Category: Reviews

Review: Dictionary.com’s “Writing Dynamo” program

  By

 If you’re on Thesaurus.com (owned by Dictionary.com) as much as I am, you’ve probably seen their Writing Dynamo program advertised. Tagged “Your personal writing coach,” the program professes itself to be “Accurate, effective, web-based proofreading.”

Were you excited?

I was.

Thesaurus.com is hands down better than MS Word’s synonym tool, so why shouldn’t they be better at everything else? Especially if they charge you for it every month! It even says it tests for overused expressions, sentence length and voice!

I signed up for the free trial to find out. I only played around with it for an hour or so, but here’s what I found out.

Disclaimer: It looks like the program was designed for students writing essays, not for fiction writers. But I only tested it on fiction. Take it as you like.

What it looks like.

What it looks like.

Problems

  • Can’t handle large text – it won’t offer feedback on much more than 3,000 words at a time.
  • “Upload Text” button didn’t work – the window popped up, but none of my documents were even visible.
  • Small writing area – the text box is kind of small and not adjustable.
  • Useless dictionary – The spell-checker flagged foreign/made-up words (like MS Word would), but when I clicked “Add to Dictionary” the red underline disappeared on that instance of the word only. Where the word appeared elsewhere in the text, it was still flagged.
  • Didn’t flag all of the foreign/made up words, which indicates it might not catch all misspellings, either.
  • Set to American English – and I couldn’t see a way to switch it to British English.
  • Flagged em dashes as spelling errors.
  • Flagged sentences longer than seventeen words – which could encourage you to be more concise, but there’s no law against eighteen-word sentences.
  • Suggested changing “would have” to “had.” Wrong!
  • Sometimes gave false apostrophe corrections – telling me plurals should be possessives and vice versa (don’t people have enough trouble with this already?!?)
Closeup of the sidebar.

Closeup of the sidebar.

It called the em dash a spelling error.

It called the em dash a spelling error.

The Best Part

It flagged words repeated in close proximity. If I used the same word twice—or even two words with the same root – within a few sentences, it flagged both and offered a synonym suggestion. It’s a pretty useful feature; one MS Word doesn’t offer. Wordle can help you identify words you use too often, but not at this level.

Quick tips appear beneath the sidebar.

Quick tips appear beneath the sidebar.

Conclusion                                                                                      

It didn’t live up to “accurate,” and I don’t know what parameters it uses to judge voice, but I don’t think the world has yet seen software sophisticated enough to judge voice as we define it.

Don’t use Writing Dynamo if you don’t already have a solid grasp on grammar and punctuation; you’re likely to get led astray by false flags. But if you just want a second pair of eyes – particularly for repeated words – this program is worth the free trial and possibly a one-month subscription ($4.99). I’d suggest waiting until your story/book is in its final editing stages, sign up, edit 3,000 words at a time, and then cancel your subscription.

However, the program is fairly new and they are accepting feedback, so they may improve it. I’ll keep you posted if I learn anything.

—

3 movies every writer should see

  By

Valentine’s Day is just around the corner! If your sweetheart is a fellow writer and you’re planning a movie night for Thursday (or, like me, you are celebrating Singles Awareness Day and need verification that you are not alone in the world), try one of these three writerly movies (okay, only one is technically a romance, but work with me here).

 

Inkheart


What it’s about:

A bookbinder with the power to make literature come alive by reading aloud must dodge the villain he let out of a fantasy novel, while trying to rescue his wife, who’s been trapped in the same book.

Why it’s a must-see:

  1. Favorite pieces of literature stumbling into the real world
  2. Author-meets-characters scenes
  3. It’s a decent adaptation of the book (I highly recommend reading the whole trilogy, which is a more mature, in-depth exploration of the concept)

Meggie: You’ve been to Persia, then? 
Elinor: Yes, a hundred times. Along with St. Petersburg, Paris, Middle-Earth, distant planets and Shangri-la. And I never had to leave this room. Books are adventure. They contain murder and mayhem and passion. They love anyone who opens them. 

 

Midnight in Paris

What it’s about:

A hack Hollywood screenwriter aspiring to be a novelist is vacationing in modern-day Paris when he stumbles through a time rift and ends up partying with the likes of F. Scott Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway and T.S. Elliot.

Why it’s a must-see:

  1. Who hasn’t dreamed about talking life and literature with their favorite authors?
  2. Owen Wilson is adorable
  3. Quotes like this:

Gil: I would like you to read my novel and get your opinion. 
Ernest Hemingway: I hate it. 
Gil: You haven’t even read it yet. 
Ernest Hemingway: If it’s bad, I’ll hate it. If it’s good, then I’ll be envious and hate it even more. You don’t want the opinion of another writer. 

 

Stranger Than Fiction

What it’s about:

An author struggles to think of the most poetic way to kill off her main character, unaware that the character can hear her narrating his life and is doing everything he can to avoid his imminent death.

Why it’s a must-see:

  1. More author-meets-character type stuff
  2. It explores the remorse a writer feels from killing off beloved characters
  3. It questions the value of tragic endings versus happy ones
  4. Dustin Hoffman is hilarious as the rather indifferent literature professor who advises Harold:

Professor Hilbert: Little did he know. That means there’s something he doesn’t know, which means there’s something you don’t know, did you know that?

 

–

What’s your favorite writing-related movie? Tell me in the comments!

 

–

Pride & Prejudice & Vlogging: Lizzie Bennett Diaries challenges us to think outside the book

  By

Yesterday, Mr. Darcy blew up the Internet.

Since the modern-day Lizzie Bennett uploaded her first video diary on YouTube six months ago, tens of thousands of Austen fans have been holding their figurative breaths in anticipation of seeing the one, the only, the Darcy. Dubbed “Darcy Day” (as if it needed any more hype!) it was, despite my worries, not a disappointment.

So…time for a review of the entire show up to this point!

(The show is a creation of Bernie Su and Hank Green. Read more about them here.)

Let’s start with the limitations and end with the best parts!

Limitations of Vlogging.

Most of the 21st-century Pride & Prejudice adaptation takes place through Lizzie’s video diaries, and through off-shoots with other characters. This means only the parts of the story Lizzie rants about, or parts her sisters and friends mention while bursting into the room, are going to make it on screen. So:

  • We don’t see all the characters. The first episodes introduce us to a core cast of Lizzie, Jane, Lydia and Charlotte. Added characters have brought it up to about a dozen now, and we meet the rest through Lizzie’s hilarious costumed dramatizations. But Lizzie’s father is rarely even mentioned, and I miss him. Though this does illustrate his laziness as a father, his closeness to Lizzie and his eventually letting her down are important points too. But writer Bernie Su aptly noted that, as people rarely rant about the stable things in their lives, Lizzie’s not likely to talk about him in her videos…yet.
  • We get a slanted view. Because the video diary format lends itself chiefly to ranting, we see lots of the “I hate Darcy” Lizzie but little of the cool and composed wit Lizzie is when she’s meeting people in daily life. Fortunately, the other characters’ differing personalities and opinions—and the brilliantly-written hypocrisy of Lizzie’s prejudice—give us a fuller understanding of the truth.

Limitations of Modern Society.

Morals, prudence and good breeding, all major themes in the novel, don’t carry the weight today they did then, which makes parts of the story difficult to adapt:

  • Mr. Collin’s proposal and the entailing of the Bennett estate to him don’t apply in today’s world, and the writers’ solution SPOILER ALERT to change the marriage proposal into a job offer only has about 50% of the moral/emotional conflict as the original—choosing a business partner and choosing a life partner are two very different things, whether or not dropping out of college is a factor.
  • Wickham’s sin of stealing Lydia’s maidenhood means little to a society that largely accepts sex outside of marriage, with a Lydia who obviously lost her virginity long ago. One must assume his racket is more on the level of pornography, prostitution, and/or sex trafficking, but we have yet to find out.
  • The trickiest adaptation is Lizzie herself. Book Lizzie is a mixture of morals, prudence and spunk. How is that transposed for 2012? Vlog Lizzie occasionally uses language and expresses views that I don’t think even a modern Lizzie would. But I am more conservative than most people—and considered through the worldview of the writers, they have created quite an accurate picture of Lizzie Bennett.

Why Lizzie Bennett Diaries is so much fun

A million reasons! I’ll restrict myself to seven.

  • It’s a story I have loved for years, but it’s like I get to experience it all for the first time again.
  • I love seeing how closely even some of the dialogue matches the book.
  • I love trying to guess how they’ll adapt the next plot twist.
  • I love following the story across multiple mediums (media?): not just on YouTube, but through the characters’ Tumblrs and Twitter pages.
  • I love seeing new depth in secondary characters:
    • Lydia – the first adaptation I’ve seen that explores why Lydia acts the way she does. It doesn’t make her behavior excusable, but makes it understandable. We can feel for her, and even like her.
    • Mary – cousin instead of sister, is cool and together and becomes more of a positive influence on Lydia than Book Mary ever was. She’s probably the least faithful adaptation of all the characters, but we like her tremendously.
    • Maria – Charlotte’s sister—remember her?—has a brief but memorable role in her own short vlog series. She’s a refreshingly normal Doctor Who-loving nerd, and we get the feeling she’s just as excited by the story going on around her as we are. She’s the one we can relate to when Jane is too perfect, Lydia is too crazy, and Lizzie too angry—and all of them too iconic. Maria is us.
  • Jane imitating Darcy. Priceless.
  • I love connecting to a community that’s even crazier about it all than I am.

In short, Lizzie Bennett Diaries is a smart, moving, and funny adaptation, and a fascinatingly clever use of modern technology to tell an old story in a new way. I don’t believe the traditional novel will ever go out of style, but heads up: there are new outlets for storytelling. Don’t tie yourself down to traditional. Think outside the book.

–

Watch Lizzie Bennett from the beginning! (recommended)

Watch Mr. Darcy’s first scene!

–

What Happened to George Lucas?

  By ,

 

babies dressed as princess leia and obi wan

Image by Steve Winton

Jar Jar Binks did not ruin Star Wars.

Actually, I found Jar Jar amusing. But there’s a reason I put it on my “If I Ever Get Filthy Rich” to-do list to buy the rights to Star Wars so I can completely remake the prequels:

George Lucas ruined Star Wars.

Now, let’s not harp on the guy. He obviously didn’t mean to ruin Star Wars. So what went wrong?

And how do the rest of us avoid doing the same thing?

Obviously, the specific errors are too many to list – from the overuse of CGI to the nonsensical plot – but it all boils down to two general problems:

  1. He knew the originals were good, but he didn’t know why.
  2. Rather than taking the time to figure out why, he opted to start making money NOW through the prequels.

The meat was what made Star Wars great—the characters; the story. Lucas didn’t take the time to understand either of those things. Maybe he was lazy, or impatient, or afraid to fall whilst leaping for greatness. But all he managed to do was copy the occasional catchphrase and the droids’ comic relief, and set up a few scenes to mirror scenes in the originals (whether or not it made plot sense). But all these things are just accessories—they make the story better only when the story is already good. When the story isn’t good, they just aggravate the gag reflex.

Here are the major character errors Lucas committed. If he had taken the time to understand and develop the characters, the plot would have formed itself.

No clear protagonist

Who is the hero of the new trilogy? You know, the Average Joe to whom all the weird stuff is explained (and thus explained to us); the guy we like and root for?

  • Is it Anakin? But we don’t even meet him until 32 minutes into the first movie (which itself is only two hours and change). And even then, he doesn’t know what’s going on until movie two.
  • Is it Obi Wan? He’s on screen a lot, but we don’t get an inside look at his motives or emotions.

Our lesson: Know who your hero is. Introduce him early. Ensure he is likeable.

Role reversals

  • Movie one: Master Qui Gon recklessly gambles with someone else’s ship, while his young apprentice, Obi Wan, sits by wisely questioning his choices.
  • Movie two: Obi Wan switches to the reckless master position: after telling Anakin to think before he acts, Obi Wan promptly crashes through a window to grab onto an assassin droid that really doesn’t look like it can support his weight – and Anakin’s the one to rescue him.
  • Amidala resists a romantic relationship just because she’s in politics, while Anakin, who’s been brainwashed to reject romance for the last ten years of his life, is hitting on her from the very first moment
  • And why does she show all that skin if she wants to keep things professional?

Our lesson: Make a list of the major actions in your story, who performs those actions, and what their motives were. Does it make sense, or do you need to swap some things around?

No personalities

The original trilogy abounded in distinct personalities.

  • Luke Skywalker: sheltered, idealistic, brave.
  • Han Solo: roguish, jaded, heart of gold.
  • Princess Leia: smart, stubborn, caring.

The new trilogy, however…

  • Anakin Skywalker: uh…whiny, homicidal, stalker-ish?
  • Obi Wan Kenobi: doesn’t seem to know who he is (see above).
  • Queen/Senator Amidala: uh. Nondescript?

Our lesson: Can you describe your main characters without mentioning their appearance or occupation? If not, you’ve got work to do.

Shallow romance

Why do Anakin and Amidala fall in love? Aside from the fact that they are both good looking, and they get shot at together a couple times, there is no foundation for Amidala telling Anakin “I truly, deeply, love you.” I mean, Amidala’s been dealing with galactic politics since she was 14—why is she attracted to this kid who complains about his teachers being too strict?

Our lesson: If your story includes romance, ask yourself what, particularly, makes those two characters suited to each other? Find something in their personalities that’s complementary.

Contradicting ideals

Lucas contradicts not only the facts of the story (for instance, according to the original trilogy, Anakin never knew Amidala was pregnant), but the ideals. We go from Yoda telling Luke that “War does not make one great” to Obi Wan telling Anakin of his lightsaber that “This weapon is your life.”

Our lesson: Know what ideals your characters hold, and check that their actions and dialogue match those ideals.

—

What bothered you the most about the new Star Wars trilogy? What did you like about it?

—

NOTE: I owe many of the points in this post to Red Letter Media’s Star Wars reviews, which are horribly inappropriate—but annoyingly insightful.

—

Sam Betrays Frodo: A Mockingjay Review

  By ,

SPOILER ALERT for Mockingjay (The Hunger Games) and Return of the King (The Lord of the Rings).

Just Say No

Image by Marc Falardeau

After finishing the Hunger Games trilogy, I was torn between:

  1. Wanting to learn the author’s techniques so I could make my readers feel as strongly for my characters as I did for the Hunger Games characters
  2. Never wanting to put anyone through what I went through reading Hunger Games

I’m not a depressed person, nor particularly moody. A poorly-ended book will leave me angry and disappointed, but not devastated. Mockingjay, however, left me in a turmoil of tears late into the night and gave me a sick feeling every time I thought about it afterwards – which was often, since I finished it mere weeks before the first movie came out, and there were reminders everywhere, from a stray Catching Fire book jacket in a coworker’s car to Hunger Games recipes on the Yahoo! homepage.

As I lay awake that first night, trying to pinpoint what bothered me so much, I realized it all boiled down to one scene. One word, really.

First, the writing is brilliant (aside from heavy exposition in book two). The author asks moral questions without ever preaching. The prose is so clean, you forget you’re reading—you just get sucked straight into Katniss’s head. And Katniss is a complex character, flawed in ways I can relate to, yet heroic in ways I hope to be. I was afraid when she was afraid, I fell in love when she fell in love, and I grieved when she lost everything she cared about. As the story progressed, and more of my favorite people were murdered, I felt more and more beaten down, just as I saw Katniss beaten down. But one thing carried me through, which began in the very first chapter: I could always depend on Katniss to defend the weak.

Despite all her flaws, when she saw an innocent person threatened, Katniss was filled with righteous anger, and fought for them even against her better judgment. That’s what made her the Mockingjay.

The author brought Katniss down to her lowest point, which so many writers are squeamish of doing, but which is necessary for a great story. You must bring your hero to the edge of death; physically, emotionally or both. In that moment, your hero must make the ultimate decision. The exact decision varies with every story, but at its core it is always the same: right or wrong.

At this point, no one would blame him for making the wrong decision. But if he makes the right decision, even if the villain kills him afterwards, even if the whole world gets blown up or he doesn’t get the girl after all or whatever, your hero has won. Because no matter what the villain can do, he cannot break your hero’s spirit.

So I can forgive Ms. Collins for killing several of my favorite characters—even Prim, though that felt enough like the betrayal of the story. I can forgive her for estranging Katniss from her mother and best friend. I even think Katniss ended up with the right guy.

But I can’t forgive Ms. Collins for one thing. When the surviving tributes voted on whether or not to hold one last Hunger Games to punish the innocent children of the guilty Capitol officials, Katniss said Yes. For Primrose.

In that moment, Katniss died.

At her lowest point, she made the wrong decision—something I can’t blame her for in the least, but something that makes Katniss’s battle for innocence and goodness and decency all for nothing. The rebels may have defeated the Capitol, but Katniss, the person we were really rooting for, lost. Not just people she cared about, but her very self. The villains succeeded. They destroyed her.

We’re left feeling betrayed—and worse: hopeless.

As I drafted this post, I stopped to wonder why Lord of the Rings didn’t devastate me like Hunger Games did. After all, we fight through three books just to see Frodo decide to keep the ring at the end. But then I realized: Frodo isn’t Katniss. Frodo is hijacked Peeta. Samwise is Katniss. It was his friendship that carried us through the story, not Frodo’s strength. So when Frodo broke, we were sad. But Sam was still true, so there was victory. Imagine if instead, Frodo had destroyed the ring, but Sam had turned on him at the last moment. Not even the victory over Sauron would have redeemed that wrong.

So when you have brought your hero to his knees and he is about to make his choice, stop and think. What is this story’s Samwise? What promise do you need to keep to your readers?

And Ms. Collins, if by some slim chance you are reading this, I beg you: get them to change just one word in the Mockingjay screenplay.

Let Katniss say No. For Primrose.

–