(FightWrite’s Find the Flaw)

I have two favorite Bobs. I met both at writer’s conferences this year, and both carry the last name [stahyn]. I write that phonetically as each one spells it a little different. I also point it all out because what are the odds of that? Two Bob [stahyn]s met at conferences?

One of the Bobs is Bob Eckstein. We met at the WD conference. He is a brilliant artist, funny writer, wonderful walking buddy, and an all-around delight of a human. My other favorite Bob is Bob Stine who I met at Thrillerfest. You might know him better as R.L. Stine.

If you have never seen Bob “R. L.” Stine in an interview or heard him speak, it would be easy to imagine him as, well, creepy. He writes books about killer dolls, haunted houses, werewolves, cursed masks. Heck, he has a whole book series known as Fear Street. If the subject is spine-tingling enough keep you up at night both reading and fearing sleep, Bob Stine has probably written on it.

Amazon
[WD uses affiliate links.]

Before the conference began, I asked my co-teacher, Jason Allison, which sessions he would suggest I attend. Jason and I taught a class on fight scenes together and he’s a Thrillerfest vet. He has heard many authors speak and could quickly scan the schedule and point out some of his favorites, one of which was R. L. Stine.

“Go to Bob’s. Super nice man. You’ll like him a lot. He’s kind of…” Jason thought then shrugged and said, “He’s kind of cuddly.” 

Cuddly? Writers, Jason is a former ATF agent and looks the part. He’s tall and imposing. Cuddly isn’t a word you’d imagine him saying at all must less as an adjective for a horror writer.

Eight rows back from the stage on which R. L. Stine was being interviewed, I had to agree. Bob Stine is, in fact, kind of cuddly. His resting expression is a smile. He laughs easy and jokes quite a bit. He’s very endearing and makes you feel like you know him. He’s kind of like a sweet neighbor who bakes you some cookies then jokes that his cooking has never killed anyone because he is always sure to pull its teeth out before he serves it. Then he walks home and writes a book about a cookie that eats people and it sells one billion copies because it is that good. Your kids read it twice. That’s Bob Stine.

During his session, Bob gave several pieces of writing advice, all of which were very practical. The one that stuck with me is one that I have never heard any other decorated author say. Scoot closer to your screen. You’re going to want to remember this.

Bob Stine pointed his thumb toward the door and said that if you go to a writing class and the teacher talks about how hard writing is, get up and leave. Writing is not hard. It’s just not.

He went on to explain that if we get into our heads that writing is hard, then every time we sit down to write, it will be hard. We have to look at it as easy and enjoyable so it will be. Does that mean it won’t be tough sometimes? No. It does mean that it won’t be tough because we have it in our heads that’s how it is.

Wow. Mic drop.

Writers, our brains do not believe what is true. Our brains believe what we tell it. If we constantly tell our brain that something is hard to accomplish, we will be right. That is not because what we have told our brain is true and the task is difficult. We will be right because our brains will approach the task with the notion that what lies ahead is hard, prepare to struggle, prepare to survive. Yes, when we say writing is hard, we prime our brains to survive rather than create. That’s not me being dramatic. It’s science.

Our brains are wired for efficiency to reduce energy consumption. Our brains burn an estimated 20 percent of our caloric intake.  A three-pound mass, 60 percent of which is fat, burns 20 of every 100 calories that you eat. Now, imagine that you are one of ancient ancestors who hunted or gathered in order to put calories on the table. Our brains have known from the start that it had to have a certain economy, or it would consume calories the rest of our body needediii.

That caloric economy is why our brains try to be as lazy as possible. When we push our brains toward something that we tell it will be difficult, our brains try to avoid it because a difficult task means more calorie consumption. That one word, hard, puts your brain on the defensive and a path to avoidance. What you think is laziness, lack of motivation or weak willpower might be your brain doing what it was constructed to do: conserve fuel and survive.

Now, full disclosure, this is a full-stop, “physician heal thyself” moment. I tell myself that writing is hard. I have primed my brain to see the process as a task to be avoided. And, I do. I avoid it, then I beat myself up for it which makes me feel like a loser which puts me in a bad place mentally, defeated before I even begin, which yields not great writing which makes me feel like a whole other kind of loser who needs some chips or chocolate and a few seasons of “The Great British Baking Show” and, wouldn’t you know it, I’m back to not writing.

How do I get past that cycle? I write. I write crappy, defeated work and I do it every day if I can. Even if it’s just a few uninspired sentences, by golly, I do it. Because after a point, this hard thing of writing will become a habit. My brain will form more pathways related to writing. Those pathways will become well-traveled and the brain loves crossing neural bridges it’s crossed many times before. Writing will no longer be perceived as something to be avoided. It will be as Bob Stine so simply put, not hard.

If you, like me, have made writing a thing that requires your brain to get up on its hind legs, ready to fight, let’s close the door on that. Because “writing is not hard.” I put that in quotes to remind you that it is not me saying it. I’m quoting none other than R. L. Stine. If you and I can start writing as if it is easy, as if it is the thing our hands are meant to do and our brain rejoices in, then it actually will be. Challenging? Sure. But easy all the same. 

And that, dear writers, is enough to give me goosebumps.

Until the next round with FightWrite on the WD blog, may you have a blessed holiday and write well.

The post Writing Advice That Gave Me Goosebumps (FightWrite™) appeared first on Writer's Digest.

(Broken Nose Symptoms for Writers (FightWrite))

Spot the Problem

The Spot the Problem puzzle was a coloring book style picture in which there were cleverly hidden items that didn’t make sense. For example, in a pumpkin patch there might be a basketball drawn amongst the gourds. Or, maybe the Thanksgiving turkey would have a sock on one leg.

Your Find the Flaw Puzzle

Your Spot the Problem puzzles are in word form. You will be hunting for flaws in short fight/action scenes. All of the blunders are related to some aspect of fighting. There will be no issues of writing such as grammar, punctuation, spelling, or even pacing or style. Just keep your focus on anything to do with fighting or fight training.

In the three scenes, there are a total of 10 flaws. Each of the 10 will be revealed at the end and briefly explained. Also, I’ve purposely made them not too violent or gory.

Ready? Good! Have a seat on some shag carpet, put on a LP record and let’s find the flaws!

The Flawed Fight Scenes

1. Minah raced across the parking lot to the boxing gym, nearly tripping over her flip-flops as she went. She was fighting for the title belt in six weeks and here she was late to warm up on her first day of training camp. It wasn’t a good look.

She grabbed her four-ounce gloves from her bag on her way in the door, then, in one swift movement, threw the duffle near the cubbies and kicked off her flip flops behind her. The slap of her bare feet on the floor echoed through the vacant gym as she ran toward the boxing ring. Thank heavens, she thought, her coach nowhere in sight.

She had barely pulled her gloves over her bare-knuckled hands before someone called out to her.

“Hey, champ!”

Minah smiled, turned, then stumbled back against the force of the woman crashing into her. The ring behind Minah caught her fall and she stayed on her feet for a moment before sliding down to sitting.

She looked down at her shirt and hands, then sat slack-jawed as her coach ran from the gym and her warm blood ran down to the floor.

2. The mugger caught up to Sarah and pushed her hard. She fell and hit the sidewalk face down with a smack. The hot, summer cement bit into her chin and the palms of her hands. Her top teeth impaled her bottom lip.

Still breathless from the fall, Sarah did her best to punch and kick the man who stood over her.

He laughed, put a knee on her back and pinned her right arm behind her. “I’ll be taking this,” he said, then snatched the diamond watch from her wrist. “Oh, and by the way,” he paused to push himself up to his feet. Sarah grunted under his weight. “Tell your mom she owes me one.”

3. The third punch knocked two teeth loose. Joe pushed against the little incisors with his tongue, then spit them out. They landed with light taps on the floor. “Those were my favorite teeth,” he said, then stuck out his bottom lip. Blood and spittle dribbled down his chin.

The giant of a man stepped forward and looked down at Joe. “You think this is some kind of joke?”

Joe wiped his mouth, then shrugged before stepping back and elbowing the man the man in the ear. The man blinked with the impact, but that was all.

“Now, that’s a prob—,” Joe started. His words choked to a wheeze as the man grabbed him by the throat. Joe gurgled, gasped and kicked as his neck took the weight of his body and his toes left the floor.

“Wait,” Joe said, his voice hissing and legs dangling. He grabbed the man’s wrist with both hands and pulled up to get a breath, not daring to let go for fear his neck would break. “I…got something…for you.”

The man narrowed his eyes in question.

Joe smiled then coughed strings of spittle. “I…I got this.”

With a grunt, Joe threw his legs up and wrapped them around the man’s neck, squeezing with every ounce of strength that he had left. Stunned, the man let go of Joe’s throat to protect his own. A minute later, the man’s knees buckled and he fell face down, unconscious. 

Joe scooted away, caught his breath, then said, “And that’s what happens when you cut in line at the coffee shop.”

Amazon
[WD uses affiliate links.]

The Flaws Revealed

Scene One      

Three problems. One: Minah is using four-ounce gloves which are for MMA not adult boxing. Two: She runs barefoot to the ring. Boxers wear boxing shoes. Three: She has bare hands under his gloves. Fighters wrap their hands.

Scene Two

One problem. Sarah is pushed down and lands on her stomach yet punches and kicks at the thief. How could she punch or kick him if she is facing the ground?

Scene Three

Buckle up. These six flaws are fairly technical.

Flaw one: Because the man is so much taller than Joe, Joe wouldn’t be able to hit the man’s ear with an elbow. The highest an elbow can be thrown, without jumping, is the height of the throwers own head. I saw this exact scenario in a well-known thriller book. Loved the book. Love the writer. The elbow? Not so much.  

Two: Unless you are Darth Vader or supernatural in some way, you can’t lift a human by their neck like that and not just because the neck isn’t made to hold the body’s weight. It has to do with strength and physics. Holding even just half of one’s weight out in front of the body with one hand requires a shocking amount of strength. Even if you have the strength, physics would cause the holder’s body to tip forward. Trust me on this. I have tried it.

Three: Joe’s choking the man with his legs is problematic. To choke the man unconscious, Joe has to choke the blood supply on both sides of the man’s neck. That is why the technique is called a choke. It chokes off the blood flow to the brain. Joe could accomplish that with an arm-in or arm-out choke. Both types of technique would require Joe to pull the big man in close or at least get his knees on either side of the man’s neck which would require a good bend in the big guy’s elbow. He didn’t achieve that bend that we know of.

Four: But let’s say he did bend the man’s elbow. It wouldn’t matter because as soon as the big man let go of Joe’s neck, Joe’s upper body would drop changing the position of his legs. That would negate the angle of just about any choke he might have on the guy.

Five: The big man drops forward. Where the heck did toothless Joe go? How did the guy not fall on him?

Six: It doesn’t take a full minute to choke someone out. It’s more like 10 seconds. I doubt the big man would just let Joe grip him like an angry crawdad for a minute without fighting back successfully. A writer would have to give a good reason why the man just stands there as his consciousness slips away.

Specialized Knowledge

Most of the issues with these fight scenes go back to specialized knowledge. Whenever you have a character who has specialized knowledge in anything, be it fighting or frying chicken, you need to have enough of that specialized knowledge yourself if you mean to go in depth on the matter. If you mention that the granny is frying chicken, and that’s all you say about it, that’s fine. If you say she tosses a chicken leg into the hot oil, that’s a lack of technical knowledge. You don’t toss anything into hot oil.

When writing your fight scene, the less technical you get, the less problems you run into. Besides, readers seem to care more about what happened than how it happened. That said, you should have enough technical knowledge to make your story believable. If your MC is a boxer and you write a scene with them training, you should know they wear boxing shoes, wrap their hands and the weight of their gloves.

Resources and a Shameless Plug

How do you get specialized knowledge? You talk to someone with that knowledge. You can also buy my books or reach out to me for a mentor appointment. (You had to know that was coming.) With a little time to prep, I can talk you through just about anything to do with any type of fight scene/scenario. I can also talk you through frying chicken. 

November is an especially beautiful month here in the U.S. as it is when we celebrate Thanksgiving. As the name suggests, the holiday focuses on gratitude. I am deeply grateful for both Writer’s Digest and, you, its readers. If you need any help with your fight scene, please reach out. I truly enjoy it and am grateful for the opportunity.

Until the next round with FightWrite’ on the WD blog, thank you for simply being you.

The post FightWrite™’s Find the Flaw appeared first on Writer's Digest.

(Writing Two-Sword Style Fighting (FightWrite))

Carrying a Sword  

Before we get into the ins and outs of carrying a sword on the back, let’s consider carrying a sword in general. There are three things that impact where we carry any weapon: convenience, custom, count. Each of these can determine not only where a weapon might be carried but how it is carried in a particular location.

Convenience

In order to protect yourself with a weapon, you have to be able to access that weapon easily. The weapon also must be positioned in a way that allows for its proper use. Here is what I mean.

If your character carries gun as their primary form of protection, they wouldn’t want to keep that gun on their leg under their pants*. Why? Well, when a bad guy jumps out, your character would have to fight off the villain, lean down, hitch up their pant leg, unsnap the gun from the holster, then draw it. Unless the villain allows the hero to call time-out, that villain will not allow the hero to grab that gun.

That is why every professional who carries a gun as part of their job keeps the weapon on their chest, hip, or, sometimes, lower back, if the weapon must be more concealed. These people have to be able to access their weapon easily and each of those locations allow for that. And, in all cases, they will carry the gun with the handle toward the wielding hand in a way that allows for a natural grip.

The same can be said of swords. They were carried in a place that allowed for a convenient, smooth wield. Sometimes that was the side, sometimes that was the back. In some cases, it was straight across the belly. In all places, the handle was easily accessible and positioned for a functional grip.

Custom

Though weapons were created for protection, custom could dictate where they were/are carried. Historically, left-handed folks were not lauded. In several languages, words meaning sinister, stingy, and just plain wrong-sided are derived from that language’s word for left. In the time of swords, if you were left-handed, you learned to function right-handed and you kept your “southpawness” a secret.

The common cultural practice of functioning right-handed is why swords were often carried on the left hip. Does that mean swords were always wielded with the right hand? No. The French created a parrying sword specifically for the left hand. It was meant to be used in tandem with a sword in the right hand. The name of that sword was main gauche – the French term for left-handed. Main gauche also means “unsophisticated hand.” (See what I mean? Southpaws, historically, didn’t get no respect!) If your work is historical and there are swords, research the use of the left hand in wielding.

You also should research when a sword was carried edge up or down. The blade is the metal portion of a sword or knife. The edge is the sharpened portion of the blade. Certain dress could dictate the direction of the edge. And the angle the wearer positioned the entire blade when passing others could be impacted by their social ranking. If you are high status, you might not point your sheathed sword down when you passed others. It would be everyone else’s job to concede to your rank and get out of your way.  

Count

The number of weapons carried also determines where each is located. *Remember when we looked at how inconvenient it is to have a gun on the leg? That only applies when that gun is the primary weapon. If the gun is a secondary or tertiary weapon, being on the leg is fine. The idea is that the gun on the leg will be used when the most accessible weapon isn’t available or functional. 

Historically, edged weapons on the body were a bit like mice: If you saw one, there were bound to be more. Swords were not the best weapon for every task. Sometimes a knife or sword of different length was needed. Also, swords could be broken or dropped. In those cases, the warrior needed a back-up weapon. And, sometimes, that back-up weapon might have been on their back.

Carrying the Sword on the Back: Appropriate

Now that we know about what impacts where swords were carried, let’s look at when swords were carried on the back. Any time a warrior found the back to the be the most convenient place for their sword, that’s where they carried it. If the sword was especially long or if the warrior would be climbing and moving a lot, carrying the sword on the back might have made the most sense.

Carrying the Sword on the Back: Not Appropriate

Running Out of Arm

Looking back at our two original characters in question, Deadpool and Michonne, the placement of their primary weapons wasn’t ideal. But far greater a sin than where they carried their weapons was how they did so. Each character carries their swords in a scabbard. That is the first problem we will look at.

A scabbard is meant to cover the entire blade of a sword. The length of a katana, which both characters carry, can be anywhere from 24–31 inches. When you draw a sword from a scabbard, you often hold the scabbard in place then pull the sword by the handle separating the two from each other. (By the way, scabbards and sheaths are the same thing. Scabbard is the word generally associated with longer blades like swords.)

Now imagine the scabbard is on your back. You reach back with your left hand and hold the sheath in place so it doesn’t ride up when you pull the sword. You reach up with your right hand for the handle which would be around five or more inches up from the blade. So, even if the blade is on the short side, say 24”, your hand will be around 29” from the tip. When you pull up on the katana, it is highly likely some of the blade will still be sheathed even at the greatest length of your reach. Yes, you will pull down on the sheath. But the way the scabbard is affixed to your back can’t be very mobile or the weight of the weapon will pull the whole thing down, out of your reach.

Put a tape measure at the base of your neck on your back. The scabbard would actually be lower, but let’s make it easy. Pull up on the tape measure with your hand sideways, as if holding the handle of a sword that is pointing down. Your reach won’t be as long as you think. If you are drawing sideways toward the edge of the shoulder, the reach is even shorter.

I have looked at Michonne’s sheath and the length of her weapon. Even standing at 5’7”, ain’t no way she is clearing that sword from the scabbard. If you can find an episode that shows her from the back wielding the weapon, reach out to me. I gotta see that for myself.

If you want your character to carry their primary sword on their back, it would be best to have the sword in a break-away scabbard. This type of scabbard grips the blade on one side and is open on the other side. This means the wielder doesn’t have to clear the length of the scabbard. Unfortunately, break-away scabbards aren’t viable for every type of sword.

Amazon
[WD uses affiliate links.]

Behold, All My Vital Organs

One of the biggest issues with carrying the primary sword on the back is what the drawing of it leaves exposed. When I reach my right hand to my left hip, I provide a small barrier to my vital organs. When I reach back over my shoulder for my weapon, I am exposing all of them: heart, lungs, guts, liver, all the things. That is a problem even if I am in armor. Armor is not impenetrable. Even if it is, in the time it takes you to pull your sword I could push kick you in the chest or whack you with a war hammer.

Why Do We See Swords on the Back on Screen?

So, if carrying a sword on the back is so fraught with peril, why do we see it so much on screen?

I reached out to my good friend and edged-weapons expert, Kirk McCune, for this question. Ready for the answer? Ladies and gentleman, here is why we so often see swords wielded from the back on screen: It looks super cool. Seriously, it is dynamic and dramatic. Movies and TV shows are, after all, entertainment.

And there you have it. Why your character might not want to carry a sword on the back. Can they? Sure. Should they? Maybe. The most important thing about where your character carries their weapon is your knowledge about that placement. By the way, in my Writer’s Digest book, Fight Write, I talk about why swords look the way they do. And they do look a certain way for a reason. In Fight Write, Round Two, my friend Kirk wrote several chapters on how to hold a sword and how to write the training of sword work. Give both of those books a gander.

Until the next round with FightWrite on the WD blog, get blood on your pages. And, hey! Reach out to me via the contact form on FightWrite.net and give me some post ideas. The best thing for me to write about is the thing you need to know.

The post Where To Carry a Weapon (FightWrite™) appeared first on Writer's Digest.

Is the Two-Sword Style a Thing?

I am asked about the two-sword style at almost every writer’s conference. The first thing I am often asked is simply: Is it a thing?  We see it in movies/TV shows such as “The Walking Dead”, John Wick 4, Deadpool, and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Are those directors and screenwriters drawing from history or simply giving viewers a cliché they so love? And, yes, viewers love the two-sword style. I know that because writers seem to gravitate toward it like moths to porch lights.

The two-sword style is a thing. In fact, some weapons, such as butterfly swords, were made specifically for such a fighting style. Two-sword styles span across cultures and continents. That said, it wasn’t the most common manner of using edged weapons, and there is a good reason for that.

Edged Weaponry

An edge is the sharp portion of a blade. A blade may have one edge or two. Steak knives have a blade with one edge. Daggers have a blade with two edges. Any weapon with an edge is an edged weapon.

It’s important to understand what edged weaponry is because what many consider a two-sword style is actually a style of two, edged weapons, only one of which might be a sword. Many times, the second weapon is a type of knife. If you have ever taken any of my classes or read my books, you will hear me say that where there is a sword, there is a knife. There is a reason for that.

Swords are excellent weapons but not all-encompassing. In order to be deadly, a sword has to have movement to slash or stab. For movement, there has to be ample space. If two combatants are in close quarters, there may not be enough room for either to use their sword effectively even with a reverse grip. That’s where the knife comes into play. Even if your character does wield two swords, they will also carry a knife as a tertiary weapon.

Primary, Secondary and the Horrible Left Hand

Before jumping into wielding two, edged weapons together, we have to understand the concept of a primary and secondary weapon. A primary weapon is generally the weapon wielded in the dominant hand. It is considered the primary weapon because of the greater dexterity in the dominant hand. It may also be considered primary because of its lethality. That said, the more lethal the weapon, the more one would want to carry it in the hand over which one has the most control.

Ambidexterity

There are people who use each hand with the same ease and control. These people are rare and incredibly gifted when it comes to fighting of any kind. However, historically, ambidextrous people wielded the primary weapon in the right hand as left-handedness was not celebrated — to put it mildly.

In Europe, where many sword-centric fantasy works are set, the languages tell the story of how being left-handed was once perceived. In French, Spanish, and Italian, the words for left and left-handed, can still be synonymous with clumsy, sinister and underhanded. In German, the word for left can be used to say, on the wrong side. In Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, the attitude was once much the same. So, even if your character is ambidextrous, their primary weapon will likely be in the right hand.

Requirements for Wielding Two, Edged Weapons

In order to wield two, edged weapons at the same time, each weapon has to meet a few requirements. One, each weapon must have a weight distribution and balance that allows it to be wielded with only one hand. Some edged weapons, such as a broad sword, required two hands to wield because of its weight. That would make wielding a secondary weapon impossible.

Two, each edged weapon must have a design that compliments the other. If one weapon is very forward heavy, like a battle axe, it might be difficult to wield with another weapon. Also, if the primary weapon is a melee weapon, such as an axe, hammer, or club, it is often wielded with a shield which prohibits the use of a secondary blade.

Three, the weapon must have a handle that allows it to be wielded with the desired hand. Some edged weapons have a hand guard that is only suited for one hand. Usually that hand is the right hand. To have an edged weapon with a hand guard that is side specific for the left hand, a weapon might have to be specially made. That is expensive.

Issues Associated with Wielding Two, Edged Weapons

Wielding two, edged weapons was absolutely doable. I have been introduced to one such style in Filipino Martial Arts. That begs the question: Why didn’t more people wield two? If one knife is good, shouldn’t two be even gooder? Yes and no.

Amazon
[WD uses affiliate links.]

The Benefits

The benefits of a two-sword style begin before the swords are even put to use: It is intimidating. Dealing with two moving blades is highly perilous, and the possibility is enough to make many would-be attackers stand down. Another benefit is the most obvious. The wielder has twice the edges. Also, if the weapons are of differing lengths, the wielder can easily transition to in-fighting (close quarters) without having to grab the secondary blade.

The Detriments

When fighting with edged weaponry, the open hand is very important even though it does not hold a weapon. It’s used for balance, parrying, grabbing, punching, getting up from the ground, and holding a shield. With a weapon in hand, some of those actions are more difficult or impossible.

When both hands hold a weapon, the wielder is in more danger. The combatant has to be mindful not to stab or slash their own darn self. They have to have an efficient way to carry and draw multiple weapons and still carry a knife. The wielder must also have the means to maintain all the weapons.

The Biggest Issue

The most difficult part of a character wielding two, edged weapons is not you, the writer, understanding how the character would use those weapons. It is also not showing the reader why that style is culturally appropriate or practical for the character. The hardest part of having our character wield two, edged weapons is writing it. Writing sword work for one sword can be difficult. Writing movement for two swords can be more challenging.

If you are a writer who excels in writing sword or knifework, writing two swords may present no challenge for you. Even so, consider why you have chosen two swords. Consider where the character is geographically and physically located and if them having two swords makes sense. Consider how they will carry the two swords. And, if your chosen area of carry is in sheaths on the back a lá Deadpool or Michonne from “The Walking Dead”, stop. You do not understand enough about wielding two swords to write it. Why? Well, that will be our next post!

Until the next round with FightWrite on the WD Blog, get blood on your pages.

The post Writing Two-Sword Style Fighting (FightWrite™) appeared first on Writer's Digest.

(6 Misconceptions (and Truths) About the Fight or Flight Response (FightWrite))

Who Is Lois Gibson?

Lois Gibson holds the Guinness World Record of “The Most Successful Forensic Artist.” Her criminal sketches have led to nearly 800 apprehensions. And, she is a family friend. She has traveled and still travels the world with her work and is considered such an authority on criminal sketches, that her word is enough to make an artist qualified for the position. There is no official certification for police composite artists, however the International Association for Identification offers one that is well respected. 

How Many Criminal Sketch Artists Are Out There?

There are less 25 forensic artists on staff with police departments nationwide. Most of those only do skull reconstruction. Police departments with no forensic artist contract the work out to local artists, work with forensic artists from other police departments, or they rely on AI.

While using AI to create a criminal composite seems like a good idea, according to Lois Gibson, AI generated work yields fewer apprehensions. She says that AI creates an image similar to a photograph. People see the image and think, I don’t know that person. However, when these same people see a criminal sketch created by a human they wonder, Do I know anyone who looks like that person? The latter leads to more criminal identifications.

Criminal Sketch Artists Don’t Just Sketch People

Forensic artists will sketch just about anything in connection with a crime that might help solve it. They may draw a vehicle, clothing, tattoos…whatever is needed.  

What the Criminal Sketch Process Looks Like

If your character witnesses or is a victim of a crime, the sooner they are able to speak with a forensic artist the better. In some cases, the artist may meet with the victim immediately after the crime in the hospital or at a safe location such as the police department outside of regular office hours. If the witness/victim comes to the police station during regular business hours, they may go to the Victim Services Department or the department dedicated to the crime in question.

Every composite artist does their sketching differently. This gives you, as a writer, a lot of leeway in how you write that process. Some artists use a large sketch pad and charcoal or graphite. Some, like Lois, have an entire tripod and light in tow and use pastels. Some might use a smart tablet.

The Steinburg Catalog

In order to help a witness/victim describe the criminal, it’s helpful for them, and the artist, to have a solid reference. This is an insider thing most folks don’t know about and if it ends up in your work, you will be as authentic as it gets. The reference often used by composite artists is the Steinberg’s Facial Identification Catalog by Samantha Steinberg.

Steinberg’s Facial Identification Catalog features criminal arrest photos of men. Each section of the book focuses on a specific aspect of the person’s appearance beginning with the head. There are categories within the sections that focus on shape. For example, in the first section, “Head Shape”, each page gives examples of different men, of different ethnicities, with similar head shapes.

In each photo, the portions of the criminal’s face that are not being used as an example are blurred out. This allows the witness to focus on one aspect of the person. The witness can then compare their memory to the photos and pick different traits from several examples. They may pick a head shape from one photo and a hair line in another. They can then describe each in more detail.

Although Steinberg’s first catalog features many races, she created a second book focusing on different ethnic groups. But what neither the first nor second catalog includes is women. Why? According to Lois, although the skulls of men and women do differ, the face shapes are similar. The female face is just softer.

It’s Not Often a One and Done

Sometimes the preliminary sketching process goes quickly. The artist with Houston PD has done them in 20 minutes. These faster sketches are generally done in person. In-person sketches allow the person describing to correct the artist as the artist sketches, so there is less back-and-forth discussion between the two. If, however, the description is by email, which happens quite often, the process can take much longer.

Sometimes the witness/victim doesn’t remember an aspect of the criminal until they see the criminal sketch finished. This doesn’t mean the artist has to start over completely. Preliminary sketches done in pencil can be erased. Those done in pastel can be drawn over.

After the preliminary sketch, the composite artist can darken the work and give it depth. Sometimes they use the witness/victim notes to add color to the rendering. This is done at a later time after the preliminary sketch.

Amazon
[WD uses affiliate links.]

Sketching the Deceased

Sketching unidentified deceased can be a little tougher, as there is no one the artist can discuss the appearance with. Also, sometimes the faces of deceased may not be completely intact. Traumatic injury, stages of decay and insect activity can all erode the appearance. In these instances, the artist first looks at the areas of the face without damage. If one side of the person’s face is missing, the artist will take clues from the other side of the face.

If bloat has distorted the appearance, the artist will consider the weight of the person and use the faces of other people of similar weight as a reference. If the facial tissue isn’t present, the reconstruction will be based on skull measurement and depth markers. These depth markers, known as osteometric markers, are landmarks on the skull that indicate tissue depth. 

Though reconstruction of deceased can be done by hand, it can also be done on the computer. That said, work done on the computer requires just as much artistry. Faces are not symmetrical. The one reconstructing can’t just cut and paste.

The finished composite is given to the police department who may put the picture in the National Missing and Unidentified Persons System, also known as NamUs. The NamUs system is a national repository for missing, unidentified, and unclaimed persons cases. It serves as a resource hub for law enforcement, medical examiners, coroners and investigating professionals. Public access to NamUs is limited.

Criminal Sketch Artists Are Interesting Folk

If you ever have the pleasure of meeting a composite artist, find a comfortable seat next to them. They have stories that make the wildest of fiction seem tame as fat hamster. They also tend to have a strange sense of humor. These professionals hear and see some disturbing things and laughter helps them process those things. That said, I have never, not even once, heard a police artist speak disrespectfully of a witness or victim. They also are fairly comfortable with gore. Again, it is part of their job.  

***

And there you have it. Criminal sketch work in a nutshell. I hope this helps you write a scene that no one else has been able to write. If you have any more questions pertaining to criminal composite work, you can catch me at ThrillerFest this month, the Writer’s Digest conference next month, and any time via FightWrite.net. Until the next round with FightWrite® on the WD Blog, get blood on your pages.

The post How Criminal Sketch Artistry Works (FightWrite™) appeared first on Writer's Digest.

Misconception: Survival Mode Is for Physical Threats

Truth: Survival Mode Is for Any Threat

Any time our brain perceives that we are in danger, it enacts our threat response system. That danger may be physical, mental or emotional. While the mind doesn’t react to threat exactly as body does, it still goes through and displays all the threat responses. For example, consider the flight response in fight or flight. Fleeing a physical threat may look like running. Fleeing a mental threat may look like quickly pushing back away from a table. In my book Fight Write, Round Two, as well as here on the WD Blog, I go over how survival mode impacts our body language. 

Misconception: Fight or Flight

Truth: Right Words. Wrong Order. Plus One.

Because survival mode is commonly called fight or flight, we have this idea that is how the body responds to threat: It fights it or flies from it. Sometimes the word freeze is added to the end of the phrase and that’s good. Freeze is a part of survival mode. But it doesn’t come after flight, and fight certainly doesn’t lead the parade.

Misconception: Freezing Is Cowardly

Truth: Freezing Is Crucial

The freeze response is the first and most crucial link in the chain of three threat responses. At the first sign of danger, everyone freezes. There is both a biological and strategic reason for this. Biologically, while in survival mode, the body seeks to conserve energy. As the threat grows, so does the expenditure of energy. If we all immediately fought every threat, we wouldn’t have energy left for any threat that followed.

Freezing is a strategic response for many reasons. One of those reasons is why you and I exist today. Our ancestors, who lived among predatory animals, froze as a means of staying alive.

When my Viking ancestors, let’s say my ancestral grandmother, was in the woods and heard a bear approaching, she immediately froze. She likely also covered her mouth with her hands and held her breath as a part of that freeze response. This is how that kept her alive:

1. Many predatory animals have eyesight that is keenly attuned to movement. My Viking granny’s freeze response kept her from attracting the bear’s attention.
2. These same predatory animals also have a chase response. They instinctively chase what runs from them. Because Viking granny stayed still, this wild response wasn’t activated.
3. These same animals have keen hearing. Because my amma (Norse for meemaw) was still, the bear didn’t hear her footsteps.
4. Because amma held her breath, her breath didn’t show in the cold and her vocal cords were poised to scream if necessary.
5. Because she covered her mouth, when she resumed breathing, the sound was muffled and the steam from the heat was filtered.

Second, freezing allows us all a moment to assess the situation. The average human brain responds to stimulus in as little as .25 seconds. In that fraction of a second, our brain can determine what we need to do next—or not do as the case may be.

Third, freezing can make us seem dead which can keep us alive. The vagus nerve is a key component in the parasympathetic nervous system, a part of our nervous system that functions without our thinking about it. Sometimes our vagus nerve believes the best way to keep us alive is to make us make us shut down. That can look like a lot of things including us dropping into a fetal position. This is sometimes called a flop response. I was a flopper as a child. If I was startled intensely, my knees buckled and down I went into a heap. I was basically the human version of a fainting goat.

This could have been helpful to me depending on the predator. I would have attracted less attention and, depending on the predator I might have been sniffed and then left alone. This is also a valid response to a human threat. A friend of mine was accosted in her home by an unknown assailant. Her body went limp, as if she had died, and her bladder emptied. She did not pass out. She was very much aware. The would-be rapist, completely shocked, left her home. In that example the freeze response pulled triple duty by also distancing her from the threat and ultimately fighting against it. 

Misconception: Flying Is Running

Truth: Flying Is Distancing

When the brain perceives that freezing isn’t sufficient for safety, it increases the energy level to the flight response. The word flight gives the impression of fleeing quickly. But the essence of the flight response is distance. You are putting distance between you and the threat.

There are many ways to put distance between ourselves and a threat. We can absolutely run. We can also climb beyond reach or settle into an area where the threat can’t fit. Just as well, we can do less active things that distance ourselves from pain. One of those is fawn.

Fawn is sometimes described as its own survival category. The goal of fawning is appeasing the aggressor long enough for the victim to delay or escape pain. To me, those are forms of distancing and therefore a manner of flight. Whatever you do to create distance between you and a threat can be seen as flight mode.

Misconception: Fighting Is Physical

Truth: Fighting Isn’t Always Physical

The final step in the survival chain of events is to address the threat directly and fight it. Fighting is reserved as a last resort as fighting, in the traditional sense, can expend the greatest amount of energy and energy is life. Sometimes, however, addressing the threat doesn’t require a great amount of physical energy. A trigger pull requires very little physical effort. Neither does turning on a computer.

In the modern world, technology is becoming the weapon of choice and that, too, is fighting. Drones can drop bombs. So can photos or videos leaked online! Cyber-intimidation and bullying can be insidious forms of combat. Keep in mind that although psychological combat, such as can take place online or in real life, may not require much physical effort, they can still, however, be incredibly taxing mentally. There is still an expenditure of energy.

Misconception: We All Lean Toward One Survival Response

Truth: We All Do Them All—Usually

Some believe that each of us leans toward a particular response. In other words, some folks are naturally geared toward one mode and go immediately to that response. For example, you might see your warrior character as a fighter who immediately addresses the threat.

The truth is, we all go through all the steps of survival mode. We all freeze, fly, then fight, in that order. Where we differ is where we might get stuck. Previous traumatic experiences can cause us to get caught in one or spend too little time in another step of survival mode. If your character was a POW who had to fight for their life daily while in captivity, they may escalate to the fight response quicker than what is appropriate or safe.

Here’s what that looks like. The POW character is on the street and a car backfires. That character will stop, or freeze, then duck his head and step back, or flee. He then might grab someone near him, cover them protectively, then put a hand out defensively, or fight. Had that character’s freeze response not been impacted by trauma, he might have realized that the sound he heard was a car.

Survival mode is a brilliant function of our brain. What we’ve gone over here barely scratches the surface. Just be aware that when your character is thrown headlong into fight or flight, they will not immediately fight then flee. Biologically and strategically, their body knows that it should go through certain steps in a specific order to provide the best chance of survival. And, you can display each of those steps in a way that is peculiar to your character and best for your story.

Until the next round with FightWrite® on the WD Blog, get blood on your pages. Also, if you are going to the Writer’s Digest Conference in July, and you need some mentoring with your fight scene, please make an appointment with me. We can troubleshoot, brainstorm, or literally walk through your scene to be sure it is exactly what your story needs. I will also be teaching a class on injuries (that includes lots of pictures) as well as a tactical class in which I will take questions from you all regarding fight movement. If you’ve been to my classes before you know they are fun and fill up quick! Sign up now to reserve your spot!

The post 6 Misconceptions (and Truths) About the Fight or Flight Response (FightWrite™) appeared first on Writer's Digest.

Not exactly.

(Is My Killer a Psychopath or a Sociopath? (FightWrite))

Unfortunately, despite its moniker, the lie detector test doesn’t actually test for lies or prove guilt, and it may not even be allowed as evidence in criminal court. In this FightWrite® post, we will take a very honest look at the polygraph. We will look at what it does and doesn’t do and when the results are admissible in court.

Disclaimer

Before reading further: This is not legal advice. I am not a lawyer and I am not your lawyer — I wouldn’t wish that you. Also, we will only consider polygraph results as they relate to criminal trials, not civil trials. Lastly, this post is for informational purposes only. Its intent is to help writers create believable fictional work and make life miserable for their innocent characters or keep a lunatic character on the streets.

What the Polygraph Does

The polygraph measures three physiological responses: heart rate/blood pressure, respiration, and skin conductivity. All increase when the body is emotionally aroused. The idea behind these measurements is that when someone is lying, their body is more excited than it is when they tell the truth. And the polygraph does its job in that respect. It does measure the body’s physiological responses to certain questions.

What the Polygraph Does Not Do

What the polygraph does NOT do is measure deception. It cannot discriminate between physiological responses to lies, the pure stress of being in a situation where a polygraph is required, or menopausal hot flashes. Basically, a polygraph is great at testing to see if someone is uncomfortable. And its margin of error, is anywhere between 15 to 40 percent.

Admissibility in Court

In 31 U.S. states, polygraph results are not allowed as evidence in criminal cases. In five states, results are only admissible when both the prosecutor and defense agree to it. When polygraph results are admissible and incriminate the defendant, the defense can bring in expert witnesses to refute the polygraph results or question the qualifications of the tester. In all states, if inadmissible polygraph results are mentioned at all during the course of a criminal trial, the entire proceedings could be declared a mistrial.

That said, even when polygraph results cannot be used in court, law enforcement can ask suspects if they would agree to take one. The goal of the polygraph in those cases is to measure what questions/statements cause the greatest physical disturbance in the suspect. Those results could be used to steer an investigation. What law enforcement cannot do is compel or coerce anyone to submit to a polygraph.

Types of Polygraph Questions to Expect

         Irrelevant and Relevant

If your character takes a polygraph, there are a few types of questions they may encounter. Irrelevant questions are questions not related to the case. These questions can give a baseline for behavior or help a person relax between relevant questions that might cause anxiety. What is your name? Are you alive right now? Do you have two feet? These are all examples of irrelevant questions. Relevant questions are questions that relate to the case for which the person is taking the polygraph.

         Control

Control questions are questions that relate to a scenario similar to the case. They not are directly related to the case but do tend to lead to questions that are. The best control questions are ones that incriminate just about everyone for something. For example:

• Have you ever driven over the speed limit? (Control)
• Have you ever been angered by another driver? (Control)
• Did you speed and run the victim off of the road? (Question directly related to case)

Control questions like these are used because, in theory, an innocent person wouldn’t have any issue saying they had driven over the speed limit or been angered by another driver. In the mind of the innocent person, who hasn’t done both of those and having done either wouldn’t make them guilty of running someone off of the road. Why would it?

On the other hand, the person guilty of running someone off the road would want to seem as though they had always been a model driver. No. They had not gone over the speed limit even once. No. They had never been angered by another driver.

Amazon
[WD uses affiliate links.]

         Directed Lie

Sometimes the one taking the polygraph is instructed to lie to certain questions. These questions are known as directed lie questions and they are innocuous and straight-forward. “Are you a duck?” “Did you fly here today with your wings?” Directed lie questions may be asked several times to get a baseline for the person’s physiological response to a lie.

Beating the Polygraph

If you look at websites endorsing polygraph science, they will tell you that you cannot beat a polygraph test. Unfortunately, history doesn’t support that. The Green River Killer, Gary Leon Ridgeway, The Angel of Death killer, Charles Cullen, and kidnapper Richard Ricci all passed a polygraph test. Spies Ignatz Theodor Griebl, Karel Frantisek Koecher, Jiri Pasovsky, Larry Wu-tai Chin, Aldrich Hazen Ames, Nicolás Sirgado, Ana Belen Montes, and Leandro Aragoncillo all passed it as well.

There are many sources out that can coach one to pass a polygraph. Most seem to focus on using the control questions to create a faulty baseline. After all, if your character reacts to everything as if it is a lie, how would a polygraph detect an actual lie? To create an inaccurate baseline, your character can:

• Think excited thoughts and constantly alter their breathing pattern. Holding the breath randomly throughout the test is important.
• Fidget the whole time. Shift in the chair, move the shoulders, cross and uncross the feet, sniff, flutter the eyes … all the fidgety things.
• Have the character randomly bite the side of their tongue or press down on a tack they’ve placed in their shoe. All of these can raise the character’s blood pressure and throw of interpretation of the results.  
• Lastly, and this is toughest one, have your character be deeply calm. This is how all the criminals mentioned in this post passed. This is the toughest route to take, but it is doable.

The efficacy of the polygraph is constantly under debate, yet it remains a constant presence in criminal cases. It is completely plausible that if your character is questioned in connection to a crime, they will be asked to take one. Now, you can write how you want that test to go.

If you want to know more about forensic evidence like the polygraph, questioning techniques or how the human body reacts when we attempt to deceive, check out my book Fight Write, Round Two. It’s full of great crime stuff.

And, speaking of crime, I am teaching and speaking with a panel at ThrillerFest this June. I will also be teaching with my WD family at the Writer’s Digest Annual Conference in July. If you see me at either, please say hello!

Until the next round with FightWrite on the WD Blog, get blood on your pages. And don’t lie about it.

The post The Truth About the Polygraph (FightWrite™) appeared first on Writer's Digest.

(Areas of the Body Most Often Impacted by Firearms Injuries (FightWrite))

Psychopath and Sociopath

The terms psychopath and sociopath are interchangeable. The term psychopath first appeared in the late 1800s. It was replaced by the term sociopath in the 1930s. The two were used interchangeably by clinicians with some favoring the latter as psychopathy was often confused with psychosis by laymen.

In 1980, the DSM-3, the third edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual used to diagnose mental health maladies, introduced a broader diagnosis of Personality Disorder that included traits of psychopathy/sociopathy. Today, these traits are found among the 10 diagnosable personality disorders in the DSM-5-TR. Neither psychopathy or sociopathy are a diagnosis. They are a set of personality traits without differentiation and neither word is found in the DSM-5-TR.

So, put away the multitude of info graphics you’ve put on your desktop reminding you of the differences between two terms because clinically, there is no difference. Also, don’t worry, you don’t have to know the intricacies of each of the 10 personality disorders. Instead, consider whether your killer is an organized or disorganized offender.

Organized and Disorganized Offenders

Forensic/criminal psychologists, as well as criminal profilers, have compiled a list of characteristics that distinguish organized from disorganized criminal offenders. The characteristics are gleaned from known killers of both categories and are used as a reference to begin the process of profiling an unknown assailant. That said, the start of a profile is not the final product. Both types of killers can deviate here and there from the compiled characteristics, especially in terms of intellect. And some killers, such as Aileen Wuornos, can fall distinctly between the categories.

Organized Offenders

Personal Characteristics

Organized offenders, such as Ted Bundy, Joel Rifken, and Dennis Rader, tend to be male with a masculine image. Quite often they were raised in a middle-class environment, are of higher birth order, and the victim of childhood abuse1. They tend to have average or above intelligence and are socially adept. They are sexually competent, attractive, and charming. It is not uncommon for them to verbally seduce their targets. They are occupationally and geographically mobile, and may live with a partner. They have a controlled mood during their crime and a controlled demeanor overall. Their crime scene is likely squeaky clean of evidence.

Post-Offense Behavior

To the organized offender, getting caught is a game. They keep up with the news regarding their crime, are police groupies and may call in to offer information about the incident. They are very difficult to catch as they are meticulous at covering their tracks. Also, their crimes tend to have three distinct areas: approach, kill, and disposal. They are known to move the victim’s body several times and dispose of it in a way that advertises the crime.

Disorganized Offender

Personal Characteristics

Disorganized offenders, like Jack the Ripper and Jeffrey Dahmer, tend to be male and victims of childhood trauma such as neglect and physical/sexual abuse3. Often, they are neither socially nor sexually competent and have poor hygiene. Their education level and intellectual ability tend to be low. They generally don’t have stable transportation, so their kills tend to be near where they live. They are anxious during the crime, overwhelm their victims with violence, and tend to leave the body in plain view at the scene. They are also known to leave plenty of evidence behind out of adrenaline-fueled carelessness. That is not to say that they are quickly nor easily caught. Some of the most prolific disorganized offenders evaded capture by more than a decade.

Post Offense Behavior

The disorganized offender may change their address or place of work after the crime1. Both, however, may still be near the scene of the offense as this type of offender likes to revisit where the crime took place. They may keep a diary or clippings related to the crime and attend a memorial for the victim. They may even go so far as to place an “in memoriam” in the local paper.

Amazon
[WD uses affiliate links.]

What This Means for Your MS

How can this help you in writing your manuscript? Placing your character into one of the two killer categories will save you time in creating a backstory. You know that if your killer is calculated with their crime, they could have had a solidly middle-class upbringing and were voted Most Charming in high school.

You could also use the character traits to give more details to your killer. If their crime is frenetic and poorly planned, its reasonable that their clothes are often dirty and they have body odor. Little additions like that can bring a character to life in a way their behavior can’t.

A Killer Reference Tool

There are enough well-researched and verified traits of organized and disorganized killers to fill a small but creepy library. I found nearly 1,000 books on criminal profiling with little effort. The traits I’ve listed barely scratch the surface but are hopefully enough to help you get on the right path of character killing. In my book, Fight Write, Round Two, I have infographics that give these characteristics, and more such as the type of criminal interview that is best for each type of offender. For example, if your character is a disorganized killer, your police characters will want to bring them for questioning at night.

I hope this was helpful and saves you time in creating your characters. The more time you save in one aspect of your work, the more you are afforded in others. If you write mystery or thriller, check out the table of contents of Fight Write, Round Two. There’s an entire section just for you. You’ll learn how to diagram a crime scene, which personality disorder your character might have, and why during criminal interviews police often carry in a file folder thick with papers. Writer’s Digest gives the book a thumbs up. And don’t forget that the FightWrite blog is out there for you free of charge and chock full of killer tools to help your scenes of action, violence and crime be the best they can be.

Until the next round with FightWrite on the WD blog, get blood on your pages.

The post Is My Killer a Psychopath or a Sociopath? (FightWrite™) appeared first on Writer's Digest.

(Entitled and Uncomfortable (FightWrite))

That’s No Bat

Several years ago, a friend of mine had a confrontation with a man in a parking lot. When he turned to walk away from the argument, his feet came out from under him. He said it felt as though someone had hit his legs with a bat. He had no idea that what felt like a bat was actually a bullet.

After the fact, we talked about how blessed he was to have taken the bullet in the side of the knee. Had the aim been higher, he might not have been alive for us to have the conversation. We wondered at the odds of him being shot in such a small area as the knee or anywhere on the legs. What we didn’t know then was that his injury fit the odds perfectly. Strange as it might seem, the majority of gunshot wounds, both intentional and unintentional, are actually are to the legs.

Areas of the Body Most Likely to be Shot

According to the CDC and National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS). All of these can also be found on a handy table in the WD book, Fight Write: How to Write Believable Fight Scenes.

Why Not the Biggest Target?

Looking at the graphic above, you can see that the thickest areas of the body are not the ones most frequently injured by bullets. Even combined, the statistics of being shot in the upper and lower trunks are not as high as that of the legs. Why? Legs are smaller targets and especially hard to hit when the body is moving. So, why are bullets finding their way there? There might be a few reasons.

Bullets Fall

Bullet trajectory is parabolic not straight. It raises above then falls below line of sight in an arc. Within .2 seconds, or at about 70 yards away, a 9mm bullet can drop more than four inches in the best of conditions.

Now, if you are a gun person you know that’s a broad generalization because the type of gun matters. The point remains: Bullets drop. Perhaps that’s one reason why so many folks are shot in the legs. The assailant is far enough away that the bullet is dropping below their desired target.

Maybe. But I think there’s better reasons.

Pulling a Trigger is Easy, Hitting a Target is Hard

To me, a more plausible reason people are shot most often in the legs might be because hitting a target is harder than it looks. Pulling a trigger is easy. Hitting a target? Not so much. The faster anything travels, the easier it is to take it off course. In the case of a bullet, the tiniest of movement greatly impacts aim. How you hold a gun can be the difference in a hit and a miss. Grab the handle too tight and your hand will shake. Grip too loose and the gun will shift in your hand. Both impact aim.

Poor hand position on the grip can cause the barrel of the gun to point down slightly. Aim the handgun sideways, a favorite in movies for reasons I do not know, and you lose the front sight—the little fin on the top on the barrel that helps you aim. That sideways position also causes the hand to curve which impacts aim.

I’m not an expert on felonious behavior, but I’m willing to bet that the majority of those who assail with handguns don’t take extra care with grip or aim. I’m also willing to bet they don’t account for weather conditions. That all makes for a bad shot. Add that to the bullet drop over distance and you have the makings of missing a target.

People Don’t Really Want to Kill Folks

In my mind, what has the greatest impact on legs being the most common target is that when people aim to kill, they aren’t literally aiming to kill. Killing isn’t as easy as criminal statistics make it seem. Most people have to be primed to kill. It is estimated that in WWII only 20 percent of soldiers actually fired on the enemy.

By the time the U.S. entered the Korean War, the military had taken efforts to mentally prepare soldiers to fire on combatants. This raised the firing percentage to estimated 55 percent. That is still a low number considering these soldiers were in a position where firing was not only acceptable but expected.

Now consider how likely a regular person is to shoot someone. It is easy to find statistics on how many people are killed by firearms. What is harder to find is the number of people who actually fired those weapons. We can’t assume that every single person killed by gunfire was killed by a different person. So, the number of assailants is likely fewer than the victims, especially since more than 60 percent of violent offenders tend to reoffend. Regardless, the number of people who kill with a gun in the U.S. is a very low percentage of the population. That low percentage may purposely be aiming low to not kill their target.

As far as accidental injuries to the legs, that is likely explained by where a person holsters their gun. If the gun is on the side or hip, it would fire down the body. If the gun is in the hand while walking, for whatever reason, it might be held downward for “safety.” (Straight down by the leg ain’t the safest way to hold a loaded gun.)

Amazon
[WD uses affiliate links.]

Mortality and Wound Location

Any bullet wound to any area of the body can kill. When a bullet enters the body, it carries with it all the cooties it went through in flight. It also pulls in clothing from the body and bacteria on the skin.

Infection aside, there are some bullet wounds that are especially difficult to survive, and we need to bear that in mind when we write a bullet into our characters. Even with modern medical care readily available, only about 30 percent of people shot in the head survive long enough to make it to the hospital. 50 percent of those die after being admitted to the E.R. Of those who do survive the horror of a gunshot wound to the head, roughly half often suffer recurrent seizures.

Mortality rates of patients wounded in the chest can vary 14 – 36 percent. The chest is a big area. Abdominal injuries have a little more than a 10 percent mortality rate. Those shot in lower extremities have about an 8 percent chance of death. Bullet injuries to the arms and hands are seldom fatal.

Strangely, more bullet wounds don’t equal greater chance of death, which make zero sense to me. According the CDC, the number of gunshot wounds does not predict severity of injury or mortality. The location of each wound has a greater impact than the number of wounds.

A Parting Shot

If the statistics regarding where people are injured by bullets doesn’t hit the target in your work, rest easy. Our readers aren’t looking for authenticity as much as realism. Consider authenticity a means of support for the reality you write, not a standard by which you must write. Knowing where people are actually injured by bullets gives you an authentic way to create and troubleshoot your scenes with firearm injuries.

Until the next round with FightWrite® on the WD blog, get blood on your pages. 

The post Areas of the Body Most Often Impacted by Firearms Injuries (FightWrite™) appeared first on Writer's Digest.

(Holiday Fight Scene Helper (FightWrite))

Recently I read a review on my second book that caught me off-guard. I was surprised by not only what was written but by my own response to it. I’m still processing how it landed with me. In fact, up until this writing, I’ve only told my sister and husband about it. This post is my attempt to digest it. So, buckle up. This is going to be all vulnerable and emotionally icky. And as a hive I will need y’all to agree on something. Repeat after me: We listen and we don’t judge. From here on out, I will just type L J to remind you because you will need reminding.

OK, here we go.

The entire review was 173 words. The part that struck such a chord was a mere seven. Those words were: Carla Hoch is a very good writer.

That’s it. That’s the statement that hit me like a wet towel. When I read it, my head shifted back on my neck, and I put my hand on my chest. Now, those who’ve read my book, Fight Write, Round Two, know those movements are all signs of discomfort. Specifically, my adrenal system was telling my body to move back from the words and put a shield up as a second line of defense. To further punctuate the emotion of the moment, I teared up.

Why? It’s a good thing to hear. A wonderful thing to hear! Why did my brain think I needed protection?

That’s when the bitter truth of it landed. I’m not sure I have ever considered myself good at writing. Yes, I know that sounds crazy. L J How am I writing in the Writer’s Digest Blog if I’m not a good, well, that thing I just said?

I’ve heard many positive things of my work over the years. For that I am thankful. But I’m not sure I’ve heard those seven words specifically. And I guess rather than deriving from those positive comments that I’m a (hard swallow) good writer, I’ve assumed that people enjoyed my writing despite my not being good at it. L J

Now, I don’t mean to brag, but I’ve been in a lot of therapy. Like, tons of it. When something impacts me in a way that it is unexpected, I’ve learned to sit with my response to it. I pick my reaction apart, overlook the bang of it, and focus on what lit the fuse to begin with.

Amazon
[WD uses affiliate links.]

So, rather than trying to flesh out the truth of the statement, I decided to first figure out what being a good writer meant to me. What did that look like in my mind? If I knew that, then I could at least see where I saw myself falling short. I came up with three things that good writers have, and I don’t. L J

One: I don’t write fiction.

Two: I don’t have a large catalogue of work.

Three: I’m a niche writer.

Unfortunately, none of those three things defined what it is to be a good writer. I had jumped over the deepest question, which I do pretty often. I still needed to know what it was to be good at this craft. I reached out on social media to writers and readers alike to see how they defined a good writer. Here is the amalgam of those responses.

Good writers work very hard. They press on even when writing ceases to be fun or easy because the path to greatness includes neither. Good writers are willing to learn and not afraid to fail. They work to make their natural ability a skill. In fact, the greater part of being a good writer is neither ability nor skill but grit and determination. Good writers do not give up. They write badly, rewrite exhaustively and submit their work quietly, boldly and fearfully hopeful.

Good writers are great story tellers and they tell the story by showing it. They incorporate all the senses, bring the reader into the story and make them a part of the journey. They have something to say, don’t shy away from the realness of life and create characters fully fleshed literally and figuratively. And somehow, in some magical way, a good writer can give readers the entire backstory of a character with the first line from the character’s mouth.

Good writers know story trumps all. They leave personal agendas by the side of the road and drive madly into, yet within the boundaries of, their created world. They use their words efficiently and wield them with a practiced technique. They know grammar and punctuation makes for solid communication. They also know characters don’t speak with either in mind.

Good writers write stories that keep us reading, keep us turning pages. They make us angry at the characters, cry alongside them, root for them and cheer at their triumph and demise. All the while, a good writer maintains their voice throughout the work. And if a reader doesn’t like the work, if they leave a bad review, a writer doesn’t step out of the story and use their voice to lash out. Because, at the end of the day, a good writer releases ownership of their story to all who read it.

Good writers are portal creators. They are mirrors of society and the human condition. And, somehow, though they seek to reflect the real world, good writers provide us all with an escape from it.

Not one thing any reader/writer said agrees with what I had determined a good writer to be. Not one comment mentioned how many books a writer has published. No one delineated between fiction and nonfiction writers. Yes, there was much said about characters, but if you read a lot of nonfiction (and I do), you know they read like a story. In fact, some of my favorite books are nonfiction, which, by default, means some of my favorite writers are nonfiction writers.

No one’s assessment of a good writer agrees with the standards by which I have judged myself. Yes, I am a niche writer. I teach writers how to write fight scenes so, actually, I’m a niche within a niche. Does that make me any less a writer? I help writers make their work the best it can be. Just because it is a small part of their work doesn’t mean it’s any less valuable.

Also, my existence within a tiny part of the Venn diagram where writing and fighting intersect doesn’t mean I have no right to exist in the broader parts that do not cross. I’m a writer. I get to say that. I get to own that. For Pete’s sake, Writer’s Digest endorses me and allows me to wear their reputation on my books, my teaching, my articles, and their blog posts. If I’m not a real writer than I am a real con artist because I have fooled Writer’s Digest, the exemplar of craft. Good glory, if I can’t pat myself on the back for anything else, it can surely be that!

So, in summary, which is a fairly elementary way to end an article, but you know what, L J . In summary, I get to say that I’m a good writer. Does that mean I’m comfortable with it? No. Even now as I type the words, I’m rolling my lips in over my teeth. Does my discomfort make it any less so? No, it doesn’t.

I can’t speak for anyone but me. And none of you reading this might relate. But I’m willing to bet there’s at least one of you out there who does. If you don’t believe you are a good writer, decide first what that statement means to you. If any part of your definition is about anything but actual writing, then maybe like me, you aren’t so much bad at being a writer as you are good at measuring yourself by a standard that doesn’t even exist.

I’m a good writer. I’m a really good writer. And that means sometimes I will write nonsense. Heck, this post might be proof of that. L J It also means that I will keep writing. Yes, next month, I will be here. Warts and all, here I shall be. Because what a good writer is really bad at is quitting. Let me assure you, I do not quit. For me, believing I can’t do a thing has never kept me from doing it. I have a very long history of doing what I can’t do.

So, until next month, when I may yet again schlep all my emotional gunk out for the world to see, L J , I leave you with two questions and a challenge for the coming year: What does being a good writer mean to you? What does that look like? Write it down. Go ahead.

Now here’s your challenge: This year, write as if you are all the things on that list.

Until the next round with FightWrite on the WD Blog, L J .

The post Entitled and Uncomfortable (FightWrite™) appeared first on Writer's Digest.