kindle offerings), but I simply can't give this a good rating. I'm sorry to be so critical, but I will be happy to read something else by Ms. Wolanski after she takes a few more writing courses. She does, indeed, have a good imagination. :-)

Reviewed by Betty Dravis, July 15, 2011
Author of E-book "1106 Grand Boulevard" and other books

Now, before anyone jumps in and calls these two "mean," remember what I said in my last post, about bluntness not necessarily being mean.

Looking into these reviewers, I find it interesting to note that they're both significantly older than I am. I doubt they read fan fiction, where vignettes are popular. In fact, just the complaints on the lack of structure told me that these two weren't familiar with the vignette form of writing. My first impulse was therefore to dismiss their critique, because "Butterfly Boots" was a vignette.

But, after letting the sting subside, I gave "Butterfly Boots" another hard look. Yes, it was exactly what I'd meant it to be. Yes, it was a vignette. Yes, vignettes aren't a standard literature form (in English, anyway).

…And I had set "Butterfly Boots" up everywhere as a short story. Not vignette. Short story.

That's like calling first person POV "stream of consciousness". Yes, there are come similarities, and yes, they're related, sort of—but they aren't the same thing. Not at all.

I had screwed up.

I faced a choice. I could repair all the blurbs and descriptions everywhere for "Butterfly Boots" and still frustrate those readers who don't know what a "vignette" is supposed to be. Or I could pull "Butterfly Boots" until I had something more significant to pair it with. As a vignette, it didn't make much sense if you weren't already familiar with the world of Aleyi.

So why on earth had I released it as a stand-alone, a free introduction to my world? I have no clue. I've done stupider things, but I like to think that most of them haven't been as public.

At any rate, I therefore decided to pull "Butterfly Boots" until I could stick it as a bonus with something more substantial. Some folks have expressed disappointment that it's no longer available.

Now, one line in Betty Dravis's review still does bother me: "The punctuation [in "Butterfly Boots"] is definitely not up to par." I follow the Chicago Manual of Style with one British modification that didn't show up in "Butterfly Boots"—but "Butterfly Boots" did use dialect. Professional opinions differ on how to punctuate dialect and how to use it properly.

It was tempting to privately grumble (after checking "Butterfly Boots" again) that someone obviously didn't understand proper apostrophe use with dialect. And while that might be the case, something else occurred to me: I like em dashes and ellipses.

It used to be that those symbols (and accented letters) only showed up properly online if you happened to use the HTML code that matched that special character. OtherwiseÀyour symbols got all messed up.

But web applications have improved in the past 5 years. I'd gotten lazy. I'd left the special characters in "Butterfly Boots", so it's possible that they'd messed up and caused Miss Betty's comment. Possible. That's something I can try to fix with some basic use of TextWrangler and the Find… Replace function.

So I earned those critical comments. I also suspect that some folks will consider me "unprofessional" for sharing this story.

I say "Tough." Negative reviews don't have to crush your soul. Take a deep breath and see if you can learn something from it. It may not be what the reviewer intended, but there's a lesson in that review if you care to learn it.

The line between "professional" and "unprofessional" behavior has always confused me, anyway… probably because opinions differ on where that line is…

Post 3 to come: Why you want harsh reviews.

Have you earned a critical review? How did you handle it?

—Misti

Attitude and Negative Reviews: How to Take Negative Reviews (1 of 3)

When I first started writing online, it was fan fiction, most of it in the Star Wars section on FanFiction.net. I was MistiWhitesun for quite some time, and I was a bit notorious for being "rude and a little mean".

Not that I intended to come across that way. But I didn't mind receiving forthright critical reviews, so I gave them, too. After my feedback left an in-person friend offended and hurt, I approached her to figure out why she was upset. I realized:

1. Most folks don't see 100% negative feedback as an implied positive. Me, I knew how much time that took to create, so I knew the critic had to see something worthwhile if they bothered to spend their time reviewing.
2. Folks take negatives better if you couch them between positives. Open with a positive, put the negative in the middle, and close with a positive.

Yes, I actually had to learn that. I'm from the North (of the US), a region that's renowned for being blunt. If someone doesn't like you, they're mean to your face. They aren't all sweet to your face before they backstab you with gossip later. (Yeah, I live in the South(east), now. Talk about culture shock.)

So when folks told me point-blank that a story sucked, I was more inclined to take it as honesty (as they saw it) than meanness.

I have a point to this rambling. A lot of advice online says "Don't read the negative reviews" and "If you must read them, don't reply—and definitely don't agree."

But here's the thing. Negative reviews can be anywhere. Even if you actively try to avoid them, someone will helpfully send you a link to a lackluster review. Someone will send a poorly-formatted rant into your inbox. Your fans may comment on your social media site about this terrible review that they lambasted.

You'll get negative reviews. You'll see some of them, whether you want to or not. So why not learn from them?

Think of negative reviewers as critique partners in a writing group. Some will be wrong. Some will misidentify a problem. And some will be spot on.

What if someone reads your short story and is squicked by the characters who are cousins and lovers? In some regions, that situation doesn't bat an eye. In others, it's legally incest. (And no, the Bible does not have any regulations against first cousins marrying; I mention that because some folks assume it does.)

A reader might be so grossed out by the cousin-lovers that they can't enjoy anything about the story and leave a 1-star review. They may harp on the (presumed) illegality of the relationship. They may call you a pervert and say all sorts of unnecessary things that makes your blood boil.

But what's the actual problem? They can't handle the cousin-lovers. That is not your fault.

I fail to see what's wrong about replying to that person to say "I'm sorry that those characters disgusted you so much. Just so you know, sexual relations between cousins of the first degree is legally permissible in the state of South Carolina." That way, someone else who reads the review gets both sides of the issue.

Now, what if a reader sometimes couldn't keep track of who was speaking? The reader gives the story a 1-star review, saying you don't know how to write, need to take some classes, etc.

A retort "I DO know how to write! I've written professionally for years!" wouldn't help matters. Their opinion of your writing ability isn't the problem. The problem is that one of you wasn't paying attention: either the reader missed some speech transitions, or you didn't put them in. That could be your fault.

So take another look. Maybe the reviewer is way off-base, or not your target audience—or maybe you did screw up the speech transitions. There's even a line in Black Beauty where the wrong name was attributed to the speaker in a conversation. Confused the heck out of me when I was in grade school, until I figured out what had happened.

And then there are the 1-star reviews that complain that the story was a complete waste of time. Those bite, and I've gotten two of them. (I also earned those, and we'll get into why in my next post.)

But consider: What makes someone consider something a waste of time?

When what they get doesn't match what they were expecting. And that, folks, likely is your fault. You (or your publisher) screwed up. The cover, the description, the blurb, the excerpt—something mislead the reader. The reader feels cheated, and you've wasted their time. The chances of them intentionally reading anything else you ever write are slim.

Are there exceptions? Certainly. I know some folks were furious upon getting a graphic novel when they ordered Homecoming by Patricia Briggs, even though it was clearly marked and marketed as a graphic novel. That was their fault, not the author's or publisher's.

Then there are the hateful trolling reviews that are just someone's attempt to tear you down to make themselves feel better, but we'll get into how to approach those in post 3.

Do you read your negative reviews? Why or why not? Do you respond?

—Misti

When Different Isn't Different

I'm a fan of urban fantasy. I was an adult before I discovered the genre in the form of the first Underworld movie. I'm still fond of that one—it's an urban fantasy action movie with a plot that actually makes sense—an actual blend of genres.

That genre-mixing a complaint I've heard about several movies Kate Beckinsale has starred in, actually.

A particular friend introduced me to Underworld. When Moni realized how much I liked the movie, she pointed me to the few urban fantasy authors that she knew.

From there, it didn't take long for me to realize that urban fantasy often… sounded the same. Characters would curse and often have sex on-screen. Heroines had smart mouths and kicked others' butts. Even "devout" characters wouldn't have their lives affected by their faith at all—never attended church, or thought about the theological implications of what they did beyond the occasional "Woe is me—I'm damned" character. Really old (vampire) guys would romantically interested much younger human women for no apparent reason.

Then there's young adult "urban fantasy", which is mostly all paranormal romance and has similar tropes. That really old supernatural guy will fall in love with the young narrator. Oh, and the love triangle? The "nice" guy will be the odd one out.

It's… boring.

It got old years ago.

But I keep reading urban fantasy. I enjoy the various reinterpretations of myth and lore. I like seeing effective uses of "fade to black." I want to find the devout ancient beings plagued by "Thou shalt not bear false witness" and "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." (Those are Biblical quotes, by the way: Exodus 20:16, 20:13, and 22:18.) I know other fans of the genre who like the same thing I do.

I like discovering stories that don't feel like they're following someone else's mould. But I still haven't found a series that's exactly what I want to read. I've spoken to others who feel the same way.

We discuss those clichés, those things we keep seeing in book after book after book…

I'm kinda tired of those debates, too.

I finally sat down and wrote a book that's young adult, that's urban fantasy, and that isn't "different" the same way as everyone else.

Destiny's Kiss is the politics, magic, and culture of your standard urban fantasy novel, with the teenage worries of the average young adult paranormal… and a bad boy you don't want to win.

All the early readers have told me that they love it. More than one beta has called it "unique" and said that they've "never read anything like it".

Does that mean I've succeeded in making something truly "different"? I hope so. What tropes are you tired of seeing in YA paranormal and adult "chicks in leather"?

Destiny's Kiss is currently available for $2.99 US—but it won't be at that price forever. Buy it now or try the sample before you buy it: Amazon.com, Smashwords, Barnes & Noble, or XinXii. (Are you outside the US? I recommend using Smashwords or XinXii.)

—Misti

• Amazon US
• Amazon UK
• Amazon DE
• Barnes & Noble
• Smashwords
• XinXii (PDF)

Destiny Walker is an exceptional student despite her youth, sullenness, and the werewolf baby she left on a stranger's doorstep. Across the Atlantic, Kismet Baros was a rare mutt of a Magik—essentially immune to magic but nonetheless able to magically modify scents and heal herself—who was under the protection of the vampire court. Only Destiny and the judge who emancipated her know why Kismet no longer exists.

When powerful Magiks from Kismet's past come into town to celebrate a classmate's coming of age, Destiny must face her demons. She must decide what she is—person or property—and if she'll sacrifice the few friends she has to save the many. If she doesn't, she'll be the next face to launch a thousand ships.