Foreshadowing

            My wife once told me that, when she was young, it used to amaze her how writers could put all that foreshadowing in their books and have all the loose threads come together at the end. It blew her mind – not to mention, disappointed her – when she got older and realized that writers could go back and add foreshadowing earlier in the book after writing the end.

            I think that foreshadowing is one of the most complicated aspects of writing, yet is one of the most important ones. How would you feel about reading a book where the masked villain is revealed at the end and... it’s someone you never even heard of before? What if you were reading along and got to the end of a book, only to discover that there was a whole other plot going on in the background that had nothing to do with the rest of the book, and that was never even hinted at? You’d probably be pretty disappointed. Surprised – but disappointed.

            I think the best-known use of foreshadowing is in the Harry Potter series. You know what I’m talking about. Or, if you don’t, go read the series and find out. If you read the series a second time (or have a very good memory), you’ll start seeing things from all the way back in book one that hint at the great reveal – and it’s truly amazing how much there is that connects.

            But, wait... there are 7 Harry Potter books (well, in the main series, at any rate) and the big reveal is in the last one – J.K. Rowling certainly didn’t have all the books completely written when the first was published. She didn’t have the option of going back to add those bits in. So, how did she do it?

            Well, it’s because there is more than one way to foreshadow. In this case, it was excellent planning. This big reveal was practically the whole point of the entire series – it was something that was planned from the beginning and, as such, it was easy for Rowling to put in. In this case, the hard part was keeping it subtle enough to not alert the readers.

            Of course, not all foreshadowing can be planned in advance. Sure, writers generally know how their books will end, but they don’t know all the separate elements – those are discovered along the way. Then, if needed, the writer can always go back and add them later, after completing the manuscript (but before publishing it).

            Yet, there is still another way to foreshadow, something that is almost a combination of the previous two. Writers can often foreshadow as they go. How? There are two ways. The first is simply having an idea of what’s going to happen in the story’s future, and spotting opportunities to drop little hints (usually accompanied by snickering behind a hand and statements like, “They’ll never catch this!”). The other is to link ideas backwards as you go along. A book being written is almost a living thing – it expands and grows as the author writes it, sometimes turning into something entirely different than was initially intended. A writer can keep in mind things they wrote previously in the book and be just as amazed as the reader when it turns out to be a hint later in the book. This is done much like guessing at what will happen next when you’re reading – only, as the writer, you get to decide what actually does happen. The writer writes something, uses it to make a prediction of what it could mean for the future, then makes it happen.

            So, Young Colleen wasn’t entirely wrong – sometimes writers do put the foreshadowing in as they go, and it can be very impressive. But, as with all skills, it’s important to remember that there’s more than one way of doing everything, and none of them is better than the other. The important part isn’t how you create the foreshadowing – what matters is having enough foreshadowing that when the reveal comes, the reader can put together all the pieces and feel like the story is plausible.

Check out my YouTube channel where I tell the stories of my D&D campaigns.

Click here to find the charity anthology containing a couple of my short stories.

Also, make sure you check out my wife's blog and her website.


If there's any subject you'd like to see me ramble on about, feel free to leave a comment asking me to do so.

Mob Mentality

            It always boggles my mind how easily people’s opinions are swayed, particularly in this age where information is so accessible. Discovering the truth of a situation is a bit of quick research away, and only requires a little bit of critical thinking to figure out the truth.

            For example, word reached my ears this week that J.K. Rowling is homophobic. I laughed, because anyone who knows anything about that woman knows this to be untrue. However, a lot of people – even professionals in the literary world – were buying into this rumor. So I did my research – and I still can’t believe that people are believing this rumor when all they have to do is read.

            The evidence for J.K. Rowling being homophobic is that someone involved with the latest Harry Potter movie said that Dumbledore (known to be a gay character) will not be openly gay in the movie. So people immediately assumed that, since Rowling wrote the screenplay, she was chickening out from presenting the character as gay. The mob mentality roused and people began haranguing the Rowling about it.

            Her response was quite simple and to the point. She muted people on social media, saying that she wasn’t going to accept abuse from people who read an interview that she wasn’t involved with about a screenplay they hadn’t read – incidentally, a screenplay that was the first in a five part series.

            Somehow, people took this as proof that Rowling is homophobic, when it is quite literally staying the opposite. It’s almost explicitly stating that Dumbledore, while perhaps not portrayed as openly gay in the first movie, will become so over the course of the series.

            Yet, the rumor has been started – and people are believing it. Why? It’s so easy to find the truth, but people are so eager (as with political situations) to believe the first thing they read that they don’t go digging. They would rather believe a falsehood and flip their opinion about a person or a subject than do a bit of research.

            Why? Is it simply not worth the effort to fact check? Is it mob mentality – everyone else is saying it, so let’s not go against the crowd? Is it pure emotion – has the internet given us such a safe place to lash out at the smallest provocation that we no longer show any restraint? Is it simply that people care so little about their opinions that they don’t care if they change their mind about it, so they go with the clickbait headlines rather than the facts?

            To me, it speaks to something rotten at the core of our society. What it comes down to is that news is viewed as a form of entertainment – not by those who consume it, but by those who create it. This has come to be because, given a choice between news that is boring and news that is entertaining, people will always choose the one that’s entertaining – so the news has become more entertaining, more dramatic, to compete. The result is that facts and truth get lost amid a swirl of opinions and misdirections intended to draw people in.

            And, slowly, the truth has stopped mattering to us. It’s the entertainment that matters. People believe what they read, because they trust the source – or, conversely, distrust what they read from sources they don’t like, regardless of accuracy. Many even believe satirical articles that they didn’t realize was satirical.

            So, is that all it is? Do people no longer care what’s real? Is it too difficult for us to figure out what’s real?

            Or is it just easier to follow the crowd? After all, when has a mob ever been wrong?

Check out my YouTube channel where I tell the stories of my D&D campaigns.

Click here to find the charity anthology containing a couple of my short stories.

To see the chainmaille my wife and I make, click here.

Also, make sure you check out my wife's blog and her website.


If there's any subject you'd like to see me ramble on about, feel free to leave a comment asking me to do so.

Rules of Time Travel

            In fiction, there are three main concepts for time travel. Each of them have their own rules that must be followed in order to maintain consistency.

            One of these methods is the constant timeline. This is the theory that events throughout time cannot be changed at all. Characters can travel backwards or forwards in time, but anything they change was already accounted for and had been changed for them. A perfect representation of this is in Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, where the characters travel back in time in order to save some lives, only to discover that they had done so all along – one of them had even caught sight of themselves before they knew they were traveling back.

            Next is the theory that time is fluid. In this theory, a time traveler can go through time, changing whatever they want – and, in turn changing the future, sometimes with disastrous results. This is sometimes tempered by a rule that history will work itself out, such as in the Dr Who series where the Doctor and his companions are constantly saving people and changing things without altering the course of history.

            Thirdly, we have the dimensional theory. In this case, as in the fluid one, time travelers can change the course of events, but each change branches off a new dimension of reality. The changes are there for the people moving through time, but the other dimension (where the time travelers came from) usually remains unchanged. I some cases, if a big enough change is made, this method allows some branch dimensions to be erased, or at least cut off from the other dimensions. An example of this can be seen in the Back to the Future movies, were the main character nearly causes himself to have never existed – and later finds himself in an alternate timeline that is nearly apocalyptic.

            Now, it really doesn’t matter which theory of time travel is used for any particular work of fiction. It needs to be chosen to fit both the story and the world well. The important part is that once a rule set is chosen, it gets stuck to. Every story – or series – needs to follow the same rules, without jumping from one rule set to the other. As soon as the established rules are broken, the internal consistency is broken and the believability of the story falls to pieces.

            So, if you use time travel, choose and choose well. Then stick to it, no matter what.

            This semi-ranting blog has been inspired by Harry Potter and the Cursed Child – an good story, except for the part where the internal mechanics do not match those established earlier in the series.

Click here to find the charity anthology containing a couple of my short stories.

Also, make sure you check out my wife's blog and her life coaching website.


If there's any subject you'd like to see me ramble on about, feel free to leave a comment asking me to do so.

The Journey of the Outsider

            Something I’ve noticed is that a lot of stories – especially in fantasy – are about outsiders. The main characters tend to come from places where they’ve been cloistered off from the rest of the world, if not from an entirely different world all together.

            I’ve realized that at least part of the reason the reason these outsiders make such good main characters is because of how much it helps the author display the world. It limits the character’s knowledge and, as a result, allows the reader to learn about the world as the character does. That farmer living in a secluded village has a lot more to learn than a well educated scholar who is already immersed in the world.

            As readers, we are more forgiving to be told about a world if we’re learning along with the character. We don’t like the story being interrupted so we can be lectured about the world. If it’s the character who is learning, it’s then part of the story. We’re also more willing to accept mistakes the character may make out of ignorance, because we know everything that they know. It doesn’t matter if it’s common knowledge in the world – we didn’t learn it, so it is acceptable that the character also lacks this knowledge.

            Imagine how different the story would have been if Harry Potter had been raised within the wizarding world instead of with muggles. Or if Ron or any other wizard born character had the lead role. All the things that had our imaginations staring around in wonder and delight would have been every hay hum-drum to the main character. Instead of rubbernecking his way along Diagon Alley, pointing out all the wondrous shops, it would have been like a stroll in the shopping mall. We would have been lucky to have our attention drawn to the Nimbus 2000. All the magic would have been sapped out of the world because it was so normal to the character.

            Would Narnia had been so fantastic to someone who grew up there? Would a journey across Middle Earth have been so incredible if hobbits weren’t so reclusive?

            The reader is an adventurer, traipsing into an unknown world. Were we going there ourselves, we would want an experienced guide who knew the place. We aren’t, though. We are following along the experiences of our guide. If we want to experience the new world for ourselves, we need our guide to look upon it with the same wide-eyed wonder as we would.

            The journey of the outsider brings a new level of depth to a story. It’s no wonder we see so much of it.

Click here to find the charity anthology containing a couple of my short stories.

If there's any subject you'd like to see me ramble on about, feel free to leave a comment asking me to do so.

A Few Steps Behind

            I've never really been one for being up-to-date on the newest and latest. My parents somehow managed to teach me that if you wait for something, you find out if you really want it. Combine that with my (almost) infinite patience and you've got someone who is quite happy to wait for what he wants. Sometimes it’s worked for me, sometimes against.

            I think the first example of this would be Pogs. Do you remember those? They were little pieces of cardboard with pictures on them that you collected, traded and wagered in games involving flipping them with plastic (sometimes metal) Slammers. They became a huge thing when I was a kid, but I didn't get into them until just months before they were banned throughout the schools (because it was gambling, plus it was causing loads of fights and bullying).

            Next would have been Pokemon – the video game; I was never interested in the cards foe some reason. When the Pokemon games first came out, it was released on the Gameboy. Newer versions were released on the next handheld system, the Gameboy Color. I didn't get my own copy of the game until the Gameboy Advance came out, at which point I got a used Gameboy Color and Pokemon Gold Version (I wanted Yellow, but it was no longer made). It was also no longer “cool” to play Pokemon, though I didn't care about that one bit.

            Harry Potter was something that I wasn't quite as late to the party for. I believe the third book was released within a year of my parents giving me the first one for my birthday. Over the next year I read that book ten times, the later times being followed by the second book, then the second and third. That was the first time I was ever riding the crest of the wave, waiting for books four through seven to come out.

            The better side has revealed itself in more recent years. Dr Who is the perfect example. I only started watching the show last year. My reward? I haven’t had to wait for any of it! I was able to buy all seven seasons (I haven’t gotten into the older stuff yet) and watch at my leisure. The same went for The Big Bang Theory – when I started watching it, I had plenty of seasons ready and waiting for me to watch.

            On the flip side, of course, are the few interests I have gained that have (along with my wife’s less-patient influence) managed to get me waiting on the edge of my seat. The video game, Portal was so amazing that Portal 2 was the first thing I ever pre-ordered. Also, the Assassins’ Creed series that has me chomping at the bit as I wait for each new instalment. And we mustn't forget BBC’s Sherlock, which I just watched the first two episodes of the third season tonight and must now wait for the third episode to become available.

            Weighing these two styles of obtaining entertainment, I find that I prefer being late to the party. That way I save money (because prices drop the more you wait), I get larger portions of my chosen entertainment at once and I don’t already own everything so it isn't redundant when I get extended and collector’s editions of things. All I get for keeping up to date on the latest thing is I can talk about it with other people who keep up to date on it. Besides needing to avoid spoilers while cruising the internet, living a few steps in the past is much nicer.

            Better late than never is a very common saying. Perhaps it’s actually better to be late than on time.

Click here to find the charity anthology containing a couple of my short stories.

If there's any subject you'd like to see me ramble on about, feel free to leave a comment asking me to do so.

References and Originality

            One thing you should always remember about authors is that we are playful people and words are our favourite toys. We love to be sneaky and hide little secrets and references in our books, not to mention leaving a few puns lying around. My favourite  though, are the references. Most of these you won’t even notice unless you’re familiar with what they are about, but when you see them, they give you a good chuckle.

            The master of these references, of course, is Terry Pratchett. I firmly believe that no one can measure up to his satirical fantasy. I don’t think you can read a page without stumbling across some sort of obscure reference – the more I read, the more of them I catch and the more I marvel at his brilliance.

            In the three and a half books I've written, I've snuck in everything from Monty Python and Princess Bride quotes to references from Tolkien, Pratchett, Shakespeare and Dr Who (which I've only been watching for about a week) to internet memes. The more I write, the more ways I discover to sneakily hide references.

            I started thinking about these references (obviously, or else I wouldn't be talking about them) after coming across a reference to the lyrics of a Bon Jovi song in the book I'm currently reading (Vortex). I started to wonder why we hide these little tidbits in our books. I mean, obviously it’s fun, and it makes us feel special when someone likes our books enough to go digging through in search of everything we hid inside, but those couldn't be the only reasons.

            Then I realised that it’s our way of giving credit. In this day and age, there is virtually no originality. Not because we artists aren't as imaginative as we used to be, but simply because there is so much that has come before us. When I first read Eragon (a book written by someone close to my own age) I knew right away, without a doubt, that Christpher Paolini was a fan of Anne McCaffrey and Ursula K Le Guin. Whether it is intentional or not, authors will always have traces of whatever inspired them in their work. So, by sneaking our little references in, we are tipping our hats to those who inspired us and making ourselves feel better about using the turn of phrase that, strictly speaking, we didn't come up with.

            Since I mentioned the lack of originality in the world, I think I should elaborate on what I mean by that, as well as making it clear that it’s not a bad thing. We humans love to measure things and, while many would argue that art can’t be measured, we have managed to analyse books and say with certainty that there are only somewhere between 1 and 36 plotlines that exist in the world (the number depends on the system you are using to define the plots). If you look at the thousands of books, movies, video games and anything else requiring a plot that’s out there (like life), it’s obvious that these get used over and over again. How do we not notice?

            Well, the reason we don’t notice is because we (well, most of us) aren't watching for it. The art of telling a story isn't in creating a plot that no one has considered before; it’s in telling the story in a way that entertains people. It’s nice if this is a new way, and even better if you can keep people guessing, but the true purpose is to entertain. So, it doesn't matter that every story has already been told, because it can always be told in a different way!

            What about those people who analyse everything and complain about the lack of originality? That’s their own problem. If they want to decide that every story where the villain is the protagonist’s father is a Star Wars rip off, anything with a portal to another world is Narnia and anything with any type of institution that teaches magic is Harry Potter, then they are welcome to be disappointed about the lack of originality. They should, however, take a moment to read the history books to see how often events of reality repeat. They should also look to see if anyone else has commented on the lack of originality, lest their complaint is not their original thought.

            To finish off, I shall impersonate the Doctor and say, live long and prosper with the force. Alas, poor Yorik, he got caught playing riddles in the dark and was slain by Sephiroth before he could collect all the Deathly Hallows! Now, where did I leave my holy hand grenade...? Like a boss!

Click here to find the charity anthology containing a couple of my short stories.

If there's any subject you'd like to see me ramble on about, feel free to leave a comment asking me to do so.