Narration in The Songs of Penelope

 

I, like many other people, read The Song of Achilles when it was trending online and fell down a massive rabbit hole of Greek mythology retellings. Since then, I've read an uncountable amount of retellings, most of them feminist (because of course they are, why would I want to read anything else), and the most recent of these retellings was ironically titled The Songs of Penelope. 

I adored this series. Dare I say, it is one of the best adaptations of a Greek myth or character I've ever seen, and I would love the opportunity to talk a little bit about one of brilliant things Claire North decided to do when she wrote these books. 

The narration. 

All three books in this series are told through the point of view of a Greek Goddess; the first book is told by Hera, the second Aphrodite, and the third Athena. There are so many reasons why I'm in love with this choice. Firstly, it allows for both first person - when the Goddesses speak to one another, to other Gods, or choose to interfere with mortal matters - as well as third person omniscient - sharing the actions, thoughts, and feelings of Penelope and the men and women surrounding her. You are not so much in the Goddesses head as the circumstances evolve, but are rather an audience that the Goddesses are willingly telling the story to. 

Interestingly, many Greek myths and poems start with an invocation of a muse to tell the tale as honestly and as well as possible, and there are many mentions throughout the books of the importance of poets to make a story meaningful, make a king great, so on and so forth. So calling this series The Songs of Penelope, and also in the final book having Athena call on a muse to give her clarity in her storytelling, as was done at the beginning of the Iliad or the Odyssey, shows the deep respect the author (and in turn, the Goddesses), hold for Penelope. 

The use of the Goddesses as narrators also allows each book to highlight something different about Penelope as a character, as each Goddess focuses on something different. With Hera, the mother of all, queen of queens, she is focused on Penelope as a queen, and how it overtakes her life more than being a wife or a mother ever has. As a common victim of a man's temper and ire, she sympathizes with the hard choices Penelope has to make around the men vying for her hand, and when Clytemnestra appears on the island, Hera shares her love for that queen too, and compares the way each Spartan princess handles their kingdom. 

Then we get into Aphrodite's point of view, and Aphrodite discusses beauty and love. She centers her narrative around Penelope's complicated feelings for one of her suitors, who is kind and respectful, and how Penelope has been a widow much longer than she was ever a wife, and how she wishes she could be tender and soft with her son and the women around her but can't find it in herself to actually do it. When Helen, Aphrodite's beloved, comes to the island, we once again have a metric to compare Penelope to.

And finally, Athena. Athena has no queen or hated woman with which she can compare Penelope to. She has Odysseus, when he finally returns home. Athena talks about why she chose Odysseus extensively, and compares him and Penelope to one another routinely. She shares more of the cunning, powerful, rage-fueled side of Penelope, the warrior side. Artemis, it should be noted, makes several appearances, but Penelope does not fight like Artemis, she fights like Athena, so Athena is the one we hear the story from. 

(Artemis does have her own league of women, led by a character named Priene, which is a whole can of worms I will not get into right now, but would love to at a later date.)

Each book allows for a different aspect of Penelope to shine through, as well as a different perspective on the Gods themselves, for each Goddess has their own interpretation of their place on Olympus, what they can and cannot do, and what circumstances they find themselves in. Hera has been shunned and cast down in all but name, her temples mere ruins and her name on nobodies lips, as Zeus shrunk her to make himself appear larger. Aphrodite is slut-shamed and undermined by everyone, believing her to be all cheap beauty and no brains and seeing no point in genuine love. Athena, as she goes into extensive detail once we see her POV, tried very hard to be less than a woman, to remove herself from anything that could be considered feminine in the hopes that she could save herself from the grief that comes with being a woman, even an immortal one, only to realize that she will always be viewed different, always be a woman, no matter what she tries. 

All this, the shunning and the undermining and the disrespect, the Goddesses find reflected in Penelope. They find it in her maids and warriors too, who are given extensive "screen-time" and add a beautiful extra layer to the wonderful women of Ithaca. It's a stunning display of sisterhood, mortal and divine, and how all women are connected in a few, very important places. 

I could go on and on forever about all the things I loved about this book, narration aside, but I think I'll stop here. I'd definitely recommend reading it. 10/10, one of the best series I read this year by far.

Happy Writing! <3

Writing Fight Scenes

 I have dedicated the last eight years of my life to a book series that includes a lot of fight scenes, which was a dumb decision, because I hate them. There is literally nothing I hate writing more than fight scenes. But my experience has gotten me somewhere, I’d like to think, so allow me to share three of my favorite tips and tricks I’ve learned over the years about writing fight scenes.

Link to the video above (which is a really useful and interesting example of what I'm about to talk about) here!

1. Be realistic. You don’t have to be 100% realistic. Especially if you’re writing in a fantasy or sci-fi realm, obviously realism is going to bend a little bit to your whims. But if you write a character that has never fought a day in their life training for two months and suddenly taking on a whole army on their own… That makes no sense, Lads. 

I was watching a Youtube video earlier today about badass female characters and how shallow they’re becoming, and one of the points this youtuber gave was the overuse of the “chosen one” sort of trope, where there is a frail, delicate woman, who suddenly fights like she’s been instilled with the might of God to paint her as a stereotypical “badass”. It’s weak, it’s cheap, and we as a community can do better. 

This also comes into play when a character is injured; if a leg is broken, unless they are a cyborg or so incredibly high, they are not fighting anything. Not well, at least. If they do, you’ve got to give me a really good reason for it. Even minor injuries or ailments can sometimes be next to impossible to fight with. My recommendation is always to do research, watch movies, and read other books. There’s a lot of really good videos by crime specialists and boxers who break down scenes in movies, and those are a great resource! Remember; the only person who is harmed by doing too much research is you, because you’ve wasted your time. But the book never suffers. 

The champ of fighting multiple assailants at once. I miss you Queen, come back soon <3

2. If your character is fighting multiple people at once, don’t explain every single person she fights. Explain three. 

Three is the most I would recommend, so feel free to do less than that if that feels best. And of course, the order is up for interpretation, but here’s the formatting I find usually flows nicely; explain the first, explain the second, half explain another in the middle, then explain the end of the final opponent. Two full explanations, and two half explanations. 

Here’s an example that, though poor in quality, kind of summarizes what it is that I'm talking about. Mild warning for graphic content.

Amalfriede charges. 

She slides beneath Alaviv's wide swing, dodges as he stabs his sword angrily, desperately at her stomach. Amalfriede kicks the end of his long sword as he rails it downwards, and the force of his thrust does not permit him to stop before the tip of his weapon has embedded itself in his foot. Alaviv howls and Amalfriede rams her shoulder into his chest, knocking him down and stealing his sword as he falls. (ONE)

A voice cries out, vengeance! vengeance! and Amalfriede whirls to a helmeted soldier, too far away to know who it is, if she knows them at all, scramble up onto a horse who has lost its master. He kicks the horse to run and the horse obeys, the soldier's long spear protruding a foot from the beasts nose. Amalfriede has to leap both to avoid the soldier's spear and to avoid hitting the horse when she strikes. 

There is a slat in between the forehead of the helmet and the chin, where the eyes are meant to look. It is as good of a place as any to aim, and Amalfriede jumps, catches the shaft of the spear between her ribs and bicep, and stabs Alaviv's sword straight into the slat. When she yanks her sword down, the soldier slides off the horse and onto the ground with it, already dead. (TWO)

There is another man close by with a bow and arrow, and it is the wrong weapon to have. More soldiers, more horses, less time for Amalfriede to wonder where Thyri had gone, and if she was alright. 

A man screams what he must think is a battle cry as he approaches from Amalfriede's left, and she ducks. (TWO POINT FIVE)

This is what Amalfriede had been bred to do. This is a place she understands, not Thyri's courts or gala's, not her midnight gatherings of secret allies, her public parties with foes. Amalfriede has never enjoyed that kind of subtlety.

Yet she yearns for it. She aches with the yearning, would be paralyzed with the fear that she may never experience it again if she had the privilege. Amalfriede is not made for the life of a Queen but, she considers, she may have been made for Thyri. Thyri, just as she is. And Amalfriede is okay with that possibility. 

An arrow whizzes past Amalfriede's face, and she blinks. Turns. A short woman with a hulking bow stands closer than an archer ever should, and Amalfriede kicks a spear off the ground where it's owner had fallen and throws. The woman goes down quickly. (THREE)

"Thyri," Amalfriede gasps, the field quiet for the briefest of moments, and she turns to the closest soldier wearing colors she finds safe. "Where is Thyri?"

Again, you can switch up the order if you want, like this;

It's a massacre. I think I killed more people that day than I had ever seen in one place before. 

I was out of practice with a gun, but muscle memory is a bitch, you know? It's a bitch until it turns into a hell of a drug. Does that make sense? I was clumsy for the first few, still trying to remember what I had been taught, and then I got the hang of it, and I kind of started enjoying myself.

A woman tried to approach me, her hair matted against her skull, and the gun in her hand was long range, unsteady, not a weapon she clearly knew how to use. When she took aim and shot the blowback was more than she was prepared for, and I reared up, smacked her own gun into her head, and shot her on the way down. (ONE)

Somewhere along the way there was a girl too - and I feel it is important to classify her as a girl, not as a woman like the one I just mentioned, because she was very obviously a girl, not a woman. She had knives. Those don't do much when I'm seven feet away. (ONE POINT FIVE)

By the time a man had the guts to try and go for me, I was in the zone. I shot him three times; once in the stomach, the chest, the neck, all in quick succession and in the cleanest, prettiest little line. I mean you wouldn't have been able to make a cleaner line with a ruler. (TWO)

This is around the time where I should probably ridicule myself, or tell you, captive audience, about how it was the adrenaline talking, moving my arms and pulling my finger down. You might be comforted, perhaps even fooled if I told you that when all was said and done, and I was free, I looked around at the mess I had made and threw up, or began weeping, or fell to my knees. Of course, I'm going to do none of these things. I didn't promise you that it would be a good, comforting story, but I did promise it would be honest. 

So when the warehouse started to go quiet, and a man was surrounded by his fallen companions, some women and girls among them, he knew he had nothing left to lose. So when he charged at me, I let him get closer, really close, closer than I was advised to let people get, and when he tackled me to the ground, when my head hit the concrete and his hands clenched around my throat, I let it happen. And then I shot him in the head, and it was done. (THREE)

Play around with it! See what you like, and if you’re in a certain character’s POV, what feels right for them. A more pragmatic character may explain more than a character running on pure adrenaline. A fighter who is looking for their partner on the battle field probably won’t take much note of the last person they strike down, because they’re already trying to find their lover. Character, I say, and I will continue to say it probably until the day I die. Focus on your character. Your character is, in almost every situation, the most important thing. 

3. Figure out what kind of fighting your character does. Even in fantasy, I do think this is important. I’m fortunate enough that my characters are familiar with several types of combat so I don’t have to follow one style too strongly, but they’re a very particular case! 

Here’s the smartest thing I think you can do; figure out what kind of style your character fights in. After a quick google search let’s go with Moraingy - a bare fisted martial art originating in Madagascar. Now go to Youtube. “Moraingy fighting style” led me to a dozen or so videos of boxing highlights, tournaments, explanations, and a foreigner who gave it a shot themself. See which moves you like, which ones you don’t, try your hand at explaining them on paper. 

Fight scene practice videos are also stellar for research and to model your fights after, and usually a lot of the fight choreography is really beautiful and interesting to watch. It is very common for small companies to make fight choreography videos and use foam walls, planks, wooden swords, and other fun accessories to spice up a scene, which is exactly what you should be doing as a writer. 

I also posted a video earlier this week about interesting ways to spice up a fight scene, from uncommon weaponry to unique environmental factors. If you wanted to check that out, you could, although seeing as this blog can only be found by going through my TikTok, you probably already have. If you have any other interesting ideas of your own, I’d love to hear them! Happy writing!

I Who Have Never Known Men: A Book Review and Discussion

 

I recently had the pleasure of reading I Who Have Never Known Men by Jacqueline Harpman, which I read in six straight hours and then pondered relentlessly for the following three days. So let's talk about it. 

I Who Have Never Known Men follows a nameless narrator, locked underground with thirty-nine other women and watched by male guards all hours of the day. As the youngest of the group, the narrator is raised without the confines of tradition or societal structure, and so she forms her own opinions and perspectives on her situation. When alarms sound through the base and the narrator and her companions escape, they begin a several year long trek to find survivors and try to form a life for themselves, stilted and strange though it may be. 

The book is beautifully written. I don't think I can continue without saying this first. The book has no chapters, just one endless narration of events, and I think if Harpman were a less skilled author this would have made many readers lose interest halfway through. I have the absolute worst attention span and sometimes even slightly longer than average chapters lose my interest, but this haunting, twilight zone-esque story of a bizarre alien world and how the women try to find their way through it kept my attention until the very end, and that's insanely impressive. It really does feel like the twilight zone, so if that's something you like, I would definitely read this. 

There's a lot of interesting questions raised by this book through our narrator, summarized by Sophie Macintosh in her end notes, which I got to read in the version of the book I had; what parts of humanity are innate, and what are learned? When you are raised in a cage under the earth and have no concept of societal standards, what remains? 

Modesty is a big one, in this book. All the other women hate the idea of bathing or going to the bathroom in front of one another, but the narrator doesn't care much about it. She was not raised with privacy, and so does not see the value in it. It reminds me of the way we see the human body now, I mean why do we think that the naked, natural body - especially the natural body of women - is a private, sexual thing? It's not the natural order of things, since there are thousands of years of historical clothing, artwork, and stories that prove otherwise. But the women in the cage rejoice the chance to go to the bathroom or bathe alone again, especially older women (which is also a societal thing! The villainization of the aging female body, a topic I will mention again later). The need to cover the body and hide it's natural state is something that society built and uplifted, so our narrator, who remembers nothing outside the cage, doesn't see it's importance. 

Death is another one. God, the amount of time I could spend talking about death. 

As the narrator and her group travel across the barren world to find life, they come across other bunkers like their own, where the prisoners had been unable to escape, and died of grief or starvation in their cages. The women around the narrator compare the stench of decay to other things, rotten eggs or foul chemicals, but our narrator, who both does not know of the things they relate it to and does not have the quiet voice in her head to steer clear of death, compares it to nothing. Death is death. She doesn't shy away from it as the others do, and in fact finds respect and peace within it, in the unwavering stare into it rather than cowering away from it's gaze. 

Now death customs are something that I find incredibly interesting, so I won't bore you with all the details. I also can't say what point Harpman was trying to make, as she was from Belgium and was Jewish, and I can't say for certain what customs she would have grown up with. What I can do is relate it to modern American death customs, or rather the lack of American death customs. America, like several other nations in Europe (there's a pattern here but I will not point it out), steer clear from talks or mentions of death. It's not dignified, it's gross, and the dead body, much like an alive women's body, or an alive women's aging body, are unsanitary, unsightly, and thus should be kept out of sight and out of mind. 

I'm beginning to branch off into a conversation I probably shouldn't. Look up Zoe Moss' essay It Hurts to be Alive and Obsolete: The Aging Woman. It's a very good essay on the topic of aging women's bodies. I also intend to talk more about this at a later date. 

Point is, for a very long time the white-washed world (there, I said it) has pushed the idea that death, dead bodies, and all things associated with each should be shunned from good society. It's why many places, America in particular, push grieving spouses and children to get the dead cremated or embalmed as fast as possible (fun fact, you actually can keep a dead body for a little bit, like you don't have to give it to a funeral home immediately), and then pressure them to invest in small white plaques imbedded into the ground, so they're easier to mow over. It's not about closure, it's about quickness. 

For our narrator, who knows none of this, she respects and honors the body. She takes on the few death customs that the women around her are willing to share and then creates some of her own. She takes her time with them. It is her relationship with death that allows her to do the heavy job of killing her fellow women when they are ill or in pain, a job that none of the other women, with their tradition, have the heart to do. 

It also has to be noted, as Sophie Macintosh says in her end commentary, that Jacqueline Harpman was again, Jewish, and fled from her home to escape World War 2. So the concept of women being imprisoned underground for reasons they don't understand only to be released and find everyone else dead? There are a lot of potential layers to that. I can't say anything for certain since I don't know why Harpman wrote this, but it is interesting to consider. 

The other part of the author's questioning is very reminiscent of the "if a tree falls in the forest" argument; who decides time? Who decides meaning? Who decides stories deserve to be told, or what it means to exist? 

I think everyone gets to make that choice individually, and so as a group no one consensus can be made, which means no one gets to decide. Another thing humans naturally have is a want for agency. Wanting, too, is something humans always have. Desire and the like. But the human experience is so specific to each person and holds something new and special each time, which means everyone has to decide for themselves where their meaning and existence lie. 

There's a scene in the book where the narrator is asking about the women's lives before the cage, and they all tell her some variation of "it's pretty ordinary, no different from the rest". But to the narrator, there is no ordinary. Everything is important and new information, and another thing about humans, they like to know things. They like to learn. And their stories are different; one woman was divorced, another had children, another had fertility struggles. One lived on one side of the world and another lived on the opposite. Ordinary is decided by societal standards, and without them, every person has the opportunity to realize the uniqueness of their tales. Does that make their stories worth telling, worth hearing? Yes, I think it does. Absolutely. 

Admittedly, I have no idea what the point of this book was for most of the time I spent reading it. Even now, saying all of this, I could be totally off the mark. But these are the questions I found myself considering while I read, and had a good time trying to find the answers to. And that's what humans do, when all is said and done. Explore. Ask questions, find answers. 

I wouldn't say this book is a happy story, I honestly felt like a shell of myself after reading, but it did leave me with an odd sense of hope. Do with that information what you will.

Happy writing!

I am having a minor meltdown over wordcounts (a completely valid thing to have a meltdown over)

 

When I was in high school, I read a 300,000+ word, My Hero Academia, Fantasy AU Kacchako fanfiction on AO3. I read it in two days and I still think about it. Probably because it was unfinished and the author never went back to it so I have no idea how it ends. 

I have read 150,000+ word Black Widow fanfiction, several 200,000+ word Avatar: The Last Airbender fanfictions, and I've read I don't even know how many real books, on paper in front of my very eyes, that were over 100,000+ words. I've read many a series where all of the books have been well over that, and I have enjoyed them all greatly. 

It is with this knowledge in both my head and yours that I inform you I've been recommended to cut my 112,000 word book down by at least 12,000 words. 

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate and understand the advice; the last person to give it to me was an incredibly kind and thoughtful agent, who recommended I slim the word count down because I'm over what most agents will consider for a debut author. She said I should cut it before I sign with an agent who gives me less control over where to cut, and I deeply respect her for wanting me to have as much autonomy over my book as I possibly can. 

The issue that I'm facing is that the recommendation is not given because the book is too wordy, or there are too many unnecessary scenes. No person who has given me this advice has read more than twenty pages of my manuscript. The suggestion comes from knowledge on marketing, what agents and publishing houses do and don't go for, and they do not go for debut authors with books over 100k. From a career standpoint it's great advice, but from a writer standpoint I can't with good conscience lean into it. 

Do you know why fanfiction is so popular? Because people yearn for content. They yearn for more of the characters and the world that they already love. The casual conversations, the fluffy in betweens, and yes, the most mind-boggling smut you have ever read in your goddamn life. People love fanfiction for the same reasons people love beach filler episodes or Christmas specials. People love fanfiction for the same reasons they hate how shows nowadays are eight episodes a season and only 30 minutes an episode; because people want to connect. With a story, with a character, with a setting, people want to drown in it. It could be because of the familiarity or comfort it brings, it could be because a part of the character wasn't explored as aptly as you wished, but whatever the reason, people want content. 

Motherfucker, I want content. The GenV fanfiction game is abysmal and I'm starving out here. 

Maybe not every scene in my book is necessary — I actually know a lot of them aren't — but that doesn't mean they won't be enjoyed, or that they won't add nuance to a later character decision. I'm not writing some grand masterpiece that students will read and analyze in a hundred years, I'm writing something fun and sweet, and that's still good. Red is my baby, not without faults but still beautiful and hardworking and important, and the thought of cutting out twelve thousand words so that maybe I'll have an easier time getting money from it doesn't sit right with me.

In an era so incredibly swamped with ai and a steady decrease in intellectualism, where my teacher-sister has students that genuinely don't know how to sound out words, why would I shorten my book for marketability? When empathy is so rare, why would I erase moments of kindness and tenderness, or moments of hostility that make the kindness and tenderness that much more important? It's a dramatic way to phrase it but I don't think it's entirely wrong. If someone read the book and told me what scenes weren't necessary I would take it a lot better than this. I want to be an author, I want that to be my career more than anything, but I'm not sure if I want it to be like this. I don't know. I got the rejection and advice from that very kind agent yesterday night and it's kind of been haunting me. 

So here are the options I've been considering, going forward;

Option 1) I shorten the book. It is the most straightforward option and will solve the problem I have with many agents, where they refuse to even consider a book that is over 100k words. It does require me to cut 12k, and as it stands currently, I don't know what to cut. I've been writing this book for eight years and have already cut and changed so much, every scene that made it into the version agents are seeing is deeply loved and, at least to me, adds something to the story or to a character's development. 

Option 2) Fuck the agents and self publish. This is not what most people advise you do if you're looking for a career in writing, but they're also advising I cut 12k for marketing reasons so I'm already going against what most people advise, why not keep going, right? I'm already here. Dig the ditch a little deeper. This would allow me to keep whatever I want, but I would have to fully work out printing, marketing, cover art, etc, and that's a lot to manage. 

Option 2.5) If I decide to self publish, I will need to hire another editor to read and critique my book (I did this a few years ago, but a lot of things have changed since then), and when I hire someone I could ask them what they think I could cut. If they give me ideas, maybe I could manage to do Option 1 and cut some things. If they aren't quite sure or have horrible suggestions, I stick with Option 2. 

Option 3) 112k is too long for a debut author, so I simply won't be a debut author when I try to publish it. In case that sentence was confusing, allow me to rephrase; I am suggesting I write, edit, have multiple people beta read, and publish an entirely different book that is below 100k prior to my current manuscript, and then once that is out, move forward with Red. Is it an unhinged option? Undoubtedly. But I'm kind of into it. I have tons of books that I started and am still slowly working on on the side, if I commit the next four months to one of them, I could get it done, and then Red wouldn't be stuck in the current that is publishing. 

If y'all have any suggestions, I'm all ears. None of these options are super great. Let me know what you think, and happy writing! 

A Short Guide for Writing Queer Characters

 As time goes on I find myself less and less likely to read stories that don't involve queer characters. I also find myself becoming very particular with how the queer characters are handled. Based on my experience writing, researching, reading and being, here are a few tips and tricks for creating a queer character. 

Make sure your audience knows the character is queer. That feels like something I shouldn't have to say, but too often authors have confirmed a character's sexuality after the book has already been published, despite the fact that the character gives no hints at that aspect of themselves during the book. The story doesn't have to be about the character's queerness, but it does have to be part of their character. Trying to claim it afterwards without giving any genuine representation is cheap, and you're better than that. 

When I write, I try to follow two steps to ensure an audience knows I'm making a character queer;

1. Either actually label their sexuality or gender identity, or make it irrefutable. IT IS OKAY TO GIVE CHARACTER'S LABELS. IT IS OKAY TO SAY WHAT THEY ARE. Andrew Joseph White is a beast when it comes to this, and I highly recommend his work as a guideline for queer characters and also, generally, an enjoyable read. I feel like a lot of authors skirt around labels because they don't want to commit or think that it feels clunky, but it only feels clunky because no one does it. So I beg of you, please God do it. Have characters ask for each other's pronouns or turn someone down because they're gay. 

A FANTASTIC example is Jordan from the show Gen V. Jordan is Bigender, and can change their appearance from masculine to feminine whenever they wish. Their gender identity is a large part of their character! They say the word Bigender multiple times, discuss their identity with their parents and friends, reflect on what it means to and for them. That's important! From a political standpoint, it's huge. 

(I couldn't find any really good articles talking about Jordan, but this video gives a decent and quick rundown!)

Another example; in the book I'm currently querying for, my FMC says that gender makes no difference to her when it comes to partners, and it's not something she heavily considers. My MMC, by comparison, says that the thought of being with anyone romantically or sexually makes him incredibly uncomfortable, and he's never had any real interest in any of it. FMC is pansexual, MMC is asexual and aromantic. 

Asexuality and aromanticism (which I believe is the proper terminology, but please correct me if I'm wrong), as well as other lesser-known labels like demisexual and the like are a little harder to make clear unless you give the actual name, but there are a few other ways you can make it clear.

2. Bring their identity up more than once. I say three times at least. For my MMC, he will bring it up multiple times in the future, worried that he isn't capable of "loving people properly", and how he wishes he were different. Even if I never say the words asexual or aromantic, this makes it pretty clear what I'm referring to. 

Likh from The Bone Witch Trilogy never identifies herself as trans, but she does wish to be a witch, wears female clothing, wants to learn magic the way women do, and switches her pronouns halfway through the series. That is a stellar way to create a queer character in a fantasy realm, where modern terminology might not make sense. Fantasy is not an excuse to exclude queer people. 

Again, if a character's queerness isn't meant to be a plot point, you can still mention it! A girl finding another girl attractive, an offhanded comment about the pins on a character's backpack, small things that, when put together, make it clear that you're writing a queer character. 

I also heavily encourage writing queer characters who identify as several different things, or identify as part of smaller, less discussed groups. Trans people can also be bi, people who are demiromantic can be pan, so on and so forth. Queer characters should reflect queer people, and there are a million different ways a person can be queer. Explore!

"But Astrid, isn't that overkill?" I am genderqueer, biromantic and asexual. No, it is not overkill. 

To add to my opinions on queer diversity, do not make all of your queer characters cis white men. Do not do that. Remember how I said that queer characters should reflect queer people? That includes queer people of color. And queer doesn't just mean sexuality, it also refers to gender! 

STEREOTYPING. Let's talk about stereotyping. 

Don't! 

I'll be a little more specific; seriously, don't. If you are writing a queer character and cannot think of a stereotype for that label off the top of your head, google it. You will find a million sources on stereotypes for certain sexualities and gender identities, and then you can avoid them. I'll give you a few that I can think of off the top of my head.

The Angry Lesbian, hyper-feminine gay men, infantilized trans men, queer black women being viewed as inherently masculine, bisexuals are cheaters, asexuals are deeply uncomfortable with anything seductive and don't feel any sort of physical attraction, aromantics do not want love of any kind. The list keeps going. If you go to google and look up "queer stereotypes", you'll find an endless fountain of sources. 

Research in general, stereotypes aside, should be done if you are writing about a character that is part of a group you are not part of. Even if the story isn't about their queerness, I recommend doing research. What are the challenges they face? What are shows or books that represent them well? What about the representation makes it good? This is the only form of borderline plagiarizing I encourage. 

I promise I'm not trying to make this seem overly complicated. When I write queer characters, other than being conscious of stereotypes, I don't consciously think about most of the things I mentioned above, it just happens organically. So I wouldn't stress about it too much, but if you're concerned, this is definitely a good guide to follow. Queer people deserve safe spaces, and if you want to create one, don't half-ass it. Seriously.

Happy Writing!