Can We Please Stop?

Life is good, and writing is going well. I'm gearing up for NaNoWriMo, during which time I will be working on a fractured fairy tale middle grade, unless something more pressing comes up. Because, dang it, I have been wanting to write this book for a long time and I'm going to do it!

But I also have deadlines, so there's that.

So, while I'm prepping, I've been doing what I always do: getting into arguments with people or just the people in my head about good writing and bad writing and the problems with fandoms.

I've touched on this before, and you should know by now I'm a fangirl and have no problems with fandom as a concept, or in its best forms. However, there are some things that irritate me about it, and today I want to talk about a big one:

Can we please stop glorifying Nazis? Can we please stop it?

I know what you're thinking: Nazis are terrible, and of course we don't glorify them! We make them the enemies of every story and we have Captain America punch them! Well, folks, I would like to present for your consideration Star Wars and the Harry Potter books. Where we have Nazis, in other forms, and unfortunately, it seems the fans can't get enough.

Let's talk Star Wars, briefly. The Empire is obviously a reference to the Nazis. Look at their uniforms. Look at the fact that the Empire only hires humans, no other races. Look at their blatant disregard for life and desire to spread their Reich everywhere, subjugating anyone who disagrees with fear. And yet I see fans who love the Empire and Dark Side enough to put stickers on their cars. They can't really align with the philosophies here, can they?

This issue compounded with the newer movies, with Kylo Ren. So many people online LOVE this guy, and frankly, I don't get it. He's a neo-Nazi: he is bringing back the aforementioned oppressive regime because he's a fan of them, their methods, and their aesthetic. Might he be an interesting character with nuance and depth? Sure, but I'm sure not going to ship him with Rey, who is strong and smart and can make a much better choice than a guy who literally captured and tortured her because he wants to be edgy and dark and bring back mass genocide. Which brings me to a secondary idea...can we stop glorifying predators? Can we please stop it?

Now let's chat Harry Potter, because this one I really don't get. Let's talk the Death Eaters and how you can buy so much merchandise with their marks and costumes. There is enough of a market that loves these people that Amazon sells tattoos and robes and more (follow that link, if you don't believe me). Why?

Seriously, why? The Death Eaters are Rowling's Nazis. They are terrorists who kill and torture people they believe inferior to them by birth, or people who associate and help those they think inferior to them. Wait, forget the Nazis; they're a fantasy KKK.

I would hazard a guess that if I went to someone wearing a Dark Mark on their shirt and asked them if they supported the Nazis or the KKK, they'd be horrified that I'd suggest something like that. "No, of course not! They're evil!" Well, so are these organizations, these characters.

So why would they wear it? My guess? There's something edgy and cool about relating to the villains. I've seen this attitude that the bad guys are misunderstood, and broken, just like so many fans. That's fine. It's fine to relate to bad guys and to see the good in them, or the relatable. That's often a sign of good writing. But I would suggest to fans everywhere to consider what exactly you see in these villains that makes them relatable to you and to check yourself.

Do you really want to relate to a science fiction version of the Nazis? To the fantasy Ku Klux Klan? Is that who you are? Do you want to wear their memorabilia and marks, and make yourself one of them?

You may be thinking that it's all fantasy. The Death Eaters aren't really out there hurting people, and I get it. It isn't real. If you dress up as a member of one these organizations for Halloween, you're not offending anyone, not even me. It may be fun to do. I'm not here to complain about dressing as something dark and scary for Halloween.

I'm here to talk about the other things, when we put on the costume and start to feel like the person we dress as. When we choose a shirt with a logo or symbol because it's "so us." When we start wearing the team colors of teams whose values we'd never openly say we associate with. And, even worse, when we start emulating the behavior of the characters, calling people racial slurs or turning to violence over peaceable communication.

(Is that not what "mudblood" is, after all?)

Keep in mind, the values that these characters hold are very real. Racism, hatred, fear, and cruelty to other groups of people are very real, and very painful. What I'm asking for is please, can we stop glorifying these characters? Can we stop fanboying and fangirling over these organizations and justifying their actions? Can we remember that they're meant to be the bad guys for a reason? Can we stop buying HYDRA merchandise and remember that they're based on the guys Captain America punches in the face?

Can we please choose to glorify characters and organizations who represent who we, as a society and individually, would like to see ourselves become?

Some of My Favorite Tropes

I had a productive morning! I got ready for school to start in about a week, and I also did some good writing. I'm approaching the climax of a novel, so I want to finish that before I start working on those spooky short stories.

(Which are getting better and better in my planning stages, all the same!)

Besides, the climax is always the best part. I've earned this dessert, dang it.

Anyway, because I'm in a good mood, I decided to write a positive post today. I considered writing about one or two of my least favorite tropes that I wish would just die, but I've talked a lot about those and I don't want to use this blog to whine. So today I'm going to name some of my favorite tropes, and why I think I love them so much.

1. Tapping on the fourth wall.

Let me explain this one. "Breaking the fourth wall" is when the writer acknowledges the presence of a reader and that the work is a piece of fiction of some kind. The show is a TV show, not real life, or the book in your hands is a work of fiction. The Muppets do this all the time. So does this guy:

When I say "tapping," it's not a full acknowledgement that there is a reader for the text. It's not a "yes, we know this is fiction and we're going to reference that." It's more a subtle appeal to readers, as readers, like slipping in a tiny reference to another show or book that wouldn't exist in that world. Like naming characters after characters from another franchise, or even very subtly calling out the premise of the piece. ("A show about a dog detective? No one would ever watch that!" in a show about a dog detective, for example.)

Or this:

They're talking about a show inside the show, but Gravity Falls also has a big mystery element. They're talking about both.

Tiny break, tiny crack in the fourth wall. But nothing super obvious. I love these because if you catch them, you get the joke, but you don't need to catch them to get the joke.

2. Implied backstories.

These are when the backstory of a character or situation isn't stated, but implied with words like "again," "one time," "like before." And we either get the whole implication, or we get enough and are dying to hear the full story, though we don't need to.

Like, there's a strange scene where the protagonist walks in one someone fingerpainting with their toes while eating lemon meringue pie, wearing a ball gown, and singing along to Taylor Swift. And they say, "Really? Again?"

Which implies this whole thing happened before. As weird and singular as you think it would be.

Or, "You shot me."

"One time!"

This is comedy gold to me. But used well, it can establish some good character development through implied backstory that can help readers understand the relationships between characters or past situations. Like this:

Person crying into ice cream, holding a picture of a past love interest.
Protag: *gently* "Really? Again?"

Not a great example, but there you go. I love implied backstories.

3. The Bad Guy really blew it, but didn't know it until the end.

This makes me so happy. Every. Dang. Time.

This is when the climax comes and the good guys go to fight the bad guy and apparently get smashed in combat (of physical or mental nature). The Big Bad is gloating, all hope is lost, the heroes are defeated...or maybe that's just what they wanted the Bad Guy to think.

A trope heavy in heist shows like Ocean's 11 and Leverage, this works best when it's been supported and foreshadowed the whole story and no one saw it coming. I love the reversal when the Bad Guy has to go from gloating to, "wait, what?" in a heartbeat, as the heroes get to give the closing monologue and tell them how they missed some key detail that let the heroes' plan come together.

Because you think the villain is supposed to give that monologue, but the heroes do, you see? You see the joke?

And it's clever. And I love me some clever writing and clever characters.

A good example of this is actually in the Harry Potter series, right at the end. Who is the master of the Elder Wand? Why, Harry is, not Voldemort, even after all the effort Voldy put into finding it.

Hohoho, I love it! This may be my favorite trope of all.

Anyway, there we go. Three of my favorite tropes. What are some of yours?

Magical Recipes

I'm visiting the Orem Library tomorrow! I'm so excited!

Also, today is Harry Potter's birthday. Happy 37th birthday, Harry Potter! (Yes, that's how old he'd be if he were real.) And, happy birthday also to J.K. Rowling, since they share a birthday.

July 31st is a real holiday in Provo. I ran a Harry Potter-related 5K on Saturday night (pics above), and tonight there's an event that will have live entertainment, trivia contests, and butterbeer. I'm going primarily for the butterbeer and the themed foods, though the entertainment will be good, too.

It's fascinating to me how an entire generation can love a book series so much that we celebrate it as though it were real. Wonderful, though.

Once, I went to a July 31st party that had 6 types of chocolate frog, among other goodies (sherbert soda drinks based on potions, jelly beans, etc.). I ate a bunch of sugar instead of dinner and woke up feeling utterly empty of anything substantive. I still look fondly on those chocolate frogs, though.

If you're throwing a Harry Potter party today, have fun and don't forget the food! Personally, I think one of the most engaging part of the books is the wizarding food; why else would people flock to the theme parks for butterbeer and buy Bertie Botts Every Flavor Beans? Food helps us connect to cultures and learn about them, and I think that also goes for the fictions cultures we wish we could be part of.

I've made a few Harry Potter-themed foods, and they've turned out great. Here are a couple of my favorites. Have a great July 31st!

Pumpkin Pasties:

Ingredients

2 eggs, slightly beaten
3/4 cup sugar
1 1 lb. can pumpkin (or 2 cups fresh, roasted in the oven then pressed through a strainer to save your Pumpkin Juice to drink!)
1/2 tsp. salt
1 tsp. cinnamon
1/2 tsp. ginger
1/4 tsp. cloves
1 2/3 cups evap. milk (1 can)
1/2 tsp. allspice
9 oz pie crust pastry (enough for two single standard pie crusts) - I like to use a store-bought one, but you can make your own.

Instructions

Except for the pastry, mix together all the ingredients well. This is the filling.

Bake the filling only (no crust) in a large casserole dish in hot oven (425 °F) for 15 minutes.
Keep oven door closed and reduce temperature to moderate (350 °F/180 °C) and continue baking for 45 minutes or until table knife inserted in center of dish comes out clean.

Cool filling completely on a wire rack.

Roll pie crust pastry thin and cut into circles approx 4" in diameter.

Put a spoonful of the cool pumpkin mixture towards one side of the center of the circle.

Fold over the crust into a half-circle and firmly crimp the edges closed.

Slice three small slits in the top for venting.

Place on a greased cookie sheet.

Bake only until crust is a light golden-brown, approx 10 minutes.

Tastes good both hot and room-temperature. I like eating these while drinking a mug of hot cocoa!

Butterbeer:

 

 Ingredients

• 1 two liter bottle of cream soda, chilled
• 1/4 tsp caramel extract
• 1/4 tsp butter extract

For the Cream Topping:

• 1 cup heavy whipping cream
• 1/2 cup butterscotch topping
• 1/4 cup powdered sugar

Instructions

1. In large mixing bowl, whip heavy cream until it forms stiff peaks.
2. Add butterscotch topping and powdered sugar.
3. Mix the caramel and butter extracts with the cream soda and then pour the mixture into clear cups or mugs.
4. Top with butterscotch cream topping and enjoy!

Assorted Candies:

Acid Pops: Dip sour-flavored lollipops in honey and roll in Pop Rocks.

Bertie Botts Every Flavor Beans: Dip regular flavors in sugar water to make them sticky. Cover beans with spices or flavorings. Go nuts and let your dark magic take you to some scary places.

* NOTE: You can also just buy regular beans and tell people you've mixed in some of the store-bought Bertie Botts. Watch people hesitate before eating the buttered popcorn flavor.

Licorice Wands: Take chocolate Twizzlers and dip the end in melted chocolate (any color). Cover the chocolate end with sprinkles.

There are a bunch of other recipes online if you want to search them and learn how to make Cauldron Cakes, treacle tarts, pumpkin juice, and the like. But these are fun and a few of them are quick, perfect for a party!

Here are this week's debuts:

Middle Grade:
Jonathan Rosen - Night of the Living Cuddle Bunnies (8/1)
Danielle Davis - Zinnia and the Bees (8/1)
Katie Slivensky - The Countdown Conspiracy (8/1)
Patrick Moody - The Gravedigger's Son (8/1)

Young Adult:
Tiffany Pitcock - Just Friends (8/1)
Katy Upperman - Kissing Max Holden (8/1)
Chelsea Bobulski - The Wood (8/1)
Matthew Landis - The League of American Traitors (8/1)

Strong Characters: Acting and Not Acted Upon

Hello, all!

I hope you're having a good week. First things first, I want to remind you that my Goodreads giveaway for Under Locker and Key is running one more week, so if you haven't entered and want to, then you still can. You should! Who doesn't like free stuff? Use the widget below to enter.

Goodreads Book Giveaway

Under Locker and Key

by Allison K. Hymas

Giveaway ends May 21, 2017.
See the giveaway details at Goodreads.

Enter Giveaway

Anyway, on to the blog post! I decided to revisit an idea I've batted around before: what defines a character as "strong"? As "weak"?

I think this is important for writers and readers to determine, since we all want our heroes to be strong (unless otherwise desired, which can make for an interesting book), or at the very least, we don't want people calling our characters weak when we didn't want them to be.

Personally, I think it's important so we can see through cheap gimmicks that make a character seem strong without actually doing it, much like how a logical fallacy can make an argument seem valid when it doesn't actually do anything of the kind.

Now, a logical fallacy doesn't mean the argument itself isn't strong; it just means that it can take a weak argument and make it seem strong. Same with gimmicks, like the following:

- The character is good at fighting and using weapons.
- The character is a surly loner.
- The character is stubborn as all get out.

These things can be part of a strong character's make-up, but weak characters can be like this, too. We as society seem to think that someone who resembles Katniss from The Hunger Games is automatically a strong character.

If Katniss is a strong character, it's not because she can use a bow, doesn't get along with anyone, and doesn't give up on what she wants.

No, I'd say she's strong because she acts and isn't acted upon.

In The Hunger Games (the first book), Katniss makes her own choices. Yes, she's pushed around a bit by the society she lives in, but her choice to volunteer is hers and hers alone. She doesn't succumb to what others want but chooses and acts in her own way.

In later books, I think she starts to weaken as a character, leaving other characters to define her and her story (Catching Fire, anyone?). But at first, I think the draw to her isn't that she's good with weapons but because she acts and is not acted upon.

One thing that bugs me more than anything is when a character is presented to me as "strong" because he/she (more and more "she," lately) fits some kind of societal value, but is still acted upon instead of acting. Take Elsa from Frozen, for example.

Can you tell me one thing she does that isn't a passive reaction?

Elsa lives in hiding all her life because her parents wanted her to. She conceals her power and her feelings, even from her sister. Then, at her coronation party, she accidentally reveals her power. This is not done on purpose; it's a reaction to her sister taking her glove and yelling at her.

When the people around her are frightened by her powers, instead of dealing with the situation like a queen should, she runs away. She reacts and is acted upon. Even later, when Anna tells her that she's set off an eternal winter, Elsa doesn't do anything to fix it. She lashes out at Anna, again accidentally, and continues to hide. The only reason she goes back to Arendelle is because she is literally carried back there by someone else.

Elsa doesn't act for herself. She reacts. She's acted upon through the whole movie. Anna is the one who acts for herself, choosing to go out and find her sister. She acts by deciding to marry a man she just met. It's a terrible idea, but she at least takes action and makes her own decisions. Elsa doesn't.

I'm not saying Elsa is a bad character or that Frozen is a bad movie. There's room for strong and weak characters in fiction because that's realistic. A character rules by fear and reacting to everything is interesting in the context of the story.

But I disagree with Elsa being considered strong because she sings a song about liberation (when she's running away from all her problems and responsibilities) and looks like this:

And Cinderella is considered weak because she does housework and is kind. Cinderella does everything she can to go to the ball. She does her work and makes her dress. She doesn't run away from her problems but faces them head-on. She doesn't wait for her prince, but goes and finds him. Her only help comes when she has already done all she can for herself.

Seriously. Look who's the one who saves the day at the end in Cinderella, when the slipper is broken and all hope seems lost. It sure as heck wasn't the prince.


The more I read and watch movies, the more I realize that a strong character is someone who takes charge of their own life to the best extent that they can. They may not always succeed, but they at least try. A weak character lets others run their lives and/or only react, never act. I used female characters for this list, but you can apply it to others, for sure.

Draco Malfoy, for example. A weak character. Dobby, on the other hand, definitely takes the initiative.

If you have any thoughts about my theory that how a character acts or is acted upon decides if they're strong or weak, let me know in the comments. This is a complex writerly issue and I keep trying to get to the heart of it and explore other dimensions of character development.

Here are this week's debuts:

Young Adult:
Cale Dietrich - The Love Interest (5/16)
Melanie J. Fishbane - Maud: A Novel Inspired by the Life of L.M. Montgomery (5/16)
Kate Watson - Seeking Mansfield (5/16)

Joy and Wonder

Hello, everyone, and happy holidays!

Thanksgiving is over, so it's officially my favorite time of the year. The tree is up, I'm listening to Christmas music, and it's snowing outside. It looks like this:

Yes, my apartment overlooks a parking lot. But you can see the haze of falling snow and the way the maple tree looks lacy.

I'm in a good mood, despite the fact that I was out walking in this snow today because I'm enamored with the first snow of the Christmas season and because I don't trust myself or other drivers in the snow. Turns out I'm right not to; there were 2 people making turns while on their phones as I passed, and, as I said, it looks like this outside right now:

Distracted drivers on the phone, the ground covered with wet globs of half-melted ice...what could possibly go wrong? Yes, this is a pet peeve of mine. I'll tell you, I'm glad to be home for the rest of the day. No driving for me. Just writing.

The writing is going well. I'll have to do major revisions on my current work, but I like it so far despite its many gaping holes. I took a break over Thanksgiving, so I'm refreshed and ready to finish NaNoWriMo strong.

Thanksgiving was good. It was restful, and I got to spend it with extended family. We spent the holiday eating a lot and playing games, like card games, Telestrations, and bingo. Nice, chill weekend. I also may have reached a 7-minute mile while running. May have. Probably didn't. But the math is lining up too nicely to ignore.

Finally got my pics from the Haunted Half. I thought this one summed up about how I feel about maybe achieving my best time ever on the Weekend of Gluttony. I wish I was smiling more, but hey, I was a few miles into a half marathon and trying to pose as I ran.

I also saw Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. It was good. I really liked the magical creatures, especially the thunderbird. And the niffler and occamy and demiguise. But mostly the thunderbird. Look at it!

It makes storms as it flies!

So, as I was watching, I was wrapped up in the wonder of the story and the world, just as I was with the original 7-book, 8-movie Harry Potter series. J.K. Rowling's worldbuilding isn't perfect; I can list many, many issues with the wizarding world that cause some gaping plot holes. But why bother? Other people have already done it.

But I think one thing she's great at is introducing wonder to the reader. I think she does this by having a character who is new to the magical world, just like the reader/viewer is.

In the original books, Harry is new to magic. He doesn't know he's a wizard, and he hasn't been raised in the wizarding world the way Ron has. So, when he comes to Hogwarts and sees magic, it's for the first time. Everything is new and interesting to him, so he thinks about it and comments on it and is amazed by it, just like the readers are. We see his wonder, and we feel our own, and it feeds itself. Can you imagine the stories from Ron's perspective? He's grown up with magic, and sees nothing interesting about it. The first day of school would be just that: the first day of school.

For Harry, it's a step into a brand new world. And so it is for us, too. We're allowed to feel all the wonder available.

Fantastic Beasts does this too. I won't give spoilers to the plot or anything, but in case you haven't seen it yet and really don't want to be spoiled for it at all (I'm talking, you haven't even seen the trailers), then stop reading now.

In Fantastic Beasts, the No-Maj (Muggle) character of Jacob Kowalski is this character that helps the viewer see the wonder in the magical world. Every other character is enmeshed in the magical world, and even though Newt Scamander sees wonder in his creatures, he's used to them. Kowalski is non-magical and seeing the magical world in New York City for the first time. Just like us. The magic and the creatures are all new and wonderful to him, just as they are to us.

I think having a character that is new and amazed by the wonderful and amazing in a story can be helpful in establishing the world of the story. You see this happen a lot: Lucy Pevensie, in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe being one example. Charles Marlow in Heart of Darkness being, perhaps, another. In both cases, the world comes alive through the eyes of a character seeing it for the first time, and it draws the readers in more.

Stories filled with wonder, like Fantastic Beasts, seem appropriate for the holiday season, when, I think, it's easier to see the world anew and appreciate magic in our lives we don't see as often. It's a time of joy and wonder and light. Before I go make some cocoa and watch the snow fall, I'd like to post this video. The #LightTheWorld campaign is put out by my church and it's all about service. The video is lovely. I hope you watch it and you have a wonderful week!

So You Want to Write a Likeable Villain...Are You Sure?

So, I'm happy to see that lots of publishers/presses/editors are welcoming the Jolly Fish writers! Yay! Hopefully everyone finds a new writerly home soon!

I've been thinking about villainy lately. This is, obviously, coming in part because Halloween is around the bend, and I'm planning myself a villainous costume. More on that next week. ;)

But also because, after Halloween, comes National Novel Writing Month, and I'm in prewriting right now for the book I'm going to be working on. This book has a villain, and I needed to get into this villain's head, discover motives, and plan moves to counter my hero. I had to think as though my main character is the villain (which is fun) because I want this villain to be strong.

After all, a hero is often only as strong as his/her villain. Who would Harry Potter be with Voldemort?

So, yes, I want my villain to be strong.

But then I got talking to a roommate and she started giving me advice on making my villain relatable, even likeable, and I found myself pulling back. As a writer, I've heard every piece of advice about how I should give my villains soft spots, or tragic backstories, to make them more human to readers. So why was I rejecting that idea?

Why wouldn't I want a villain readers may like?

Okay, I don't think this villain is entirely unlikable. I think this person is smart, cunning, and interesting, with a unique worldview. My villain is my monster, though, and you're supposed to like your own little monster. I also hate my villain with everything inside me.

And I think that's okay.

I've seen unlikable villains done before and I think the writers chose wisely. Anyone here seen the TV show Leverage?

Great show. Highly recommend.

This show is about a team of thieves who take down the rich, powerful, corrupt, and manipulative. The people the Leverage team go up against are awful, awful people. They use their lawyers and money to cow innocent people into silence. They break laws when they can get away with it, but more often they bribe, lie, cheat, and hide evidence in ways that are legal, but hurt many, many people. They are atrocious, nasty, unlikable villains, and they have to be.

Why? Because the Leverage team ruins them.

The Leverage team takes the villains down past rock bottom, destroying the villain-of-the-week's reputation, business, everything. If we liked the villain, this would seem horrible and cruel. But since we hate the villain, we root for the team and feel satisfied when they take this piece of human garbage down.

A likeable villain is a good thing, in most cases. But if my villain is likeable, or has some kind of tragic backstory, then when my hero takes them down the story becomes, in part, a tragedy. Part of the satisfaction of the good guy winning ebbs. The tone of my book, the kind of story it is and the characters I have...I don't think this is what I want.

So, do I really not want my villain to be likeable? Kind of. Of course I want this person to be human, and relatable, not some mustache-twirling cardboard cut-out stereotype. However, I've been drawn lately to villains who are bad, know it, and don't care, and I think this is the kind of person who would fit my story best. No tragic backstory needed, not in this case. I'll let my villain charm readers with their nasty, clever personality. It's been done before.

 *cough cough* Moriarty.

Familiarity Breeds Fear and Pain

Happy October, everyone!

Here in Utah, we have rain and festive-colored trees, so it finally, FINALLY, feels like fall. I'm enjoying every minute of it. I ate Pumpkin Spice Cheerios this morning. Yes, they are real things. Happy Halloween!

I've been literarily (read it again) preparing for Halloween by reading horror books. I swear, the temperature drops below 70 just once, and I grab every book in the library about monsters and killers and ghosts. And the king of those books? Stephen King.

Over the last month or so, I've read a couple of King horrors: It and Cujo.

             

They're both good, but one left me feeling emotionally satisfied (It) and the other just bugged me (Cujo). Which was weird, because It definitely had a lot more horrifying scenes and moments than Cujo did.

So, like I do with anything that bugs me, I pick at it. And this is what I determined: It can't happen. It can't. It's a supernatural monster that taunts and scares kids and eats them. It shapeshifts. It doesn't exist in the real world, and when the book is over, the monster is dead. It can't come where I am.

Cujo, on the other hand, can happen. It's a rabid dog, not a supernatural monster. There are touches of the supernatural in this book, but not enough to place that barrier of disbelief in my mind. A dog can go rabid. It can trap a mother and son in their car on a hot summer day. The mother and son can be stuck there, day after day, as no one comes to find them. This CAN happen, and the monster is really out there, somewhere.

So it freaks me out even more.

I don't think this is a phenomenon unique to me. I had a conversation with my sister about The Hunchback of Notre Dame (Disney movie), and she told me she thinks the saddest part of that movie is the scene where Esmeralda and Phoebus kiss as Quasimodo watches. She claims this is worse that any other scene in this movie, and let's remember, this movie involves death, emotional abuse, and physical abuse and humiliation in the Feast of Fools scene. But no, rejection is the most painful, and I actually agree: this is the saddest scene.

I think this is because few of us know what it's like to experience humiliation on that scale, or even events like the deaths in that movie. We don't know what it's like to have food thrown at us in front of everyone. But we know exactly what it's like to be rejected, to fall in love and have the subject of our affection choose someone else. We can feel that heartache because we've felt it before.

On a related note, I remember seeing an Internet post about how Professor Umbridge from Harry Potter is the worst and most hated because we don't normally interact with terrorist dictator evil overlords like Voldemort, so we see him as evil in the abstract, whereas Umbridge, the power-mad teacher who uses her authority to hurt, is much more relatable. We know her, and we hate her, because she's familiar.

Seriously, how much hate do you feel looking at her right now?

I think this idea is interesting to think about, that the familiar hits us harder. It gives us writers a key to making stories more emotionally impactful without being manipulative. Give the reader something familiar, and they'll already have the emotions ready made. The pain of rejection, the loathing of a tyrannical teacher, the fear of a psycho dog under the control of a very real disease. Once it becomes personal to the reader, it becomes real, and once it's real, the feelings deepen.

What do you think? Do you know a story that got under your skin because something about it was so  familiar that it stirred up real, present emotions in you?

A Magical Weekend

Hello, all!

Just so you know, this week I'm participating in GISHWHES. If my media looks weird, that's why. More about that in a future post.

Anyway, you know how I said I had one adventure worth talking about this summer? Well, I'm going to talk about it now.

About a month ago me and three friends went to Universal Studios California and Disneyland. We had planned this trip for about a year, so anticipation was high. Sometimes, when this happens, the trip doesn't live up to the hype. Sometimes disappointment sets in.

Not this time. This trip exceeded my expectations.

 

That's me on the end in the black shirt.

I'll spare you all the details in favor of a brief overview: we spent one day at Universal and two days at Disneyland, one day for Disneyland itself and one day for California Adventure. We spent a day driving there and another driving back, making the trip 5 days total.

We rode many, many rides and spent all our time well. I can't think of anything I regretted doing or not doing. The company was wonderful as well: my companions were three women who know how to have fun and give in to the magic of these places without becoming irresponsible.

Highlights: Harry Potter World. Harry. Potter. World. I've been to the one in Florida, but I had friends with me who were experiencing this for the first time, and it made it wonderful. The butterbeer was, as always, perfect.

 

The ride in the castle was great, but I felt like the 3-D glasses got in the way. Water splashes on the lenses ruined the effect for me (but not by much!). One thing I learned was that there are passwords that let you jump to the front of the line. What was ours? Not telling. We were given it by a kind worker trying to make our first time in Hollywood magical.

And it was. I learned a word that lets me do things I can't do on my own. Ergo, I learned magic.

From there we went to Disneyland and attacked the rides with such energy, so early in the morning, that we were the first riders on the Haunted Mansion (and it wasn't our first ride of the day). I had several great moments of the day, and here they are in pictures:

 

Here was meeting Rapunzel and Flynn. The best part about this was that each of us had something we were celebrating. One friend was getting married. One had a great job. One had parents coming home from a mission in Nicaragua soon. And me? I was publishing a book. The characters commented on our buttons, and Flynn asked me about mine. Here's how that went:

Flynn: You're publishing a book? What's it about?

Me, smiling, knowing this is going to get a good reaction: It's about a thief, actually?

Flynn: Is it about me?

The conversation continued in that vein, and both Flynn and Rapunzel told me I need to tell Belle. And guess what? I got the chance!

 

She said she'd look for Under Locker and Key in the Beast's library. Score!

Other highlights included riding Splash Mountain for the first time:

 

(I know it's grainy. Let me keep my dignity.)

And also eating at Earl of Sandwich:

 

Best. Sandwiches. Ever!

The next day was in California Adventure. I had never been there, but I knew it was the more intense park. Hyperspace Mountain (I like the new changes) is not as intense as California Screamin'. So, I was nervous.

I didn't have to be. I loved all of it! We started with Soarin', which has been changed. It now has landmarks from all over the world: we saw the Taj Mahal, the Great Wall of China, the Eiffel Tower, Pacific islands, among other things. It was nice, though I miss the orange trees.

One highlight was me finally defeating the Tower of Terror. I rode it with my family a year ago, but I was so scared that my mom had to hold my hand. I'm an adult. I enjoyed the ride, but the fear from that first apprehensive ride stuck, and I was still scared. Even a year later, I was still dreading the ride.

No more. I rode again, twice, hoping to paper over the fear with thrill. I enjoy the ride now, and here's proof:

 

That's me, back and center. Great ride!

I also enjoyed California Screamin' a lot. I rode it three times. After the first, the line was short, so we got back in for a moment before having to leave because the ride broke down. As we left the line and went to find our one friend who didn't want to ride, I looked up and noticed that there were people still on the coaster.

Two or three trains were stuck on the rails. It was a hot, sunny day. If we had been a little later or earlier to the ride, we might have been the ones stuck. The people were down in about 20 minutes, but we were glad to be eating lunch then, not waiting on a stalled coaster.

We got to see the Frozen show. We also met Captain America and Spider-Man. Photographic proof below:

 

 It was a magical weekend, full of beauty and perfection. Our timing worked out so well; not only did we not get stuck on the coaster, but we were in California during a stretch of beautiful weather. I've missed it since I came back to home and reality.

I've been thinking about places like Universal and Disney and how they're different than other places. I go there and I feel something beyond just fun. I feel magic. When I'm there, I really feel like dreams are coming true. The effect was heightened by celebrating my own dreams coming true while I was there.

I think the world needs places like this, in the same way it needs books and movies, good stories told. Magic like this helps us feel like dreams do come true, even when they don't seem to. It lets us live out fantasies of being a hero or an explorer, just for a moment. I think that helps when life gets hard and we feel like regular old people again. It's hard to completely get the glitter of being a hero off.

So, when the monsters attack and the villains laugh and times are hard, it becomes a little easier to wipe the blood off your lip and say, "No. That is my castle, my happily ever after, and you don't have a prayer of keeping me from it."

I'm oversimplifying, but it's what I felt when I was there. It was a very real, very beautiful kind of magic. I hope the glitter of it stays with me for a long time.

Thanks for an enchanting time, ladies!

Tl;dr - I went to Universal Studios and Disneyland. I learned magic, flew through a castle, hobnobbed with fictional characters of all kinds, went to space, flew around the world, conquered my fears, achieved hopes and dreams, and took a little magic home with me.