An Exciting Sort of Job (Cullen North)

The gun. It's always the gun.

I'm 16, so I can't legally carry a gun unless I have to. That's supposed to mean when the stars fall from the sky and angry werewolves attack the president. But often times, I can't wait that long. I would die if I did. I'm a ranger. Sort of. All I wanted to do on that not-so-fateful day was go through the usual routine and then take some knock-your-socks-off pictures of deer. No angry werewolves attacking the president, so I couldn't take dad's gun.

You know how the movie characters are always so wrong? Well, it turns out the stars decided to fall to see if gravity really worked. And to spite me. In other words, I should've brought dad's gun.

When I got to the site where I work as a ranger, I parked my car in the usual gravelly rectangle. I don't know who chose it as the parking space, but it had to be someone who had no depth perception to joke about.

Through the usual routine I went, taking care of a few barely-injured-but-very-loud animals, looking for signs of rabid wolves or coyotes or foxes. Why didn't I take the gun, you ask? Because there have never been any rabid wolves or coyotes or foxes. And if there were, I could use my hawk. Or my knife, which is better than any knife you'll ever see. But I digress.

It went wrong when I walked halfway down the steepest hill - more of a mountain - in the property. I looked down at Ol' Robert's cave through my binoculars, and saw no signs of a recent exit.

Ol' Robert was a grizzly who was once in some kind of mining accident, they say. His brain's messed up, but he's still alive. He'll attack anything that moves, and forgets when grizzlies are supposed to hibernate. So he sleeps most of the time. It's when he's awake that he's dangerous.

Seeing no signs of an exit, I walked back to my tree house and set up the camera to take pictures of the deer that would come through soon. It took me at least twenty minutes, but I finally had it just right. It would look amazing, and I could make some good money selling the pics to the right people. They were going to be one in a thousand, maybe even in a million. The landscape was better than a fried apple pie dipped in dutch chocolate, and the camera did it all justice. It was going to be a new car, if I could get it right.

I waited. For at least an hour, I sat motionless, the tree house lights off, terrified that I would scare off the timid deer if I moved so much as a few inches. At one point I resolved to sit for another hour. That was when I heard the unmistakable grunt of Robert.

I knew I had to scare him off, but I didn't really want to shoot blanks into the silent midday air. If I fired a shot, the deer could be off and running, and I would never see them. On the other hand, Robert could try to eat one of them. There wasn't really much of a choice.

And suddenly I remembered I hadn't brought the gun.

I want to say I panicked, but I didn't. I was in a state of utter shock and confusion that I sat for thirty seconds before I even got up. The lights were still off, but Robert could definitely smell me. He didn't hate me, but the two things he likes most are sleeping and eating. And I was the easiest thing he could kill, because he could also smell that I didn't have the hated gun. In other words, I was as dead as a cow. That was dead. (Seriously, there doesn't need to be a simile for death. Everybody understands it.)

I snatched up my binoculars and ran to the window from the direction I had heard the grunt. Robert was about a tenth of a mile away. He could get to me in about a minute, at the very most. I closed the curtain over the window and thought. 

The car was much, much further away than a tenth of a mile. I didn't have any bear spray, and even if I did, I doubt it would have worked. I still don't know how messed up Robert's brain is. There was no way I could escape unless Robert wanted to kill something else. And that was unlikely.

What did I do? I would like to say I took everything I had learned from my extensive research and training to attack Ol' Robert, or at least confront him. But I was too scared of the outcome. My chance of life was, in every possible situation, about the same as the chance of Congress sticking to the Constitution.

As the weak sun trickled through the gaps in the curtain, I closed my eyes and sighed. I flipped open my phone to call my mom and tell her she would probably never see me again. And then I heard a bang that sounded about the size of the mountains where I worked.

I jerked open the door and looked out to see my dad. I didn't wonder how he came, or why he was there. I just waved and clapped like a stupid seal. Dad didn't notice, and instead fired another round. Grumpy Grizzly had had enough, so he galloped off.

"Why are you here?" I shouted. Dad looked up at me and waved. I waved back, still waiting for his answer. He put his backpack back on, picked up the things that had fallen off, and walked towards the treehouse. I lowered the rope ladder and helped him up. "Well?" I asked again when he was inside.

"I wanted to go camping out here in these woods," he said. "We didn't have a lot of things that we needed, so I went out and bought them. That's why I wasn't there in the morning. You could have asked your mother for the gun, you know."

I rolled my eyes, but didn't comment. He knew that I hadn't been expecting the grizzly. Remembering that Robert could still be roaming around, I asked dad for the handgun and trotted away to look for Robert. It took about half an hour, but I made sure he wouldn't be able to leave the area around his cave without my noticing.

Much later that day, dad and I were sitting as still as an old cassette player in the tree house, waiting for the deer. I was uncomfortably aware of how unnecessary it was, seeing that the deer had probably all run away, but I said nothing. Just in case.

Finally, at about eight o'clock, the deer came. Dad and I had gotten tired, and were playing card games, when dad looked out the window and noticed a few of them wandering out into the open (ish) fields.

I dashed to my camera and spent the next arduous half hour taking the fantasized photos. They turned out well enough, but not as well as I had hoped. The gunshots had scared most of them off. So much for that new car.

That night, dad and I determined that he would leave the handgun in the tree house. If I ever used it I had to write down the reason. I objected, but eventually I had to give in. It would have been much more interesting if we had just left it the way it was.

Ol' Robert would agree.

Your Lead Character Should Make Bad Decisions

Recently I have been thinking a lot about character development, for the purpose of making my lead an actual person to the people who read what I write. After about an hour of reading, I found a lot of helpful advice. But not a whole lot of it was about morals, and I can't recall any of it that was specifically about moral choices a character has to make. So here I am to give you never-before heard advice, as far as I can tell.

In the first chapter, something has to happen, your main character should have to make a choice. (This doesn't always happen, but it's advisable that it does.) That choice must have a reason behind it, and the same choice has to be made for a reason. If there is, indeed, such a choice, it should be of a moral significance, even if only slightly. And your lead should make the questionable or wrong decision.

Think about it: if you really have to make a tough decision, more often than not, you would make the right one. Maybe you would regret it, maybe you would make it for questionable reasons, but it would still be the right decision. When you really have to think about something, and yet you still make the wrong (moral) decision, that shows a lot more about your character.

It is a rare occurrence when someone really has to think hard about a choice, and then makes the wrong one (talking about morals, not life decisions).

Everyone has something that they spend a lot of energy, thought, effort, research, money, time, relationships, friendships, or sanity trying to hide. That one deep, dark corner of their heart. And yet, the wrong moral decisions they make give you a glimpse into that inner person.

With all that said, the never-before heard advice is: your lead character should, in some chapter of your novel, make the wrong moral decision. Preferably, this paradox of creating a likable character would occur within the first or second chapters of your amazing story you have to tell the world. But it still should be there.

It doesn't even have to be the wrong decision. It could just be the questionable one. For example, do you get fired from work and chase the guy who just robbed a store, or do you leave it to the police? If that's a tough decision for your main character to make, the reader knows more about him than if it never occurred to him to help the store owner.

Just remember that thoughtful, yet wrong decisions on the part of your lead can help develop him or her so much more than the right ones, or none at all.

I say this at the end of every blog post, but thank you for your time. It comes in short supply these days, and I appreciate your willingness to lend me such a valuable currency. Thank you.

Book Review: Master of the World by Jules Verne

Nowadays, not many stories or novels have moral lessons hidden in the ink. But all the classics do. Jules Verne's novel Master of the World, which he published about a year before he died, is no exception. It's a fantastic story that also serves as a lesson in pride and power.

It's an event story, with very (very) strong elements of idea. It begins when a mountain in South Carolina is suspected of being a volcano. The news goes wild, the locals freak out, but no one can get a look at its crater. The news dies down, of course, because eventually it becomes old. Shortly after that, however, an incredibly swift automobile is seen, and the news picks up on that. Another very fast vehicle, a boat, shows up, and the news writes about those for a while. However, when a fast submarine is discovered soon after that, one newspaper hypothesizes that all the machines are one and the same. This is widely accepted, and happens to be correct.

The main character, a detective, is one of the most thoughtful characters in literary history, and what's better is that he has a right to be, because he's a detective. He is the eyes through which we are given the main moral lesson delivered through the book, that of power and pride. In the novel, a single man has an incredible vehicle, and he makes sure that everyone in the world knows it. After a while, the public is so terrified, yet in awe, of the mysterious vehicle that many governments offer very large sums of money in order to own the machine. The prices offered go up and up, until finally the inventor puts a notice in the newspaper that he refuses all offers.

But he doesn't stop at that: he says that "with [the vehicle], I hold control of the entire world, and there lies no force within the reach of humanity which is able to resist me, under any circumstances whatsoever." If the public had been hysterical before, it was nothing compared to what the reaction was after the letter was published. That's when the main character is called to arrest the driver of the vehicle. And he gets close. I don't want to spoil the ending, but it's a surprising one.

The monopoly of power in relation to the public is the most obvious, and the least subtle of the moral lessons: everyone wanted it. When they couldn't have it, they still wanted it; when it was a threat, they wanted it destroyed. The power was so far advanced, they had no way of even addressing it. However, it was not simply the love of power that drove their desires; it was the pride of having power, being associated with it. When the public's prideful love of power couldn't be applied, they wanted the power gone. Also, they were more than just a little bit scared.

To put it in a more modern light, it would be as though someone had singlehandedly mastered interstellar travel, teleportation, and nuclear fusion - and put them all into one vehicle. People would have mixed reactions; they would be terrified, yes, but if the owner were benevolent, it would be slightly less terrifying, and they would hope that the latter was the reality. Governments would probably make a lot of stupid decisions trying to get it, because they want power. The pride of owning the machine, the reputation it would bring, would flare brighter than the rational fear (so Verne predicted).

However, Jules Verne shows quite effectively that governments would not be alone in their desire; the people would want the machine as well. In his novel, the citizens knew very well that the millions of dollars offered for the new vehicle would be taken from their tax dollars. But they didn't mind, because of both national pride and the hunger for that kind of self-image, the association with power.

The power and pride in relation to the driver/inventor of the vehicle, the self-proclaimed "Master of the World," is a little more intricate and implied. The inventor is a very intelligent man, and obviously a master technician. He could have made millions, if not billions, by using his talents across multiple industries. Instead, he wanted to rule the world. Why?

In the prequel to Master of the World (yes, there's a prequel, and it's called Robur the Conqueror) he had already put himself above the rest of humanity (pride). He had a new and innovative flying machine, and he decided that society wasn't ready for it, because of their love for power. They would, he figured, use it for their own personal and destructive gain. He didn't want that, so he flew away and didn't reveal his secret.

So basically, he already knew that his judgment skills were better than everyone else's, that he was less selfish, and that he was just a better person. This turned into hypocrisy, to the point where he decided that since society was so degraded and behind him, they needed a guiding ruler, who would tell them how to do better, and who could do whatever he wanted. His pride, his love of power, got in the way of his judgment. This is, in the end, what made things that much more difficult for him.

And that's really what happened with society and government: their pride in their image and love of power, the sense that they could do things better, led them to make decisions that very well could have made things worse. The only difference is that things didn't actually get worse, the perception got worse. The "Master of the World" wasn't so lucky, but you'll have to read the book.

Should you read this book? Yes. It's short, it's a good read, and I only scratched the surface of Verne's moral lessons in the book. And it's free. Get it, read it, and see for yourself if it's a good lesson in morals and society.

I appreciate that you read to the end. If you disagree, or think this was a terrible review, or think I'm as dumb as a horse, let me know in the comments so I can disagree with you. Thanks!

The Different Types of Stories (and how it should affect your writing)

There are a lot of different ways to look at stories. Seriously, a lot. I've only known four or five of them, but I've seen many more than that. In this post, I will give you the Story Structure Theory that has helped me the most in my work as an author.

I won't be so arrogant as to claim that this is the best of all the systems. Nor will I take credit for something I didn't invent. This blog post is a shameless summary of Orson Scott Card's ideas, which I think are fantastic.

He sets up four story types: Milieu, idea, character, and event. They've helped my writing improve, and I hope they do the same for you. I'll go over each of these story types and give examples, starting with milieu.

Milieu literally means "a person's social environment." So, a milieu-type story will focus on the world around a character, whether it be social (for things like romance or thrillers) or aesthetical (for sci-fi/fantasy). It is the world itself, the society, the weather, the MC's family, and basically every element that pops out when you create the world in the first place.

Every story has a world, a person's environment, but in this particular type of story it is what the author focuses on, what they write about the most. There can be a good standard plot line with things happening and so on, but those won't be as strong as the world the author creates. I haven't read for myself, but I've heard that author Hugh Howey creates milieus very well.

Milieu structures are, in essence: an common observer with our same perspective gets to the new/strange/different place, observes things, is changed by what he sees (positively or negatively), and then returns as a different person. Milieus don't have to just be the trees and the grass; they can be the evil emperor who constantly sends out his minions to attack the protagonist. Or a milieu could be the odd weather in a place.

A good example of this played out in a book would be Gulliver's Travels, or even Planet of the Apes. The Wonderful Wizard of Oz is a good example: the story doesn't end when Dorothy kills the witch. It ends when she goes back to Kansas.

Second, there is idea. This story type is about characters who look for, and eventually find, new information (or make discoveries). To quote OSC himself, "The idea story begins by raising a question; it ends when the question is answered."

I think it would be safe to say that nearly all mystery stories follow this structure. The beginning question is "who committed this crime?" and the book ends when the question is answered. Other types of stories can follow this line as well; for example, raising the question "how did Ancient Rome fall?" and ending with the author's opinion, or just a good or interesting explanation.

The character type of story is quite common today. It focuses on the changing of a character's role in the places that matter most. Sure, in one sense, almost every story is "about" one or more characters. However, most stories are not about who the character really is. Character type stories are.

OSC words it very well, so I'll quote him again: "The story begins at the moment when the main character becomes so unhappy, impatient or angry in her present role that she begins the process of change; it ends when the character either settles into a new role (happily or not) or gives up the struggle and remains in the old role (happily or not)."

The Hunger Games has a strong character element to it, as does Stowaway by Karen Hesse. Captain Nemo in the book 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea follows this type of story, though the book itself does not.

Finally, we have event. This may just be the most common of all the structures, and it's probably the one that most people will want to write.

The story starts with the universe out of order (to put it a little drastically). Something is wrong. This could be the One Ring being re-discovered and a powerful adversary reappearing (LOTR), a boy being transported into another world that is tyrannized by an evil wizard (Beyonders: A World Without Heroes), a father's empire dissolving and family wealth disappearing (Artemis Fowl), or the murder of a King by his brother (Hamlet). All of these have a world where things are generally good - and then they get bad. The rest of the story focuses on the protagonist attempting to put things right.

The event story ends when a new order is put into place or, in some cases, when everything goes back to being exactly the way it used to be, or, in a select few cases, when the "good guys" fail, the world goes into chaos, and all order is destroyed. 

The story starts not at the point when the world becomes disordered, but rather at the point when the main character becomes involved. This is why it is rarely a good idea to write a prologue, and you should avoid it at all costs: the main character is the focus more than anything. You should know from experience that people tend to skip the prologues, and even if they don't, it will subtract from the rest of the experience of the MC's struggles and triumphs.

So, how should this affect your writing? To start, each story has every element in it. Your book, your short story, your film project, etc. automatically has an idea, or a question that should be answered, a milieu around your character where a bad event happens.

Now, not all stories have a particular focus. Maybe you decide that your story best falls under the idea and event structures, and you don't want to change it. As long as you're making sure to look past your own ideas, that's fine. (But if you can, try to narrow it down to one major genre.)

Something I found in my own story is that for the first half or so, it was more idea-focused. There was nothing particularly wrong with the world at first. Then it changed into more of an event-based story. I have yet to hear from my beta readers if that's a good idea or not, but so far they've told me they're intrigued. As long as you keep the story moving, you can't really go wrong when you're not writing blindfolded.

Well, that's it. Thank you so much for your time, and I hope this was helpful!

P.S. There's something really exciting that I've been gearing up for for a while: about once every other week, I'll do a book review. I'll start with the lesser-known or lesser-read classics, and then do some more modern writing. This is one reason I blogged about this, so you understand what you're reading when it comes to those reviews.

I'm also going to post a short story once a month, hopefully. I'm really excited about that too. I'm not sure what I'm going to do first, but I do know that it will most likely be adventure (without any magic or over-the-top tech).

Thank you for your support!

Don't Write Blindfolded

In our society today, nearly everyone wants to write a book. 80%, in fact. But of those, very few will actually try to write one. And of those, even fewer will actually finish. Why is that?

If you want to write a book, but haven't yet, you need to get on that. Make your goal a paragraph, a hundred words, or even just a single sentence. Just get on it.

If you have started, this post is for you. From my experience as a writer and from the experiences of other writers I know, you've probably not just started one book. You're on your third, or your eighth, or you one hundred and sixty-fourth. Whatever number it is, you're probably not just working on your first. Why?

Because you got bored. Or because the story wasn't coming to you. Or because you lost inspiration. Or because you got a better idea. Or all of these. But these all have the same problem: you're writing blindfolded.

What I mean is that you don't have a plan. There is no goal to your story, and you don't intend for there to be one. You just have a bunch of cool characters, maybe some awesome gadgets or intriguing wizards. You've created mansions, huts, shacks, cars, streets, skyscrapers, entire worlds in your head. It's exciting at first, but when you lose inspiration, or when it gets old, you move on. But it can be fixed.

The easiest way to fix all this is to add a goal. What is your character doing in the skyscrapers, why is the group afraid of the bad guys, and why do we care that a side-character betrayed the main character?

We care because the main character is a vigilante, looking for his parents that the FBI took when he was fourteen. Or because Jim stole the plans for the new super-spaceship and gave them to the communists.

The more difficult way, especially because you've already started writing, is to plan it all out. Now, this doesn't work for everyone, including some famous authors, but it worked for me and many others. Probably most others.

So, plan it all out? That sounds tedious. It can be, if you plan each and every detail. All I mean is that you should have ideas of scenes. The MC goes to Paris, gets caught by the police for doing something wrong, goes to prison, escapes with another man, and they take over the French air force to attack the killer robots.

That's a little bit of a ridiculous example, but you get the point: each scene, not each time your character breathes. Be careful to remember that the story still needs a goal.

Not all stories need goals, but those are few and far between, and take a particularly good author. I'll cover the types of stories and plots later this week or early next week. For now, just try to find a goal, a reason for your character to do anything, in your story. You might be surprised.

Thank you for your time, as always.

How to write when you don't know what to write

There's this impasse that all authors hit when they're writing. I'm not talking about writer's block. I'm talking about substance block.

I just made that title up, but it's real. I've struggled with it. My friends have struggled with it. It's real.

In essence, it's what happens when you have a great plot, but it's moving too quickly. When your characters have just done something awesome, and you want them to do something else awesome...but it's only been a page since the last awesome thing happened. Basically, you need substance that isn't too action packed. What do you do?

Well, there are two ways to deal with this that I would recommend, so here they are.

1. Plot it out

The one big problem with the substance block is just that - you can't think of substance. Just action. One of the best ways to fix this is to plot out what you're going to write.

Basically, plot it out.

For example, say my main character is eating lunch, when a group of Agents from a secret association come and try to kill him. He manages to escape against all odds, showing his amazing skills.

And the next thing I have in my plot is he goes to the main bad guy lair. Only problem is, I don't have anything in between these two.

What do I do?

I would add an extra scene. Either I would make a scene out of his journey to the lair, or I would add a scene where he goes to a pet store and buys a dog for his brother's birthday party. Or something like that.

2. Add Character Development

This is an interesting one. If you need some filler, make your character do some mundane things. Ride a bike, do something he/she loves, meet a hated character.

And when you do this, make sure your characters have some flaws. Make them subtle, but there. If there aren't any, the character will not be believable.

One of the things you could do to really develop all the flaws/awesomeness of the character is to meet another character. Either one that's already been introduced or a new one.

That's it! Hope this was helpful for everyone with substance block.

Criticism is Good

For you TLDR people: the end paragraph (for you snarky people, the one before the  "Thank you" paragraph) contains my basic message.

Let me start off with a quote that you should never agree with: "When people give you advice about your book, don't listen to it. Write what works for you; don't give a flip about your readers."

Okay, I'm hoping that quote doesn't exist. But recently a friend told me about this "advice" that they had read on a blog somewhere. I couldn't find it, fortunately. I have no idea who came up with it.

But if someone actually said that quote, they would be wrong. I am writing this post because it seems that beginning writers are too afraid of advice, and will do anything they can to protect their pride.

The impression I get when I look at online forums, blogs, websites etc. is that whenever people give a critique of something someone else has written, the person who wrote it will stop at nothing to defend their mistake.

Why? Why do people do this?

Well, probably because we are born into pride, and we don't like being told we're wrong.

Actually, that's definitely it.

But seriously, think about it this way. Say, in one of my books, I had the following metaphor: The grass was like the sun, with its rays shining forth into the world, its truth and justice made known throughout the nations until the earth turns its back and abandons the beauty, preferring the inherent evil until the rooster calls back the sun.

Does that make any sense? No, it doesn't. If that were in my book, I would need to take it out. And if someone told me, that would be great! How would I know that it was bad if they didn't?

But then what if I defended it, saying it was "good" and "relevant?" My book would have a confusing and horrible and irrelevant metaphor. Or simile. I never can get those straight.

My basic point is, your audience is who you are writing for. If you don't write for your audience, or your readers, then you are writing for yourself. And then you might as well not even show it to anyone else.

So, the underlying message: if someone tells you how you can improve your book, at least listen to them. Hear them out, check it out. If you completely disagree with them, tell them why. If there is no good reason, ask a lot of people about it. But don't ignore your readers, because that's why you're even showing the book to anyone. 

Thank you for your time.

If you're an author, you need to have a professional format your book

I was reading a book that someone shared with me recently, and I was shocked at the lack of proper formatting. It was extremely difficult to read. To the point where I was skipping pages and pages of information just because of the formatting.

Your book needs to be professionally formatted if you're doing a self-published book. Period.

But that doesn't appeal to a lot of people. Pay money? Ridiculous.

I have the same thoughts.

What? But this is about having your book professionally formatted! you say. And it is. But that doesn't necessarily mean that you have to pay money.

Let me explain: there are people who help you format your book (for free) without realizing it. If you're any good at figuring things out, here are some links you can look at to see how you need to format your book to make it look awesome.

First one - this page has some really good tips and hints about what you should think about when formatting your own book. No examples, just questions you should ask. A great resource!

Second one - this page has fantastically wonderful examples for formatting. Look over it. Even I got some great ideas, and I thought I was already done with my formatting!

Third one - this page is a fantastic resource for page formatting. It only shows you Kindle formatting, but you can use it for print as well. This is where I got the first ideas for the way my own book is formatted. Check it out!

Fourth one - this page has several good options.

Hope that helped! I looked for others for a really long time, but either they weren't any good or they were downloads, not images, or something else was wrong. So this is all I could find. If you're any good at figuring things out, play the "copy others who really know what they're doing" game. If not, you should really pay a professional to do it. Seriously.

And if you're looking for cover inspiration, this is an excellent resource. Check it out if you're looking for inspiration for a book cover.

That's it for this time! Thanks.

P.S. if you are doing your book in print, use the CreateSpace template creator (this page). Even if you're not going to use CreateSpace, use it. It's really handy. At the bottom of the page, you will see a list of links that you can download for MS Word. 

There are two options for each: Download blank word template, and Download blank template with sample formatted content. Click on the second option of the size you want. It helps a lot.

Pen Names (Pseudonyms)

All right, I said I would help you come up with pen names, and I will. In this blog. And right now.

So as an author, where do you start? First, what genre are you writing in? I'll help you out with a list of the names you can use when writing a book:

• Your name (Jonathan Kyle)
• Your first and middle names (Jonathan Matthew[s])
• Your initials (J. M. Kyle)
• Your Full name (Jonathan Matthew Kyle)
• A Pseudonym

Okay, you can see that there are many options. I will go down each one and help you decide. But first, look up other authors of your preferred genre and see how they format their name.

First, your actual name, Jonathan Kyle. It does not sound like it would be an epic fantasy type book. Other than that, it could go for a lot of things. For some context, I would say Jonathan Kyle would be best for Science Fiction.

Second, your first and middle names, Jonathan Matthew. If you wanted to make your middle name more like a last name, add an "s" to make it Jonathan Matthews. This would probably go best under the genre of non-fiction. But it would go fine under others as well. Any name could potentially go under any genre, so this is just a suggestion.

Third, your initials, J. M. Kyle. This style works best for fiction, specifically fantasy (epic fantasy at that). This is probably the only one that can really be generalized by your name. If you're writing under the fantasy genre, your initials is probably the best way to go (unless, of course, your name sounds better). You could do it three ways: J. M. Kyle, J. Kyle, or M. Kyle. The first option is certainly the most common. Maybe not, but it is very common, especially with the more famous authors, such as George R. R. Martin, J. R. R. Tolkien, N. D. Wilson, J. K. Rowling and C. S. Lewis.

Fourth, your full name, Jonathan Matthew Kyle. This is probably the least common option. Only go for this if your full name is pretty short. If your name is long, like Jonathan Matthew Kyle, I recommend you avoid this. Imagine this scenario: your book becomes pretty famous, and someone recommends you to a friend. However, your name takes too long to type into the search bar on their phone. It sounds ridiculous, but it is completely true. People are lazy, and with phones, they will most likely not take the time to put in your name. Stick with something (relatively) short.

Finally, a pseudonym. This is my favorite option, because my actual name does not sound good in any of the above formats. If your name is the same way, a pseudonym is the best option. The options for a pseudonym are:

• Arrangement of your name
• Variation of your name
• Completely different name

For a different arrangement, try something like M. K. Jonathan, Kyle. M. Jonathan, Matthew J. Kyle or other variations. There are many, many combinations. Think of which one best suits your needs. 

A variation of your name works as well, such as Matthew Jones, Kyle Jones, Mark Johnson, and on and on. Alter your names slightly or replace them with similar sounding 

A pseudonym is the hardest to choose from. It can be anything. Make a list of your favorite, most awesome sounding last names, first names and, if you're that kind of person, middle names. Combine them to sound really cool, and make sure there isn't already an author under that name. But it's okay if one book has been written under that name in a different genre. You can use initials here, too.

For example, if you choose the pseudonym Kristof Williamson for a science fiction novel, look it up to make sure there are no authors with that name. But if another Kristof Williamson has written a book about the disadvantages of crop rotation, you can still use that name, as long as that is the only book he has written. People will certainly not confuse the two of you.

Make sure you do not choose the name of another author with a few semi-popular books, even if it's in another genre. For example, don't use the name Jonathan Swift even if you're writing legal thrillers. The name is too famous. If you don't know who he is, look him up.

So, if you chose a pseudonym and narrowed it down to the names that would be unique to your book, you have anywhere from two to seventeen names. I fell closer toward the second category. If you only have a few, it should be easy to pick. Ask a bunch of people you know which pen name they prefer. Or, if you prefer total anonymity, think about which one you want to be known by. Say it aloud several times to yourself, referring to an author. An example would be saying "You have to read the new book by Kristof Williamson!" to yourself many times. If it sounds good, keep it. If not, reconsider.

Also, sign the name over and over. If you become famous under the pen name, will you want to sign book after book with that name? Write out your options as signatures and see which one looks better.

If you have seventeen options, you might want to cut down simply based on awesomeness; that is, which ones you really, really like. Then use the signature method.

Another way you can cut down on names is to search to see if there are blogs/domains with that name. For example, if there is a www.kristofwilliamson.com, you wouldn't be able to use that as a name. You could use a dash, or add "author," but it would be best if the name you use can be used as a plain old, simple domain name.

And all of that advice I gave you about a domain name is if you even want a domain. If not, you could start a blog (like this one) and have that be your "domain." So you could start the "Kristof Williamson" blog at wherever. Blogspot, wordpress or wherever you like. If you go for the blog option, check to see if your pen name would be available as a blog.

If it gets down to two options and you just can't decide, there are three things you can do to help you decide:

1. Flip a coin. Not because it actually helps, but while it is in the air you know what you really want.
2. Do a simple book cover and put your name on it. Which looks better on your cover? If you can't tell, then maybe it's time to ask someone's opinion. If you've already done that and they can't decide, use the other helps.
3. Think about it in a different scenario: if you were to legally change your name, which would you change it to?

I hope this helped! Thank you for your time.

How to Write to Let Your Reader Use Imagination

When you watch a movie, how often do you have discussions with your family about the overall message of the underlying worldviews presented? Often? Fantastic.

And how often do you deeply reflect on the morality presented in the main character's decisions that outlined how the bad guy can be so evil? Not so often? Hmmm, better work on that.

And how often do you have a fight with your brother about the antagonist's hair color? What? Never? Seriously? Wouldn't that be ridiculously hard to discover? Oh, right. Forgot.

Movies put everything in front of you on a screen so there can be no argument. Your mind knows exactly what the characters are supposed to look like. In a sense, it "overwrites" your imagination. But with movies, you don't even have to use imagination. It's just there, without debate.

It's obvious what the difference is, but why should you care?

Because it should change the way you write your book. Or not, if you've already figured it out and write accordingly. But think about it this way: your book should have a lot of subtext. Meaning, you need to leave plenty to the imagination.

For example, I have a lot of characters in my book that I don't describe. I might eventually, but not in depth. Why? Because I don't need to. I'll put it in simple terms, and give an example: "he had blonde hair, that waved in the wind like so much wheat in a field on a windy, sunny day, and his blue eyes cut through the night with a radiance of dignity. His nose extended past the end of his face like a mountain, and his cheekbones were sharply contrasting upon the features that were visible in the shining moonlight."

Do I really need much more than just maybe a quick description of him? Like maybe this: "He was hoisted up to his feet and the Captain grabbed a fistful of his hair. 'Brown. Just like Tim.' One of the lads looked closer at him and noticed the scar running down his thin face." That is much better, because it leaves more to the imagination. But I could still potentially do better.

But you don't need some ridiculously poetic/serious description of every inch of his facial features. To the reader, it seems like you're just looking for filler. And here's the thing: if you describe their background and their personality, the reader will automatically assume a look to them.

People sometimes say "I don't judge a person at first glance." They're wrong. Everyone does, whether they like it or not. It's because what you look like is inexplicably tied to your personality. This is what separates the good actors from the great. The great actors know this. Sometimes unconsciously, but they know this. They know that a personality will always look a certain way, and behave a certain way. Good directors know this. The costumes and makeup the actors will wear will be linked to how they act, and what the character is like.

So when you write about how someone behaves, and what type of things they enjoy and think about, you've already given him a look.

For example, this right here would be a plenty fine description: "He was hearty and jolly, although sometimes mean-tempered. He had come from a poor family, but you would never guess from looking at him. Except that his natural face, the one that shone through on occasion and the one that was not quite so thin, had deep lines of sorrow written on it." That might be a little too poetic, but what kind of person do you envision? Do you really think that he needs more than that? Maybe hair color, hair style and MAYBE (I say this almost laughingly) eye color. Think about it this way.

What color are Iron Man's eyes? Loki's? The Hulk's? Sam Gamgee's?

If you know every single one of those, you are an exceptional "noticer." I can tell you how many of these people's eye colors I know: the same number as the amount of times I have walked up to someone and said "you know what, you look like the type of person I would punch in the face in the middle of a debate round." (That would be zero, just so we're on the same page here.)

Let's pick one. I pick Sam Gamgee. I hope you didn't remember his eye color. But how well do you have his image in your head? Pretty well, I imagine. And what color is his hair? Blonde, duh. Everyone knows that (if they've watched the movies). But that's not his defining aspect. If blonde hair is the only thing you remember him for, then you might as well have remembered Thor.

But what about his build? His body type? What he looks like below his head? How well do you think you could describe that part of his body? I'm not sure what your writing skills are like, but I can say that I can't really describe him very well. So I remember him from my memory and what his personality is. See that? His personality is important. Even more so for books.

To conclude, this doesn't just apply to characters; it applies to weapons, to gadgets, to buildings (unless a long description is absolutely necessary), and to pretty much any item. Leave things to the imagination. It will drastically increase the quality of your writing. I know, because I did it. I used to write horribly.

Use this to your advantage and slaughter the competition. Your characters can shine through, if only you don't care so much what they look like on the micro-scale.

Of course, some characters will need to be described physically. In fact, probably your main character does. And here's a little hint: some don't need to be described at all. They just need to appear, and you can cleverly work in bits and pieces of their personality and their physical appearance. That is, if you're good. And you probably are. I don't know many authors who couldn't do this.

Physical descriptions can add to the personality, and vice versa. Just don't spend too much time on the physical. Enough to identify, but not enough to picture as clearly as a person from a movie. Let their imagination do the work. That's one of the main benefits of books: they let you use your imagination! Don't deprive your reader of that joy. Think carefully about your character descriptions. If they're great, they will have the right amounts of both physical and personality descriptions. If they're not so great, they won't.

Make sure the character development focuses more on the personality. How you continue is equally important as how you start.

If you do your characters wrong, it could make your book just like too many other books: boring and unremarkable. You don't want that.

If you do your characters right, they will seem real. Your potential readers will love you for it.

Thank you for your time.