Not sure if I’ve mentioned this or not on the blog, but when I’m writing a rough draft I shoot to produce 1,500 words a day.  That’s both the goal and the minimum.  If I go over, great.  But I won’t let myself stop before I get my 1,500 words unless it’s literally impossible, such as when a four-year-old nephew stops by, jumps in my lap, and begs to watch the funny kitty show on Youtube, or when time for work or an appointment comes and I have to leave.

For the past three weeks I’ve been working on a brand new book while Spring semester in finishing up at the college, which has me pretty busy.  (That’s on top of the marketing and promotion things I’m trying to do, and all my church stuff, which anyone who is LDS knows, includes quite a bit when you’re in a quorum presidency.)  This means I have between 8:00 and 10:00 a.m. every day to produce my 1,500 words.  That means keeping up quite a pace by my standards.  So you can probably understand why I’m pleased that, so far, I’ve hit my 1,500 word mark each day I’ve written, including this morning (except one day when I finished a chapter after 800 words, and finished chapters let me off the hook sometimes). 

It’s been over a year since I really wrote a book.  That stunned me when I first realized it.  I’ve done a few proposals with sample chapters and synopses, but hadn’t finished an entire book in over a year.  So there was a bit of trepidation about picking up serious writing again.  Would I be able to produce at my expected pace?  So far, so good.  With all the other stuff going on and with how different this book is from anything I’ve written before, so far, so good is just fine with me.

***** 

A quick update on Dan Wells’ book launch yesterday.  I did manage to make it and am glad I went.  It was well attended, though I think I’m the only one there who wasn’t wearing either a shirt or hat proudly declaring “I Am Not a Serial Killer” in big bloody letters.  Please don’t take that lack of denial to mean anything.   

Bought a book for my brother (#31 of the evening).  Saw some writing friends.  Demolished a poor woman’s understanding of her story when she asked me for some plotting help.  (I really wish my advice wasn’t so often destructively creative, emphasis on the destructive, but it’s the only way I know to actually help.  I don’t know how to improve a structure without securing the foundation first.)  Anyway, if you didn’t make it be sure to check out Dan’s book, I Am Not a Serial Killer.  As I’ve said before, he’s a good writer and it’s a good book, and by “good” I mean legitimately better than most.  So if you like horrific realism and psychology, or good writing that tackles difficult scenarios, then you should give it a read.

I cannot post tags on my blog anymore.  Don’t know why and it is frustrating me way out of proportion to how important this should be.  This all started when I updated my version of WordPress.  It was my belief that an update would make things better, easier, quicker, and in perhaps many other ways to some degree improved.  You know, because of that whole up = good, down = bad analogy.  I thought moving up a grade would probably be a positive thing.  I was wrong.  It seems to have for some unknown reason made WordPress recalcitrant, sporadic, and somewhat more dense than it was previously.

When did “new and improved” start to mean ”different and the better/worse thing is hit and miss” rather than “preferable in some way, shape, or form than what we gave you before”?  And people wonder why I’m obsessive about semantics. 

So if while you’re visiting this blog/site weird stuff happens—words disappear, navigation goes screwy, lasers shoot out of your USP port and melt your cat—please know that it isn’t my fault.  It’s just the internets (I like that word so much better pluralized, so thanks to our former pres)  plunging further and further into degeneracy as version 12.465.Omega1.2 becomes version 12.465.OmegaRed1.3.    

Dan Wells is having a book launch and signing for his horror novel I Am Not a Serial Killer tomorrow night at the Sam Weller’s in downtown Salt Lake (254 South Main Street).  It’s scheduled to start at 6:00 p.m., and he’ll be there until around 9:00 p.m.  I’m going to try to make it if it all possible.  You should, too.  If you can’t but you still like horrorific, fear-based fiction, you really should read Dan’s book.  It’s good.  Like I’ve said before, I don’t say that lightly or often, so you know I mean it.     

On a similar note, I just finished Sarah Zarr’s Story of a Girl last weekend.  Those who know me and my reading preferences know just how big a compliment it is that I finished the book; more, I enjoyed it.  Sarah really is one of the best at what she does, so if you like teen girl stories that trend toward the traumatic, you need to read her stuff.  I’m now reading Shannon Hale’s Book of a Thousand Days, which I’m enjoying immensely about three hundred days in.   

What else?  Oh, I finally got advanced notice that I’ll be participating at CONduit this year after all.  Don’t know quite yet what I’ll be doing (maybe a workshop of some sort), so keep an eye on this blog for more information when I have it. 

I thought I may as well pimp Brandon’s Fablehaven 5: Keys to the Demon Prisonrelease party tonight, even though it will certainly have a half-gajillion people attending as is.  If you’re interested, it’s being held at Cottonwood High School (5715 S. 1300 E.) in Salt Lake City, where Brandon went to school.  The event is scheduled to last from 6:00 p.m. to 11:00!  Five hours, crazy, huh.  I suspect that about an hour of that will be a cool presentation (similar to the release party I attended two years ago) and the next four hours will be people milling about having fun at games and stands while Brandon signs a book every ten seconds.  (For those trying to do the math, one book every ten seconds means six books a minute, 360 an hour, and 1440 over those four hours.  1440 books in an evening.  Makes you wonder why he bothers.)

Just for the record, Brandon Mull is a good writer, an even better storyteller, and a nice guy who works really hard on top of it.  He’s one success story that earns cheers from me, because he genuinely deserves it and has more than earned it by pounding the pavement.  So if you’re interested, go be a face in the crowd (mob?) and throw your support behind the already speeding train that is Mr. Mull.

Also, Sydney Salter is doing a little fundraiser for Room To Read, an organization that builds libraries and champions literacy world wide.  For every person who posts a comment on this blog posting she will donate a dollar.  So go!  Help and be heard!

I forgot to mention that I did an interview with The Enchanted Inkpot (not an actual enchanted inkpot) which was posted on their blog Tuesday.  You can still read it by clicking here, if you’re interested.  It’s largely about conflict in story and how I applied my theories on conflict rich narrative in GDC. 

And a final reminder that the Fire Petal Books auction will only be accepting bids on most items and services until tomorrow.  If you haven’t yet looked at what’s available, go here.

Lastly, I just added a paper I wrote a few years ago about archetypal literary theory to the essay section of the site. (That section is available to members only, so you’ll need to join for free to see it.) This is more academic than the other essays I’ve posted so far, with citation of sources used included. Anyone interested in a more theoretical treatment of my storytelling philosophy may be interested. As always, comments are welcome, and complaints are accepted.

That’s right, once more I am available for purchase.  Michelle Witte, formerly of Gibbs Smith, is showing much greater ambition and courage than I could ever muster by daring to start up her own indie children’s bookstore in Springville, Utah.  How fantastic and gutsy is that!  To help her get things off the ground, she’s holding an auction with a number of books and services and other odds and ends (stress the odd, such as Wendy Toliver’s bracelet). 

If anyone is interested, I am one of her odd wares.  Likely the oddest.  I’ve offered to critique a proposal package consisting of a cover or query letter, a synopsis, and the first ten pages of a manuscript.  The current bid is $50.  If you’re interested just see the list of auction items by going here. 

There are a lot of other things worth bidding on as well.  Books, all signed I believe, by my old friends James Dashner and Jessica Day George, newer friends Bree Despain, Kristen Chandler, Shannon Hale, Mette Ivie Harrison, Mike Knudson, Janette Rallison, and Sydney Salter, and many others—they even have a book signed by Neil Gaiman!  Services include everything from critiques to an interview for marketing opportunities to lunch with Bree Despain (who, yes, is very lovely, but is also happily and healthily married, so don’t bid too much on that thinking it’ll be THAT kind of lunch). 

A few things that caught my eye: the manuscript critique and phone call by Molly O’Neill from HarperCollins; the picture book critique by Rick Walton (who is described as all-knowing not as propaganda but as a matter of documented and undeniable fact); the manuscript critique by Sara Zarr (I believe my last post made clear my thoughts on her abilities); two admissions for the Teen Writers Conference, which could very well be a life changing experience for teen who is interested in writing; and, especially, Wendy Toliver’s bracelet (as readers of my blog, I assume you have some familiarity with the magical and fantastic, and so should know the power a personal item like that can give over you; her daring magical enslavement to help a children’s bookstore is truly heroic).

I believe bidding on most items (all except those with no current bids) ends this Saturday, so if you’re interested you’d better take a look quick.

Sorry I’ve been even less attentive to this blog than normal.  My reason—yes, reason, not excuse or justification—is that I’m starting a new book.  Really just the proposal package, which means the first three chapters, a synopsis, and a cover letter, but doing that requires that I pretty much know where I’m going with the entire story.  Sticking with my typical method, I can’t share too much about the story, but I will tell you that it mixes a Korean boogeyman myth with teen girl lit.  Yeah, that’s right, and I dare you to use that to figure out what I have mind. 

It’s Spring Break at SLCC so I’ve set the goal of finishing the sample chapters by this Saturday.  Three chapters, roughly 7-8,000 words, in a week shouldn’t be too tough.  As of this morning I’m to about 5,500 words and am nearly done with chapter two.  Right on pace.  It’s impossible to know if a rough draft is good or not, especially as our emotions so often lie to us during composition, but I feel pretty good given how new and different this genre and perspective are.  I’m writing from the POV of a 14-year-old Korean-American girl, first person, so there’s a lot that’s new there.  I’ll keep you updated, hopefully with greater frequency once the rough draft of these chapters is finished.

In preparation for writing this new story, I’ve been reading some teen girl lit with a strong voice and powerful, traumatic emotions.  That isn’t all I’ve been reading, but it has added titles to the list that I wouldn’t likely have picked up otherwise.  So here’s a rundown of the books and authors I’ve been reading in recent months and why:

- Sara Zarr.  Sara’s a friend and member of several local writer’s organizations with me, and I’ve been hearing about her work for a long time.  It isn’t the type of stuff I read normally, but this new story gave me a good reason to try her writing.  It’s good.  Very good, in fact, if Sweathearts is any indication.  (And I hear her other books are better.)  So I’m picking up Story of a Girl (her National Book Award nominated debut) and Once Was Lost next.    

- Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson.  Another teen book, very strong voice and equally difficult subject matter.  It was very good, though I did feel that sometimes the dark, jaded slant of the protagonist was a little excessive.  Dark humor can lose it’s theraputic value if used too often, which I felt occasionally made this protagonist feel just a touch artificial.  But that’s pretty particular criticism; overall, very well done.

- Dune by Frank Herbert.  I’ve read this book before, of course, but not since I was a teen.  I knew I liked it, but I’d forgotten just how much.  Aside from Herbert’s affinity or jumping heads within a scene (which I sometimes find distracting) and his italicizing thoughts (which always irritates me when done as frequently as Herbert does), it’s a near-perfect book.  Great drama, fine characterization, fantastic dialogue, all communicating really complex and important ideas.  The rest of the series is less cohesive than the first book, but it’s definitely a worthwhile read.  It’s a great study into what it means to be human and how intricately that is tied to our ability to hope.  It will always be one of my top recommendations.

- Kate DiCamillo.  I’ve made no secret of the fact that I’m not as familiar with children’s lit as I am adult, and that since I started writing for kids I’ve been trying to catch up.  In that rush, I’ve found no children’s writer that I more admire and even envy than Kate.  The Magician’s Elephant, The Tale of Despereaux, The Miraculous Journey of Edward Tulane, all fantastic.  They’re books I wish I had written.  I still want to be Neil Gaiman when I grow up, put now I’d like a bit of DiCamillo thrown in as well.

- Terry Pratchett’s The Fifth Elephant.  A Discworld novel I’d not read before, it was typical Pratchett, which means it is anything but typical.  Life is always better with a little Pratchett added to the mix.

- Charles Dickens’ Great Expectations and R.L. Stine’s Welcome to Dead House.  The first I reread and the second I read for the first time in preparation for UELMA a few weeks ago. 

- I just started Dan Wells’ I Am Not a Serial Killer.  While I’m not much of a horror reader, I’m impressed by Dan’s craftsmanship and his ability to tread the very fine line he needs to tell the story without losing sympathy for the protagonist.

- The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins.  Good, well-written story, but I’m not as high on it as many others.  I found that a number of things in the story felt implausible, which made the experience less authentic than I would have liked.

- Next on the list (if I ever find the time) The Gathering Storm by Brandon Sanderson and Robert Jordan.  Hey, I put them in the order I consider proper given how the book was written.     

Adios.

A week late, true, but here it is.  My presentation to the Utah Educational Library Media Association last Friday went as well as I could have hoped.  It’s always a bit nerve wracking to deliver a new presentation, and this was the first time I’d ever given this program on archetype and abandoning canon to develop narrative literacy in elementary schools.  The session was pretty well attended and participation was excellent.  We talked about parallels between Goosebumps and Great Expectations, then I broke attendees into groups to find archetypes in a variety of texts, and then I used that to jump into the theory.  The attendees seemed very pleased with the experience, which makes me pleased with it.  In the future I’ll be looking to give the presentation again to educators and librarians.  If that includes any readers of this blog who may be interested, contact me if you have an event at which you’d like me to speak.  And just for the record, either James or I is stalking the other.  You can’t keep crossing paths this frequently without someone putting in some effort to make it so.  I’m just saying.

Now a quick conference announcement: The American Fork Arts Council Conference for Writers is coming up.  Here’s all the information as I received it.

American Fork Arts Council Conference for Writers
Saturday April 24 2010 9 a.m. – 4 p.m.
Historic City Hall, 31 N. Church Street (50 East), American Fork
8-9 a.m. Registration
9-9:10 Welcome (Plenary)
 
KEYNOTES
9:10-9:40 Keynote #1 Ginger Churchill, “What I Wish I had Known as a Beginning Writer”
9:40-10:10 Keynote #2 Ally Condie, “My Journey to National Publication”
10:10-10:40 John D. Brown, “Aiming for National Publication”
 

INTRODUCTIONS of editors and authors
10:40-11:05 EDITORS: Derk Koldewyn, Granite

AUTHORS: Shannon Guymon, Linda Jefferies, Caleb Warnock
11:05-11:20 15-minute break
11:20-noon BREAKOUT ONE
Upstairs room “Crafting the Novel” with Shannon Guymon, John D. Brown
Downstairs One “Finding and Working With an Agent” with Ginger Churchill, Ally Condie, Caleb Warnock
Downstairs Two “Taking Your Questions about Publishing” with Deseret Book and Granite Publishing
  
Noon-1 LUNCH “Mix and Mingle with Authors and Editors”
 
1-1:40 BREAKOUT TWO
Conference One Derk Koldewyn of Deseret Book “What Deseret Book is looking for now”
Conference Two Ginger Churchill “How to Write and Publish Picture Books”
Upstairs room John Brown, “How to Write a Story That Rocks Part 1: First Principles & Story Concept”
Office room Caleb Warnock “10 Things Every Writer Should Know about Copyright”
Downstairs One Granite Publishing “What Granite is looking for now”
Downstairs Two Ally Condie “Writing Young Adult Fiction”
 
1:40-1:50 Ten-minute break
 
1:50-2:30 BREAKOUT THREE
Upstairs Room John Brown, “How to Write a Story That Rocks Part 2: Character”
Conference Two Ginger Churchill “Genres of Children’s Books, from Board Books to YA Novels”
Conference One Derk Koldewyn of Deseret Book “National Publication with Shadow Mountain”
Office room Caleb Warnock “How to Write the Query Letter”
Downstairs One Granite Publishing “Publishing Options with Granite”
Downstairs Two Shannon Guymon “How to Write Romance”
 
2:30-2:40 Ten-minute break
 
2:40-3:20 BREAKOUT FOUR
Upstairs Room John Brown, “How to Write a Story That Rocks Part 3: Plot”
Conference Two Ginger Churchill “How to be a Writer and a Mother Too”
Conference One Linda Jefferies “Writing Poetry”
Office room Caleb Warnock “Write a Synopsis? I’d Rather Gouge My Eyes Out!”
Downstairs One Ally Condie “Succeeding as an LDS author”
Downstairs Two Shannon Guymon “Writing Nonfiction”
 
3:20-3:30 Ten-minute break
 
3:30-4:10 BREAKOUT FIVE
Upstairs Room John Brown, “Writing Scenes: The Basic Units of a Novel”
Conference Two Ginger Churchill “Querying Agents and Publishers”
Conference One Linda Jefferies “Publishing Poetry”
Office room Caleb Warnock “Okay, You Were Rejected – Why, and What to Do Now”
Downstairs One “How to form a critique group that works”
Downstairs Two Shannon Guymon “Succeeding as an LDS Author”
 
4:10-4:20 PRIZE GIVEAWAYS, GOODBYE
 
REVISED (MAY CHANGE)

I hear from a colleague (for I did not watch the Academy Awards) that Hurt Locker and not Avatar won Best Picture of 2009.  For someone who places little stock in these awards, I find I’m surprisingly jubilant.  My ambivalence about Avatar has been well expressed on a previous blog posting, but I’ve had enough people take exception to my criticism that I feel compelled to explain a bit more.

Avatar was not bad.  Technically, it was fantastic, though I found it a more logical step up from LOTR than an unanticipated one-movie revolution of film.  Narratively, it wasn’t distinctive in any way other than its complete predictability of premise, character, plot, and just about everything but the look of the film.  The celebration it has garnered I find sad, because it is indicative of the substantial appetite there is for style without much substance.  What bothers me the most is that style can readily be used in service of substance, as could well have been the case with Avatar.  Here are a few specifics that bothered me about the film as well as an idea of what would have made it more interesting, which may help you better understand my opinion of the film.

1) Alien Love: Two complete different species experience attraction and romance so predictably that Jake and Neytiri develop an intimate relationship in a very familiar, human way.  Not only is this a boring approach, it isn’t particularly genuine.  The Na’vi are descended from felines and have carbon filaments strengthening their bones.  Their passions would likely be expressed, at least at times, far less tenderly than human intimacy.  Even the Klingons had more complexity with their snarling and biting and amorous adventures into dominance.  A lot could have been done with the complexities of inter-species romance, so big opportunity missed.  Every love story is about individuals, which means that they are at some level alien to one other.  By taking advantage of the significant differences between two individuals of literally different species, an interesting commentary could have been made on the nature of romance and love.   

2) Angelic Science: There are some quirks about Sigourney Weaver’s character that make her more interesting than any other character in the film, but even that is window dressing.  Weaver’s Dr. Augustine is driven by curiosity just hard enough to never compromise anything in the film.  Science is as pure as the Na’Vi faith, this perfect oneness with everything.  What a crock.  Science as a method is pretty trustworthy and impartial, but as a practice it’s cutthroat.  It’s intertwined with economics and prestige and the substantial fallibility of humans, and people who are driven to be the best in their fields aren’t ever self-sacrificing altruists.  Dr. Augustine would have been much more interesting if she was shown to be benefiting materially in some way from her study of the Na’Vi.  Would this make her evil?  Of course not.  Would it have made her a genuine scientist?  Certainly.  Real scientists confront tough calls frequently, crises of ethics and competition, and seeing how Augustine handled such situations would have helped the film immensely.  Instead, science serves as the perfect mechanism to verify the perfect system inherent to Pandora, and as any storyteller should know, few things are as boring as perfect.  Which brings me to the next point…

3) The Circle of Life!  Works well for an animated Disney show meant primarily for kids; for adults of a more examining nature, not so much.  The assumption that unadapted nature is the perfect environment for a sentient species is illogical.  The very emergence of sentience is tied to the ability to manipulate.  If I am aware of my my self then I critique my self, and as I separate my self from other things, I make use of them as best I can.  A sentient species will—even must—prioritize itself over other life by the simple fact of direct experience.  The simplistic conservationist message of the film was so trite as to be painful.  Now, if the Na’Vi’s god truly had not taken sides and let them all die, that would have been an authentic presentation.  Not a great film, but at least authentic.  What would have been far more interesting is a presentation of an evolved Na’Vi culture, better off in some ways and harmed in others, after interaction with humans.  If there’s a single great truth about nature, it’s change or die.  If the Na’Vi had been forced to adapt to the new situation, changing their culture in some way irrevocably, that would have been interesting to see.  Instead, we get a message not quite complex enough to deserve an Elton John song.

4) Evil, Stupid, and Cowardly Business:  The suit behind all the nastiness on Pandora is possibly the most irritating and one dimensional character in Avatar.  Believe it or not, even lowlifes usually don’t see themselves as lowlifes.  Most of them even have good points, such as sound understanding of market forces or even the yearnings and appetites of their market.  Some have even heard of a concept called “business ethics.”  They may not always follow these, but it does play a role in their decision making.  Ribisi’s character would have been so much more interesting if he’d genuinely represented the corporate world: human, perhaps even likable, but driven to do something that really bothers him.  He could have been charming, truly invested in finding a peaceful solution and bothered by their inability to do so—and he still could have ordered the attack on the Na’Vi.  That’s what makes excessive capitalism frightening: it can recognize other values, such as diversity, ethics, or interpersonal relationships, and consciousness relegate them to lesser value than profit.   It would have been even more interesting if the Na’Vi had genuinely benefited from the “Sky People,” making the corporation a great yet dangerous catalyst forcing the Na’Vi to decide how much of their own future would stay in their hands.  Instead, it was like Wal-mart with missile turrets bristling from every store.  Yeah, most realistic.

5) The Great Satan (the American military): This one makes me genuinely angry.  I find the assertion that soldiers are evil to be extremely offensive.  Most soldiers, including American soldiers, don’t demonize their opponents.  Their training is designed specifically to prevent that.  Soldiers are trained to focus on what they do, and to do it as perfectly as possible under the worst of conditions.  The enemy is a variable that you do not allow enough influence to dictate the outcome of engagement.  You don’t have to belittle or hate someone to fight them, even to kill them.  That’s one of the fascinating things about soldiers and war.  Col. Quaritch is every stereotype of the evil military commander.  He is a conscienceless killer, doesn’t know or respect his enemy, and is driven by no particular affection or defense of anything in which he’s invested.  He’s violent for the sake of violence.  At the very least they could have shown his viciousness arising from camaraderie with his men, which is true of almost every single combat vet I’ve ever met.  The dynamics of war are fascinating in their difficulty.  Soldiers are both people and weapons, and those aspects frequently fight against each other.  That’s what PTSD is, the human portion lashing out at things the weapon disregards as being no longer consequential.  Col. Quaritch isn’t human, just weapon.  If that happened in real life, and I expect it can, the result is a type of monstrous victim, someone who has had the humanity literally bleed and burned out of him.  There is no husk of a human soul in Avatar’s archvillain; he’s no person, just function.  That, ultimately, is the common fatal flaw throughout nearly every section of this movie: every character has a why for their existence, but almost never is there a why behind their why.  It is a film full of sparkly things, which, unfortunately, includes every character in the movie.

As I promised, Miss Austen and the nightly heavens collide to produce a work of mystical and prognosticatory powers! 

I don’t know why I did this other than that it seemed fun and, to my knowledge, has not been done before (likely for good reason).  My sincerest gratitude to ForeverTeal who, through a coincidence of fortune that shall not further be expounded upon, played a role in the creation of… whatever this is. 

(Let’s make a game of it.  I won’t tell you which person represents which sign, but I’ll describe them really well and give the birthdate ranges that correspond.  See if you can figure out which character typifies which sign.  If you need some help, go to the site that gave me this crazy idea: PBS’s Masterpiece Theater gallery of Austen’s male characters.)

The Zodiac of Manly Men of Jane Austen

Frederick Tilney, Northanger Abbey, March 21st – April 20th: The Frederick Tilney is of an aggressive, cavalier nature yet remains somewhat insular.  He is impulsive, running whichever direction—or after whichever skirt—most entices him, though often this pursuit is more for the sake of the chase than the prize.  From the virtuous to the degenerate, all Frederick Tilneys are dynamos.  The best marshals his pioneering spirit and lust for adventure t0 blaze trails for society to follow; the worst burn paths through any society unfortunate enough to seek to contain him.  Subtlety is never his strength, nor is patience, or undo burden of empathy.  While pro-activity and risk are his hallmarks, a wise Frederick Tilney will temper his perpetual motion so as to not always charge regardless of the level of resistance or consequence to himself or others.

Colonel Christopher Brandon, Sense and Sensibility, April 21st – May 21st: The Christopher Brandon is stolid, dependable, and can be as unchanging and impervious as stone.  His devotion to purpose and fulfillment of his promises, to self and others, is all but certain regardless of circumstance.  This unwavering center makes him a leader who cannot be swayed from his aims, which may lead to seemingly impossible triumphs or catastrophes of such scope as to boggle logic.  When his character is tempered by devotion to others or social principles he becomes a staunch defender and advocate for others; when the opposite, he embodies the extremes of self-centeredness, and is dictatorial and self-gratifying to the point of totalitarianism.  A wise Col. Brandon will endure the foibles of others as he does chaos of situation without succumbing to fury.

George Wickham, Pride and Prejudice, May 22nd - June 21st: The George Wickham is engaging, lively, and the life of any party, from the most intellectual soiree to nights of crude language and cards.  His intellect and charisma are frequently matched with a skill at oratory, which makes him both a gifted storyteller and liar.  Truly skilled at mobilizing and manipulating people, he is nonetheless not well fitted for leadership roles as they require a level of dedication and fixation that is alien to him.  His great variety of interests and appetites sometimes combine with his enthusiasms and vigor to create a perpetual adolescent.  This craven being possesses the appearance of wide ability while actually lacking all depth but a sinister, manipulative core.  A wise George Wickham will delight himself by fostering an interest in others rather than consuming them in moments of impulse, even when they sometimes lack his persistent energy.

Henry Tilney, Northanger Abbey, June 22nd – July 22nd: The Henry Tilney is both caring and prone to appreciate the fantastic, but beneath lies a constancy and strong and stable foundation.  In many ways possessed of a variable personality, there is nonetheless an undercurrent of deeply rooted conviction of some sort in him, whether in morality, or law, or power.  The unpredictability that sometimes typifies his life arises from his instinctive and creative expressions of this underlying foundation.  While his breaking the orthodox can make him a fantastic problem solver, he makes a poor leader as he tends to act in ways that are difficult or even impossible for others to understand and emulate.  When poorly seasoned, this combination of creativity and bedrock conviction results in the despising of others, resulting in schizophrenic paranoia, obsessiveness, and control issues.  A wise Henry Tilney will keep as his guiding principle the notion of balance between his confident center and his quick, adaptable intellect with which he engages the world. 

Fitzwilliam Darcy, Pride and Prejudice, July 23rd – August 22nd: The Fitzwilliam Darcy is a mover of men, an exercise in constant and constructive movement.  No other type is so possessed of the confidence, charisma, adaptability, and determination to inspire obedience and even adoration in others.   He is leadership personified, and leads others even when traveling to destinations he would like to avoid himself.  The Mr. Darcy is the span against which other men are measured, both by themselves and by him.  While frequently charitable in his consideration of others, his good graces are always dependent upon conduct that fits his personal code.  No man can be as narcissistic, domineering, and intractable as a Mr. Darcy whose confidence tips to assurance of infallibility.  A wise Mr. Darcy will remember that even the greatest gifts are often best used in moderation, otherwise those he seeks to sweep into his wake will break themselves against him instead.

William Collins, Pride and Prejudice, August 23rd – September 23rd: The William Collins is a doer of deeds rather than a master of words or performance.  His method is almost mechanical: particular, precise, extremely intelligent, and acutely conscious of both practicality andtheory.  His goal-oriented nature is paired with a humility and even aversion to celebrity that makes him a fine independent worker or coordinator of others and a reluctant leader.  This fixation upon method and result can, when exaggerated, become an extreme judgmentalism that results in constant criticism of others.  The standard becomes the expectation, and any deviation from such is not only a sign of imperfect performance but genuine incapability and dishonest intent.  To avoid such didactic judgment of the entire world, a wise Mr. Collins will not examine possible future problems before they have come, assume the worst about a deviation from the expected before seeing a result, or claim to have established a lone perfected method of achieving any end.

Charles Bingley, Pride and Prejudice, September 24th – October 23rd: The Charles Bingley is imminently likable, most significantly because of the common and easy affection and regard he feels—and shows—for others.  He is a peacemaker, well equipped to use his charm and romantic sensibilities to diffuse tension and avoid conflict, for diplomacy rather than leadership.  His extreme optimism makes him a man of significant endurance, able to shake off circumstances that would cripple others.  However, if his idealistic nature is allowed too free a rein, he may become unmoored, moved by impulse and improper exercise of momentary passions.  A Charles Bingley lost to innate romance is a constant victim and victimizer, a slave to gratifications without understanding of consequence.  His life is likely to be spent constructively diffusing conflict or destructively avoiding it at all costs.  A wise Mr. Bingley will consider the counsel of others yet make his own decisions, seek for the good while admitting the bad, and establish a level of principle where even he will not compromise.

Henry Crawford, Mansfield Park, October 24th – November 22nd: The Henry Crawford is more a force than a man, a configuration of a number of different virtues—intellect, passion, spirituality, sensuality—whose total is always a rare potency: power of feeling, or speech, or action, of attraction, of virtue or vice, or even all at once.  He is a being of extreme emotions, both positive and negative, that can sometimes be hidden but never dismissed.  His every action is intense, an outgrowth of strong purpose and expression of self.  If he becomes a leader he does so almost unconsciously, as it is difficult for him to place much investment outside himself and his own exploration of self.  More frequently possessed of genius and ravenous curiosity than all others, his life is marked by grand events and actions that can be both supernally beneficial or demonically destructive.  A Mr. Crawford whose great gifts and potency combine in unfettered self-service becomes an inferno capable of consuming all and everything he comes across.  To avoid this fate as human vortex, a wise Mr. Crawford will realize that the scope of his life will be measured by his influence on those around him, not his utter remaking of them, and that power allows for great reciprocity rather than just domination.

John Thorpe, Northanger Abbey, November 23rd – December 21st: The John Thorpe is an eager embracer of life and all that comes with it.  While often bright and capable of deep thought and wit, he is  rarely obsessive about the complexities of life or prone to fixate on perplexities.  His is an appreciative nature which finds a wealth of interesting, beautiful, and enjoyable delights wherever he goes.  He is direct and honest in his communication, which often inspires trust in others but rarely leads to his developing a following as his affection for freedom and independence is too great.  While his good nature and spontaneity often make others feel comfortable in his presence, if overindulged he may become erratic, foolish, and forever swept along by the frivolous.  A wise Mr. Thorpe will anchor his effervescent nature with strong principles and temper his enthusiasm for the new with his experience.

Edmund Bertram, Mansfield Park, December 22nd - Januray 20th: The Edmund Bertram is a diligent realist, able to overcome a variety of challenges because of his discipline, pragmatism, and strong goal orientation.  Where other men would shirk from truth or become flippant at the difficulties of life, he is buoyed up by a cautious but innate good nature.  He has the rare ability to see genuine humor in even difficult circumstances.  While not particularly adept at inspiring others, he is often liked and imminently trusted for his firm understanding and patience with others.  As both an ambitious and cautious man, he is more likely to reach profound goals than many others by being methodical and consistant in his efforts.  His strong center of gravity does risk consuming him, however, wrapping him up in the difficulties of reality more tightly than his inherent humor can balance.  This pessimist can reach the very deepest depressive depths, which results in near suicidal fatalism and utter incapacity of the charitable.  To escape such a fate a wise Edmund Bertram will stay conscious of the light side of things and be generous when judging the efforts of others, and will not allow the vicissitudes of life to appear to him as inescapably systematic.

George Knightley, Emma, Januray 21st – February 19th: The George Knightley is a perpetual seeker of truth, a man driven both to explore the natures of those around him and of his own mind and soul.  He makes the very best and truest of friends and is more able than any other to return good for evil so long as one gives honest effort at camaraderie.   Capable and wise in the ways of the world, mind, heart, he is a source of excellent counsel and sound judgment.  His intellect is such that he sometimes sees superior possibilities earlier than others, but is patient enough to steer them in these directions even if they make mistakes.  This combines with his natural generosity to make him a fine administrator or counselor, though his leadership is usually not of a supreme nature.  His capacity and comfort in society belie an underlying independence, a lonesome quality that he never quite abandons.  This hidden core is rarely communicated, and if hidden too deeply and allowed to grow to unhealthy proportions can turn his gentle nature harsh.  Patience becomes frequent irritation, kindness becomes callousness, peacemaking gives way to constant opposition, all as his secret inner orientation override his faith in anything other than himself.  A wise George Knightley will keep his personal/social balance steady by always seeking to participate constructively in the spheres in which he walks rather than observing while detached.

Edward Ferrars, Sense and Sensibility, February 20th – March 20th: The Edward Ferrars is the most gentle, kind, and willingly adaptive of all men.  No other has the same persistent ability to rise above the baseness around him to treat people with civility and respect regardless of situation.  He is also extremely empathetic, so much so that others may feel he is gifted with supernatural understandings and awareness of the thoughts and concerns of others.  While unlikely to galvanize or lead others frequently, he is very likely to preserve associations and groups by inspiring unity and understanding during times of great conflict.  While maliciousness is all but impossible for him, his otherworldly nature can reach the excessive, removing him from reality all together.  Thus unhinged he becomes incapable of facing problems, refuses to communicate with anyone, and becomes easily taken advantage of and manipulated.  A wise Edward Ferrars will balance his great heart and soul by strengthening his mind, and remember that helping others is not possible while denying the tragic realities of human experience.