Inherent BS: Writing Tips - Contract?

This may come as a shock to you, but I'm not just a writer, I'm a gamer. Go figure, right? But the thing about it is that recently the two worlds have been merging more and more as games with real plots have started to become the standard bearers for the rest of the industry. Writing for games has actually, in some studios, become respectable. And at the forefront of a lot of this was a game series called Mass Effect.

And then they fucked it up.

I'm not saying that as a judgment of the quality of their last game but rather as a judgment of their position in the eyes of their fans. You see, if you're unaware, there was a bit of a controversy not long ago about the release of the final game in the trilogy, Mass Effect 3. The ending for this game was apparently so counter to what the fans expected that there was what could be called a... nuclear meltdown. The fans of the series, at least a large portion of them, have said they felt betrayed by the results of Mass Effect 3's last 10 to 20 minutes of game time. How betrayed? Well one person actually reported them to the Federal Trade Commission for, apparently, fraud.

Even the characters are confused

Now, I don't want to sound callous about this: I understand that buying the whole trilogy to get to that point means you've spent hundreds of dollars and countless hours of your time to meet that one moment of resolution. If you're angry that resolution was lackluster then it's your right to be angry. But one thing that I've seen repeatedly brought to the front of this argument is a so called "reader-writer contract".

To say that I, as a writer, was shocked to find out that there was a contract would be an understatement. In fact, I looked around, I wasn't the only one. Turns out, the only people who were taking this "reader-writer contract" seriously were the fans and the hand-full of writers who actually proposed this concept on their blogs. Yeah, you read that right, someone was holding writers to the standards of someone's blog.

Typical blogger in a nutshell

Now, if you're part of the writing community, you'll inevitably take to starting a blog and then using that blog to discuss writing. This is basically how our people operate and communicate with each other and the world at large (while also whoring out our books: see here). But I, for one, don't think that anyone should be obligated to follow what I'm saying here on this blog except for me. If I don't follow it, I'm a hypocrite. If someone else doesn't follow my ramblings, they have a mind of their own.

But somewhere along the line, the concept that there was a "reader-writer contract" actually bled into the consciousness of the viewing public. I had to find this thing and come to understand just what exactly it was I was obligated to follow. Apparently, according to the ME3 controversy, we've all signed this thing. And in the course of being handed this argument, someone gave me a version of this reader-writer contract for me to see. Let's just say I have some problems with it.

Let's take a look, shall we? For the sake of not outing which version of this I've been handed, I'll avoid linking it and will paraphrase. For the sake of space, I'll only address the ones I have reason to disagree with.

The Author will treat the reader as intelligent. Do not resolve everything for the reader, leave things for them to resolve themselves

This one is actually common sense. You don't belittle your audience because a belittled audience is an angry audience. But the thing about not resolving everything for them becomes troublesome when you realize that the writer is now obligated to predetermine the intelligence level of their readers. This, of course, requires you to be not only psychic but have a machine which could let you read the minds of every reader on the planet.

Needless to say, this is not something you can achieve for everyone in everything. You are going to, at some point, insult someone's intelligence because either A) you yourself did not feel you would have figured it out on your own or B) you were concerned that the stuff you left lying around was too subtle because none of your test readers had noticed it. I had this problem myself when one of my test readers missed every clue in my book (see here) when the other 4 test readers actually figured it out independently at various other points throughout the book. Ironically? This reader who didn't figure out a key part of the book repeatedly told me that they felt they didn't need to be told other things.

"That damned machine told me it would work"

Conclusion? People are different, this part of the contract is nearly impossible.

The story will follow the conventions of the genre it claims to be

This one ticked me off the most due to my personal experiences with figuring the genre of my own book. You see, I had written it as something you could consider a supernatural mystery, but there was a lack of magical and I had gone out of my way to deal with these creatures as something tangible. Was it fantasy, science fiction, mystery or crime? I honestly didn't know. For a couple days I spent time studying the conventions of the different genres to figure out just where exactly I fit. I knew I could choose two on most of the venues I could ePublish, but which ones to choose took some time.

Mystery? Sci-fi? Taking a theme too far? You decide!

Did I pick the right ones? I'm still not 100% sure. And if someone disagrees with me, should I be reported to the FTC?

Conclusion? Doesn't really respect the fact genres are subjective.

The style of your first page or scene will be the style of your whole story. If you start off funny, it will stay funny.

Your first page apparently will be everything that you ever do, apparently. If you start off something lighthearted and gradually move towards a darker outcome or write a story about someone with crippling depression managing to move on past it towards a better outlook on life...you've violated the contract. The first scene of my book, proper, involves my character under cover in a ridiculous outfit. Later in the book he starts to have a breakdown over the fact he doesn't know who he can trust anymore and is tormented by the fact he may not know what to believe anymore.

According to the people who've read by book...the first scene is pretty funny and a few later scenes are terribly sad. There are humorous instances and one liners peppered throughout the rest of the story, but it doesn't maintain one mood throughout. According to this contract, that's a no-no.

The Joker is either confused or a deal breaker, we're not sure.

Conclusion? I wasn't aware we were required to make our characters two dimensional.

There are more parts to this "contract" but I think I've made my case. When I protested against the idea that I should be held to this contract, specifically because of the points listed here, I was told that my protest meant I thought everyone should happily read crappy stories without saying a word. That's bullshit. Here is the true reader-writer contract, the only one that all readers and writers are obligated to.

1) The Writer will try their very best not to write something that will be hated by the majority of the people

2) The Reader will show their support to what they like and will not show their support to what they don't like

3) Everyone will buy my book as stated in this contract, else all things shall be void and writers across the world will write horrible pieces of crap until the end of time

Sign Here_______

(no, that doesn't count as blackmail)


If they can do it, so can I.

Inherent BS: Writing Tips - No New Ideas?

The Hunger Games film has come out and it is currently doing spectacularly. In it's opening weekend it managed to beat the first film in the Twilight Saga and several of my more feminist minded friends have cheered the fact that the current fad among teen girls happens to be centered on what can easily be defined as a strong willed, self sufficient and capable female lead that isn't constantly helpless or tripping over herself.

This is progress people.

But along the way there are some criticisms to be addressed. Namely, the basic premise of this story is stitched together from the styles, conventions and plot lines of other works through the last few decades. One that springs to the top of the list quite easily is Battle Royale, a story about a group of teenagers abducted and forced into mortal combat for someone's twisted purposes. This is really fucking similar. In fact, it's also really similar to quite a few stories through the ages.

Pictured: Proof that Hunger Games and Battle Royale are very different

Some people have credited this as being different from Battle Royale by the fact it really strikes out at the culture of Reality Television that's risen in the recent years. But then, if you take that into account, it's actually quite similar to other stories even there too. At one time, I broke down an explanation of the plot to a friend as "Picture The Running Man if Arnold were a teenage girl and was fighting other teenagers for survival without the light bright costumes".

I shit you not, this man was supposed to be the scariest thing anyone had ever encountered

So when it boils down to it, it's kind of the product of years of cultural development being stirred together in a pot and set to simmer. There's nothing wrong with that from a certain vantage, mind you, but it is a criticism leveled at the whole thing by the people who like to find criticisms. This, in itself, is not something I have a problem with.

What I do have a problem with is the defenses that have been shot back at these criticisms. Though they come in many flavors, they all say the same thing "there are no new ideas anymore."

What life would look like if we had no new ideas

So why the hell are any of us writing anymore if there's nothing left to write?

The truth is that there's a loss of perspective. If you watch Battle Royale and watch Hunger Games back to back, you wouldn't walk away with the impression you'd seen the same story twice. The same would go for Running Man to Hunger Games. In fact, you'd find that if you watched any good works that had similar plots you'd find that you rarely felt like they were really "ripping off" each other. The reason is because a lot of people mistake what exactly is the aim of telling stories.

An original idea is great, but you have to make that original idea something compelling to the reader. If you have nothing but an original idea, something that I recall pointing out was a mistake back during my "new sci-fi" rants, then you've really kind of missed the point. Your ideas aren't enough, there has to be a story. And when you have that story, you have to realize that people are going to read this and are going to be deciding the virtue of your story based on the things they can relate to rather than the things they cannot. In other words, if your idea is too original (read: nonsensical), people are going to hate it.

Plot? No. Characters? No. Original method of flashing lights and colors at people? Yes.

Like with everything, there's always a balancing act. You can't make something too much in one direction or another. If something is too derivative you'll find people are bored with it because they've heard the story before. If something is too original they'll be bored with it because they have no idea what's going on or what they're supposed to feel about it. Regardless of what genre you're writing, you end up having to write about something that could relate to your audience and their feelings. In other words, your story will never be 100% original because, regardless of effort, it has to feature something that can be recognized as the human experience.

"Remember that time you were lobotomized and had that crazy dream you were a stripper that fought robot samurais in a mini-skirt? That was a wild summer."

There are plenty of ideas still left out there, in fact if you took a book from today and transported it back no more than half a century they'd think that some of the things you wrote about were signs you'd gone insane.

"Why is this character talking to someone else on a screen they hold in their hands?"

"What is this nonsense about electrical cars?"

"A black man as president? The hell you say."

The problem is that if you wrote about nothing except the new ideas, you'd be left with a story so abstract and inhuman that it would only fit in among what many artists would call "avant garde". Here, have a taste:



I know what you're thinking about now: "What the fuck did I just watch?" The answer, as I just said, was avant garde. Unique, wasn't it? You see, the problem with Avant Garde in any form is that it is inaccessible by anyone who's not part of the avant garde mindset. No one would really pay good money to see 2 hours of what you just saw in the video above. No one would buy a book to read about...whatever the hell that was. And that's what you'd end up with if you didn't have some sense of convention to wrap around your original idea.

And that thing about conventions, sometimes, it's okay to remember that there are elements of a story that, even if you could come up with an original alternative, should be left as is. For instance, if you're doing a sci-fi story set in space it is perfectly acceptable to use a space ship at some point. Yes, I know that someone else has done it before, but what else are you going to send them in, a school bus?

It would be original, to say the least, but no one would take your story seriously while picturing the bus flying among the stars. And so you have to be accepting that sometimes there will be elements that will always be present. As I told my friend during a conversation on this topic, everything good is mostly written to build on top of what others have done already, adding new things to the top of the old.

Hell, the line I just said is pretty much the basis of the age old "standing on the shoulders of giants" quote. Without radio there would be no television and without television there would be no computer monitors to read this on. Without John Carter, there probably wouldn't have been a Star Wars or Superman. Which, by the way, is one of the reasons you should show love to John Carter too. I hear it's still about 200 million in the hole.


And to show my originality, 2 videos this time.

Inherent BS: Writing Tips - Don't Make Up Words?

There's a piece of common wisdom that has been around the writing community forever, especially in the sci-fi and fantasy groups. It is so old and so frequently echoed that I can't even remember who first said it because every time you hear it someone presents it as something they came up with themselves. It changes from person to person, but the basic concept is always the same:

"Don't create new words"
That's it - clean, clear and simple. So, of course, that's what you should strive to do, right? You should make every effort to avoid making up a new word if you can because the act of creating new words is the mark of an amateur that will live in obscurity for the rest of time. You know, like Shakespeare.

That hack introduced over 1700 words to the English language over the course of his career that we still use today. You think it's hard to understand while reading it now? Back then people had never even heard most of these words, such as:

Addiction
Alligator
Bedroom
Belongings
Bloodstained
Coldhearted
Disgraceful
And countless other words you've probably heard on the street or in a rap song. So of course, as you can clearly see, it's dangerous to make new words because if you do you'll be forever forgotten and unwanted for the rest of eternity, just like Shakespeare.

Oh, wait, that's right: Shakespeare is god damned legendary now and is used as a measuring stick for which many other writers are measured against either seriously or in jest. "He's no Shakespeare" is so damn common a phrase that he technically ended up continuing to invent phrases even after his death. So where do people get off telling you not to try to invent something?

Well this, like most common wisdom, is bullshit created by two things: watching someone do it badly and deciding that's how everyone's results will turn out. If anyone screws up, for any reason, you'll notice that people have a tendency to assume that the reason it failed was because it was done and not how it was done.

Many of the people who analyze writing and make judgments on the way things should be done are only applying their experiences and deciding those apply to the rest of the world. Even when I'm saying something here, I'm applying something that I believe is universal. And, in my mind, the universal solution is that there is no universal solution. Everyone will approach everything as it best suits them. All we can really do is show each other what we have learned and tell them how to avoid problems, rather than avoiding actions.

Shakespeare, clearly, managed to create thousands of words and phrases over his career and he suffered no consequences for this "crime" in the eyes of history. If you feel like you should do it too, then you should. if only to be true to yourself. A lot of authors who give advice today feel they're in a position to give advice, that you should follow their lead because they're ahead of you somewhere. But if you're going to aim to be an author, why not aim for Shakespeare?

Not that way

Some would think that aiming to be like Shakespeare is arrogant. A lot of people in our society chase fame and fortune. Just as many condemn people who want to be famous. But remember that chasing fortune doesn't necessarily mean chasing riches. Sometimes it's chasing the ability to be considered fortunate. And, if that is the case, if you aim high and fail you'll find yourself still above average. If you aim low and fail, you'll eat pavement. Besides, aiming high has worked for others.

Consider the classic authors and how many of them created a word or used one that hadn't been used for ages. Mithril, quark, nerd, robotics, cyberspace and even the term tween (which you can't escape anymore) were all words cooked up to fill a need in an author's work. But notice what works about these and what doesn't about others. When you look at some ridiculous words like "teleojuxtaposition", "granfalloon" or "speelycaptor".

Seriously, sit there and try to read that first one out loud and you'll see exactly what the difference is. It's not just about the difficulty of saying it, but about how jumbled it sounds when you do say it. These things completely lack musicality. (a word made up in the mid 19th century, by the way)

Perhaps the lesson that should be taught isn't "don't make new words" but rather "if you make new words, make sure they don't sound like crap." This seems like a simple concept because it is. If you're going to make up a new word, make sure you can say it and that other people can say it too. If it sounds like a mouth-full, it is, and no one is going to want to say it with you. It's a handy rule of thumb, don't you think?

Though, sometimes, it's not the word

So be bold, take risks and be creative when you find a situation that might be deserving of a new word. Test it out, make sure it works for people other than you, but don't be afraid to experiment when you see the opportunity. After all...


Someone has to come up with this shit.

Checklist for the Aftermath

Saint Patrick's Day was two days ago, it's Monday, and you just woke up from your blind stupor. That was some party, wasn't it? You're dazed, confused and probably wondering just what the hell you did over the last couple of days. First, just to be clear, it is Monday, you missed Sunday all together and it's probably for the best you can't remember what you did for that day. If you go to church, though, they are going to be judgmental about it next week. As a catholic this is fine since you're likely to just have to say a few Hail Marys and put up with being nudged a little when it's your turn with the sacramental wine. But there's some more important things to consider.

Don't be ashamed to admit that you've had a problem in the past. Obviously, if you're reading this now with a cup of coffee and no memory of the last 48 hours, you've had a bit of a drinking problem. With your tendency to get blitzed to the point of complete blackout, you've likely got a record (unless, of course, you work for Wall Street, then you've probably be rewarded for your criminal activities during your momentary lapse of consciousness).

So, if you do have a probation, and you probably do, there's a quick checklist you need to check before you continue on with your day:

1. Are you in the hole?

You may be reading this on a smartphone or a laptop, something that you had with you mysteriously when you woke up in a strange environment. First things first - check to see where you woke up. Is there garbage? Dirt? Naked bodies? If the answer to any of these is yes, you should do your best to get out of or off of whatever it is you woke up with. If you're physically in a hole, you've apparently degraded back to natural instincts, your people have long lived in underground burrows and it's only natural to want to go home when the only brain-cells functioning are from the primitive end of the brain.

However, the hole you're in may be figurative: check for bars. Are the windows barred? Is the pile of naked people you're with inside a mostly concrete room? Can you feel a draft or hear your butt whistle? If yes, call your lawyer or someone who can post bail - preferably both.

Failing that, get someone cheap

If no, onto step 2.

2. Check the damage (physical)

This is going to be hard to admit to yourself, but you have to come to terms with it: You probably picked a fight with someone.

This is easily forgiven on Saint Patrick's Day and the days immediately before and after it, everyone's been there at some point. But regardless of whether or not it was culturally acceptable you have to start checking yourself and those around you for signs of injuries that may require immediate attention.

First of all, worry only for the injuries that are visible on the outside or can actually be dealt with. In other words, we all know your liver's had it, so don't stress about it right now. Check for cuts, bruises, foreign objects stuck in strange places.

If you find them, try to figure how they came about. If any of these signs are present, you've probably been in a bit of a brawl. Figure out with who and make sure no one's looking to press charges.

If the worst you have is a bald spot that seems to have been shaved clean, you've likely just been in a prank war, proceed to step 3.

Though, sometimes, it still might be criminal

3. Check the damage (house)

By now you should be clear headed enough to figure out whether or not the house is in good or bad condition. Obvious cosmetic damage should be readily apparent once you've stopped seeing three of everything and are able to discern details from the formless blobs of color that you awoke to. But don't forget that there's a damn good chance, given your family's history and the history of civilization as a whole, that you may have booby-trapped the environment for similarly drunk, unsuspecting party goers.

Gotcha!

Is the toilet covered in plastic wrap? Is there glue on the toilet paper? Has anyone positioned buckets of what you hope to be lemon juice over doorways? Most importantly, has anyone been stuffed into anything that may require the fire department to get them out of? If yes, once you've stopped piecing it together with them how exactly they got in there, call for help and stay out of the way while the rescue workers do their job.

"Every fucking St. Patty's Day"

If no, and you've managed to successfully disarm all of the booby traps in the house, onto the final step.

4. Find the Pot

Okay, this step has been held off for a while. You know it, I know it, it's probably in the house. You've done everything to kick the habit and you've been pretty good about it for a long time. But you have no idea what you've done or where you've been in the last 48 hours and with that much time black out drunk the pot can't be that far behind.

It's okay, we understand, it's hard stopping something like that when you're under the influence. A few drinks and before long things that were just uncomfortable before now become tipping points. Passing the usual places, the places you wandered into during your sober times just to look around, tempted by the prospect of buying something when you could get it cheap. All of those moments of lovingly staring at cookware in the local department store coming back to you right now.

Is it there? Is it full of gold? Do you know where the gold came from?

If it is and you don't, it's time to find out where before someone starts asking questions. Even if the fighting, or the substance abuse, or whatever the hell happened with those people on your floor doesn't get you - stealing the gold is probably a one way trip back to the joint. Unless, of course, you work for Wall Street. In that case you apparently came away from it unharmed.

If that's the case, congratulations for surviving another binge-drinking mind blowing night of debauchery and misdemeanors.


Close calls are half the fun, eh?

If any of this is applicable to you, you'll probably be interested in Alters United, or my book. Both harmless ways to spend your time that wont cause any fights... hopefully.

Alterpedia - Leprechauns

As a service to the community (and a little bit of shameless plugging for my book here) I feel it necessary to educate the populace about those persecuted souls that happen to be something other than human. For knowledge is power and I like to pretend I'm powerful. Once a week (roughly), we will address those topics that deal with Alters, and this week we’re covering:

Leprechauns

Mischievous, greedy, strangely well dressed for people who live underground - The Leprechaun are forever tied to the traditions of St. Patrick's Day and the Irish people. Though, like almost everything about the Irish across the ages, the Leprechaun have been treated unfairly as inhuman creatures with a sometimes evil origin and borderline evil behavior.

Though they are sometimes angry drunks

In the spirit of the weekend, let's examine these jolly little fellows closer.

Appearance

Myth
Leprechauns, being children of evil spirits and degenerate fairies, are diminutive in size and possessing fairy traits. Often no larger than a child, they still sport beards, usually red in color though sometimes depicted other shades. Their clothing has changed from region to region, traditionally red or brown in the old days but turned green in recent tradition. The depiction of the Leprechaun in red was associated with the idea that they were "solitary fairies", which traditionally wore red, while "trooping fairies" which lived more socially, wore green.

Truth

Leprechauns, being a relative of the gnome and dwarf families, do have a short stature and youthful appearance most of the time. However, they are not typically the size of children, though some extreme cases may occur. Rather, most Leprechauns are just slightly shorter than typical people of their community.

They're also quite commonly sporting a beard, though this is more cultural than a matter of physiology. The color of the beard varies greatly, but as there is a higher tendency to have red hair among their people, this is truthfully the most common version. Their height is not nearly as short as people have claimed, the shrinking of them to the size of a small child being a result of them being marginalized by the growing christian movements in their native lands... an ironic thing as many of them are catholic.

The color coding of Leprechauns has long been related to the tendency for colors to be used as a means of identifying loyalties. This became particularly important during British colonial periods as the Leprechaun was prone to gang activity. During these times it was rough being short, being Irish, and most especially being both. Luckily for them, they also had a tendency to be scrappers, producing some rather unfortunate images over the years that have remained in the cultural psyche over the centuries.

Talents

Myth

The Leprechaun, gifted with magical powers, can grant wishes to anyone that captures them (like a genie) and have a keen ability to find buried treasure which they somehow magically place at the end of the rainbow.

Truth

The legend of wish granting is complete and utter bullshit (like the genies) cooked up as a reason to convince people that you should harass any Leprechauns you may encounter (or, more often, any short, tipsy Irishman). The added accounts of their hoarding of treasure was also embellished slightly. Leprechauns have a keen sense of business, along with a naturally heightened awareness of where precious resources may be found. This is easily attributed to a greater than average awareness of the natural forces around them such as magnetism and shifts in gravity. Aware of these forces, the Leprechaun may find buried objects, especially things such as minerals and oil deposits.

Occupation

Myth

Leprechauns were typically depicted as making and mending shoes, sitting on a great deal of riches but still being subservient to humans. Often times, they were only mentioned in stories where they'd been somehow brought into the service of humans.

Truth

Leprechauns are actually quite adept at gaining riches and controlling the flow of resources. Their natural talents of finding things such as oil, gold, diamonds and whatever else you may dig out of the ground has made them incredibly wealthy over the years. They also have a knack for accounting, especially in terms of commodities trading (something they've been firmly in control of for centuries).

Often, latent Leprechauns, prone to otherwise nonsensical rambling, will cling to gold mining or gold peddling.

Sometimes it's hard to tell which one's the leprechaun

Careful observation of television reports often exposes latent Leprechauns in their natural setting, often acting irrationally around large quantities of money.

Though sometimes the disguise is too thin to be plausible to anyone.

Behavior

Myth

Leprechauns are depicted as solitary figures that live underground and hoard treasures for no apparent reason as they mend shoes. Obviously, they get bored from time to time and use their magic for mischief from time to time, tricking humans to amuse themselves. When up to something unusually mischievous they're known to jump onto walls, stand on their heads and spin with their feet in the air, balancing on their distinctive hat.

Truth

Sadly, most of it is true. The modern Leprechaun is prone to obsessive compulsive disorders, doing menial tasks repeatedly and hoarding everything they can find. Their hoarding is often so severe that they have often used objects for purposes other than what they were meant for, such as cook pots being used to held their collectables. Their intelligence, keen awareness and mental condition has a tendency to drive Leprechauns towards further addictive behaviors... such as drinking.

And there in lies the curse of being a Leprechaun: they're dicks when drunk. Practical jokes, abusive behavior, dancing like an idiot on table tops: they've done it all at one point or another. The long standing myth of the drunk Irishman (used so often as a stereotype for their people and culture) can be attributed not just to simple racism but also to the actions of the wee folk.

But, like many traditional alcoholics, many Leprechauns don't realize what they are until it's too late.

So this St. Patrick's Day weekend, as you recover from your personal binge drinking, you may find some of this sounds familiar to you. You may vaguely recall tricking your friends into drinking something that wasn't quite "beer". You might have had enough alcohol in you to kill a small elephant. You may have waken up in a pile of crap that you collected over the course of one black out session, mysteriously shiny coins in your pocket that you didn't have before.

If any of this sounds like you, or if this sounds like it may be your personal anthem...



You might be a Leprechaun too.

If you're a Leprechaun, know a Leprechaun, or just drink like one, feel free to visit Alters United. And, as always, buying a copy of my book is greatly appreciated.

Alterpedia - Woodwoses

As a service to the community (and a little bit of shameless plugging for my book here) I feel it necessary to educate the populace about those persecuted souls that happen to be something other than human. For knowledge is power and I like to pretend I'm powerful. Once a week, we will address those topics that deal with Alters, and this week we’re covering:

Woodwoses

Long depicted in artwork, rarely seen in lore, the Woodwose is both at once one of the most famous and unknown figures in mythology. Unlike those spoken of previously, the Woodwose are not frequently identified by casual observers. Though they've been in many works of art over the years, many have not known that the wild men of the woods were depictions of Alters. This has led them to being granted a privilege not many Alters have had: the ability to blend in. Though, even there, they've come to superstition, stereotype and misunderstanding.

Genealogy

Myth
Woodwoses, being nature spirits, are more closely related to other nature spirits such as Satyrs and Fauns. These creatures, more in tune with their animal natures, are perversions of natural beasts into a more humanoid creature. And, while the Woodwose is closer to human in appearance, their minds and souls are little more than beasts.

Commonly, such creatures took part in bestiality as well

Truth
While Woodwoses prefer natural settings they're actually quite human. They are the male equivalent of similar humanoid "nature spirits" such as Nymphs and Dryads. Thus, being members of the Fae or "Fairy Folk", they are not the savage creatures sometimes depicted in the few pieces of lore through time. Many Woodwoses pass completely for human, though with changes discussed below.

Some are unsure what he may or may not have done with that bear, however

Appearance

Myth
The Woodwose is a larger than average naked man with either foliage on his body or a part of his body. They sometimes have a wood-like texture to their skin and are known to have leaves in their hair or along their waists. This is not always true however and sometimes they are simply very hairy, large men. Sometimes, the Woodwose is described to have green skin along with these traits.

Truth

Woodwose descriptions are fairly accurate. Their distaste for clothes tends to be due to a more wild, instinct driven nature, though they are not the beasts depicted in the stories. The typical Woodwose tends to be large and hairy, often times being unusually tall and with wild, unkempt hair. Sometimes they are shorter, but even in these forms they are easily recognizable for their hair and grooming. In severe cases, Woodwoses can lose themselves to their inner nature and become identifiable within the human population.

Behavior

Myth
Woodwoses are reclusive figures that spend their time lost in the woods as their names suggest. They've been inflicted with a deep sense of madness and have lost themselves to their animal natures. Considered to be cursed, they wander the woods seeing visions and becoming one of the wilderness creatures. Many Woodwoses are said to be able to see the immaterial and are eccentric, writing poetry or prophecies for others despite their isolated nature making it impossible for anyone to see their sometimes insane scribblings.

Truth
Woodwoses, sadly, are inflicted with addictive natures and may sometimes be prone to substance abuse. Though they are not by any means insane, they have been known to have somewhat eccentric views. Combined with a heightened intelligence and observant natures, they may occasionally see outcomes that others do not. However, as with most people with higher intelligence, they are prone to boredom and may take part in recreational drugs, at which point they have been known to lose their senses and draw humans into bizarre rituals.

Woodwoses do have a love for nature, however. They feel comfortable in a natural environment and are often known to have nature retreats or take frequent hikes to avoid over populated environments and urban landscapes. This leads many to be found in the forests, sometimes looking unusually blissful in the environment.

Stories

Myth
The Woodwose has had many interpretations across many cultures, but of these few are positive depictions. They've normally been said to be cursed, insane, driven mad by isolation or taken over by animal instinct like the Wendigos in colder countries. And, like the Wendigo, Woodwoses have often been depicted as cannibalistic wild men who will kidnap and devour children as their primary food source.

A pool of chocolate large enough for someone to fall into fools no one

Truth
These stories are horrible pieces of propaganda generated by hateful people that choose to depict the Woodwose as an evil creature for the sake of spreading discrimination. In the times when these stories were written the purpose was to depict taller men with unusual hair and odd skin as something of a threat to the normal populace.

Some of the tactics have even gone so far as to be spread to the things which the Woodwose enjoy in order to drive them into illegal activities. Propaganda tactics such as "Reefer Madness" and the "War on Drugs" has made it difficult for the otherwise harmless Woodwose to receive what many in their culture see as a sacred plant.

Some of these tactics, especially in old times, are clearly backwards and uneducated fear campaigns.



So say no to hate, say yes to Woodwoses. After all, Lincoln was one.

If you're a Woodwose, know a Woodwose or just want to show your support for them and others like them, please show your support by going to Alters United and, as always, feel free to buy my book to see a more positive depiction of Woodwose kind.