Language in Historical Fiction

I've just finished watching Season Four of THE CHOSEN, the streaming series about Jesus and his followers. (It seems likely the title refers to the latter.) I find it captivating, although naturally it's not perfect. In the first season, the Roman soldiers sometimes act like the Gestapo in a Nazi-occupied country, whereas from what I've read, the Roman occupation was more like the British Raj in India. The Pharisees are portrayed as if they wielded official authority, when in fact they were a self-appointed religious-political pressure group promoting strict observance of the Law. What the series brings to mind for me at the moment, though, are linguistic issues. How should characters in a historical novel or film talk in order to seem approachable by modern audiences yet also quasi-authentic or at least not blatantly anachronistic?

If a historical person's speech includes jarringly contemporary slang -- unless it's humorously meant as parody, of course -- it throws the reader or viewer out of the story. On the other hand, characters who speak "forsoothly" can feel emotionally distant rather than engaging. Worse, some writers have a tenuous grasp of archaic language and season their texts with random peppering of "thee," "-est," "-eth," etc., with no regard for the actual grammar of premodern English. Obsolete words can lend the narrative an authentic flavor but, if the meanings aren't obvious from context, may confuse the reader. I admire the way Chelsea Quinn Yarbro's Count Saint-Germain novels refer to clothing and some other everyday items by the terms used in the respective historical periods rather than substituting modern approximations. But, then, Yarbro is an expert with many decades of experience, and even so, I'm not always certain what a particular article of clothing looks like; her skill, fortunately, always gives the reader enough to go on with.

Then there's the issue of narrative and dialogue meant to be understood as translating from a foreign language. Some old war movies show enemy soldiers speaking with German accents, as if they're foreigners to themselves. The new miniseries adaptation of SHOGUN makes the bold decision to have Japanese dialogue spoken in that language with English subtitles, immersively realistic but rather demanding on the audience. The filmmakers do give us a rest by letting the European characters talk to each other in English when they're presumably speaking Portuguese. In my opinion, THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER made an excellent choice with scenes on the Russian submarine. For the first few minutes, the actors speak Russian with subtitles. Then we have a conversation when the captain (Sean Connery) is reading aloud from a book written in English. His spoken dialogue segues from Russian into English, and thereafter Russians talking among themselves do so in English "translation." When foreign languages in historical fiction are "translated" into English, as in most novels and movies, it seems appropriate to render casual speech from the supposed original language into colloquial modern English rather than making the characters talk in an unrealistically stilted, formal style. With one precaution -- the writer should take scrupulous care to avoid anachronistic references, such as metaphors based on technology that didn't exist in the particular past era, e.g., "like a broken record" before the 20th century. But how far should the dialogue go in the direction of informality to be accessible without the intrusion of jarringly modern slang?

I'm ambivalent about the way THE CHOSEN handles that question. Mostly I like the casual, colloquial dialogue, but sometimes the characters use trendy phrases that I think make them sound too much like contemporaries of our Gen-X children. I don't object to words such as "okay," though. That's been around since before the mid-19th century. As for accents, it puzzles me that the locals speak with what I guess is meant to be a Middle Eastern accent, again as if they're foreigners to themselves. Logically, the Jewish characters should speak unaccented English and the Romans, as the outsiders, should have an accent -- maybe a hint of Italian? I winced, by the way, when a Roman soldier stumbles over the name "Peter." It's Greek, the common language of the eastern Roman empire; of course he would know it means "rock"! (Furthermore, for maximum realism the disciples should address Peter by the Aramaic word for rock, Cephas.)

The regional and class issue should also be taken into account, in my opinion. Dorothy Sayers, in the introduction to her radio play cycle THE MAN BORN TO BE KING, discusses accents in this context. Should Jesus and his disciples speak more correctly than the working-class people around them, as if the disciples weren't part of the same population? Jesus and his mother need to share the same accent, but would it make sense to have them talk differently from his followers? Sayers also brings up and dismisses the complication of regional dialects. THE CHOSEN doesn't allow for that, either. I wish they'd taken into account the fact that Jesus, his mother, and several of the disciples come from Galilee. Since inhabitants of that area were considered uncouth by people from around Jerusalem, the dialogue should reflect that difference. I'd like Jesus, Peter, et al to have a distinct regional accent, maybe a tinge of Scottish or Irish, something I've never seen in any film version of the Gospel story. I wonder how THE CHOSEN will handle the moment during Peter's denial scene when a bystander recognizes him as a disciple by his Galilean accent?

Writers of fiction set in past eras or foreign cultures need to strike a delicate balance between annoying purists and baffling casual readers.

Margaret L. Carter

Please explore love among the monsters at Carter's Crypt.

He, She, It , or They Said

Nowadays a widely accepted piece of advice about writing fiction sternly rebukes any use of dialogue tags other than the simple, almost invisible word "said." No alternative verb choices such as "muttered," "snarled," "cried," "screamed," etc., and definitely no adverbs. Nothing like, "We must flee," Tom said swiftly. Resorting to dialogue tags to convey the tone of a character's speech is a sign of weakness, the fiction mavens insist. A skillful writer can accomplish this goal by other methods. But sometimes you can't, I protest, at least not so concisely. Can't your hero "whisper" or "shout" occasionally?

Anthony Ambrogio's "Grumpy Grammarian" column in the August newsletter of the Horror Writers Association rages against this alleged rule. In this columnist's view, the constant repetition of "said" makes a fiction writer's prose tedious and flat. He particularly dislikes the use of "said" with questions. The verb "asked" belongs there, he insists, and on this point I completely agree. I also advocate a whisper, shout, murmur, or mutter in the appropriate places. Ambrogio disparages the current fashion as "the unfortunate less-is-more, bare-bones approach to dialogue where everything is 'said' and writers don’t ever vary their descriptions of characters’ remarks." He concludes the essay with the exhortation, "You’re a writer. You have imagination. You have language. Use both (he demanded boldly)." To some extent, I agree with him. Sure, a beginning author may wander into a thicket of purple prose by becoming too enamored of flamboyant dialogue tags and unnecessary -ly adverbs. But potential abuse of a technique doesn't justify forbidding its legitimate use.

Of course, variation can be introduced by avoiding dialogue tags altogether and identifying the speaker through his or her actions. However, that device, too, can become tediously repetitious if overused. Sometimes, moreover, we just need to know that the character whispered a line instead of screaming it. I once did some editing on a novel that included a conversation where two women were drinking tea or coffee or whatever. The text repeatedly identified each speaker by having her fiddle with her cup, spoon, etc., often in almost identical words.

One stylistic choice I strongly dislike consists of line after line of quoted speech with no attribution at all, like reading the script of a play but without the characters' names. Supposedly, in well-written dialogue each character has such a distinctive voice that you can immediately recognize which one is speaking. Well, sometimes you can't. It breaks the flow of the story when the reader has to count back up the lines to the last mention of a name to figure out who said what. It's even worse if the author ignores the "one speaker per paragraph" rule, as some do.

In short, writers have access to many methods of distinguishing speakers in fictional dialogue and describing their manner of speech. Each one can be elegantly deployed or clumsily misused. Or, in the words of Rudyard Kipling, "There are nine and sixty ways of constructing tribal lays, And every single one of them is right!"

Margaret L. Carter

Please explore love among the monsters at Carter's Crypt.

Mysteries of Pacing Part 10 - Show Don't Tell Character Arc

Mysteries of Pacing

Part 10

Show Don't Tell Character Arc 

Previous parts of Mysteries of Pacing are indexed at:

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2020/07/index-to-mysteries-of-pacing.html

Note in that index post, at the top there are links to 3 of my Reviews of Series I've been following on this blog.  Assuming you have at least looked over the cover blurbs and first and last chapters of some of the novels in each Series, think now about the Main Character in each series.

If you don't like the Series I've highlighted, pick some others you do like.  The point here is to follow a single Character through years, and even decades, of life's vicissitudes and rewards.

I'm also assuming, if you've had the ambition to write novels for a while, you've also delved into a large number of biographies, both of famous people and of less well known who have lived through major world events (such as the World Wars, famine in Africa, adventures with the Peace Corps, etc.).

https://socreate.it/en/blogs/socreate-blog/posts/how-to-write-character-arcs/


Many people have lived interesting lives without making Headlines you can rip a story, plot, or setting out of.

Given that breadth of reading experience, and the ambition to write something as gripping and fascinating (maybe even instructive) as those books you love, consider the story you want to tell.

Now reconsider whether any of the books you have read actually TELL you a story.

If you're using the examples I've highlighted in Reviews, the answer is, "No, they don't tell the story."

The deepest, most gripping, thrilling, and informative books (novels and non-fictiion) SHOW you the story in such a way that you remember it as telling you the story.

The serious clue to what is happening when you remember a good book comes to you when you meet the author of that book and get into a conversation, not so much about the book but about life in general.

You come to realize one of the oldest bromides in the writing profession -- "The book the reader reads is not the book the writer wrote."

And the reason for that difference is the element in worldbuilding we've discussed at such length, Verisimilitude.

Making your world, your characters, your story into something resembling the reader's internal world (derived from but not identical to the real world around her) gives the illusion of verisimilitude because we all believe our own internal world is real, or very close to reality.

Verisimilitude is not about reality, but about resembling reality closely enough to "suspend disbelief" long enough to explore the validity of one's beliefs, to see reality from a perspective unavailable without suspension of disbelief.

One of the writer's tools for creating Verisimilitude in a Character, especially a Main Character, or Viewpoint Character whose story you reveal in the plot of his life-experiences, is Dialogue.

Characterization of a Viewpoint Character, one whose silent thoughts and reasoning, emotional reactions and subsequent evaluations, are revealed to the reader, requires that the Character's dialogue, words spoken aloud, be reflective of that Character's Arc.

As we discussed in Part 9, Character Arc is a vector quantity, having both magnitude and direction.  That makes it complicated, but extraordinarily simple to portray.

Here is a blog describing (as most writing tutorials do) what the ultimate goal of your crafting of a story should be -- but devoid (as most writing tutorials are) of exactly how to take your inner vision and make it into words other people will enjoy.  Nevertheless, if you're confused about what the goal is, read this

https://socreate.it/en/blogs/socreate-blog/posts/how-to-write-character-arcs/


Here are a few posts exploring creation of Verisimilitude:

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2015/07/why-every-novel-needs-love-story-part-1.html

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2015/07/why-every-novel-needs-love-story-part-2.html

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/06/depiction-part-14-depicting-cultural.html

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/10/alien-sexuality-part-3-corporate-greed_25.html

And here's the index post for the series on Dialogue which now has 15 entries.

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2012/10/dialogue-parts-1-4-listed.html

Dialogue is not real-speech-transcribed.  Characters don't speak like real people.  Dialogue is an art form designed to move the plot while incidentally leading the reader (or viewer) to create their own Character from the words spoken.

Dialogue is "Di" -- that is, two-fold, an interchange between at least two.  One might be an Alien, a Computer, a Pet animal, a working animal (the Cowboy's horse), and the speaking Character may infer or imagine the responses to suit himself.

Robert Heinlein famously characterized Mike, the Artificial Intelligence awakened on Earth's Moon whose job was to run the infrastructure of the habitation there.

Dialogue, likewise, must not be Exposition.  Exposition is the writer filling the reader in on "need to know" matters the Characters already know.

Beginning writers often use the line "As you know, ..." and proceed to insert Exposition into the spoken words of the Character.  This never works well because it stops the forward momentum (Pacing) of the plot developments.

In a Mystery, for example, you can show-don't-tell a Character lying by using Dialogue to relate an Event the Narrative went through step by step.  Describing that Event to another Character, but leaving out or inserting information can move the plot forward.

There are many other exceptions, but wherever you find yourself using Dialogue to explain something to the Reader, re-write it into plain Exposition. Then you can mine the Expository Lump for salient bits, sprinkle them elsewhere in Dialogue, and delete the fabricated lump.

Description, Dialogue, Exposition, Narrative, are the basic tools of the story teller.  Each has a purpose, and when used for that purpose, each one can be crafted into a method of advancing the plot.

The plot is the sequence of Events that happen TO the Main Character, impacting the Character's character, thus propelling the Main Character along an Arc.  Some Events hit hard and speed the Character to new Realizations that change the Character's decisions, thus affecting the plot-arc.  Some Events change the DIRECTION the Main Character is going in Life.

This year, 2020, we are striving to "get back to normal."  This concept "get back to normal" is an attempt to retain the DIRECTION our lives were going in while compensating for the speed-bump of quarantine which slowed down, delayed, and frustrated us.  Our life-Arc changed speed and now we struggle to keep direction.

Think about the world around you and find the "Arc" to understand how to craft a novel using Character Arc.

For a Character to "Arc" - the Character's life (inner and outer life) has to be in flux.  Finding where your Character's "novel" happens along that Character's life-path is one of the hardest techniques to learn. Romance is easy in that the novel happens between first meeting and happily-ever-after. Science Fiction is much harder, but generally the novel happens from before-the-Protagonist-knows to after-the-Protagonist-finds-out.  Science is the never-ending quest to figure the universe out.

Usually, we start a novel where two forces that will Conflict first meet, intersect, become aware of each other, or just plain collide.  Each of those forces are represented by a Character, and that Character (two Lovers-to-be or Hero and Villain) will CHANGE under the impact of the meeting.

Yes, both Hero and Villain, or both Lovers, have to change.

Romance is, as I've noted many times, something that happens in Reality under the impact of a Neptune Transit to the Lover's Natal Chart.  Neptune's effect is to blur, dissolve, erode, or confuse, mislead.

Neptune is also called Wisdom.  Neptune is about a method of cognition which is not logical, a data channel which streams information into the deepest part of the Psyche.

Neptune, Romance, doesn't usually cause Change or Arc in your character or life-direction.  It is other things going on while Neptune prevails that cause serious change of direction.

If such other direction-changing forces are acting on a Character, Neptune will move through and ease, smooth, lubricate the path of Change.

Romance makes falling in Love easy.  Without Neptune, falling in love can be a disaster because people resist the kind of change it takes to blend an innermost soul with another.

If a Main Character, Protagonist, Hero, is to undergo such a profound change of innermost character, how can a writer Depict that change without inserting long, boring, exposition lifted from Psychology Textbooks?

Here is the index to Depiction:

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2015/04/index-to-depiction-series-by-jacqueline.html

Dialogue is one of the most powerful tools for depicting a Character, with one caveat -- avoid trying to spell out an accent or dialect.

You can use spelled accents the first few times a Main Character encounters the Character who talks funny, but let the Main Character's "ear" become gradually accustomed to the dialect, and fade in a correct spelling, leaving only the rhythm and vocabulary of the accent.

And you can use that same technique with choice of vocabulary. You've seen it done (not really well) on Star Trek where Spock uses "big words" (even small ones may be obscure).  His dialogue is not laced with scientific jargon, but with precise English dictionary words where colloquialisms serve native speakers well.

In lieu of spelling out accented speech, a dialect or non-native-speaker, try altering choice of vocabulary, or phrasing.

Note how many older people use slang, old sayings, cliche or pop culture references from their teens and twenties, decades previous.  Note how today's young people have a whole new vocabulary, and new celebrities and movies to quote.

As an aspiring writer, you probably love words, and have a junk-pile of trivia in mind of words nobody uses much.

Find the etymology of words, old and new (easy using Google and Urban Dictionaries etc), and you will find the backstory of your Main Character depicted in the vocabulary of their youth.

Start the story with the Main Character's dialogue redolent of that epoch, and let the impact of a younger person's speech infect the older, let them discuss current events using non-current vocabulary.

Trying to explain the usage, connotation and denotation of unfamiliar words can be a Lover's Pillowtalk Device.

Love is about communication.  Use vocabulary to depict Character, and Character Arc as one absorbs the speech idiosyncrasies of another.

For example, one protagonist may start out hiding from emotional confrontations by sprinkling speech with "bromides."

Even if you know what a bromide is, and often use them yourself, Google "the bromide."  Check some of the "dictionaries" that come up and compare the entries -- they aren't all the same, and make wonderful ongoing conversational tag-games for Characters engaged in something more important.

A "bromide" can be identified as "...a comment that is intended to calm someone down when they are angry, but that has been expressed so often that it has become boring and meaningless."  This evolved from the wide usage of bromide compounds as sedatives.

The evolution of language describes a Culture Arc, which can be one of the Mysteries of Pacing, as one Character acclimates to an Alien culture.

See https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/bromide  - and note the tabs at the top of the page that separate slanted definitions.

Over the course of your Series of Novels, let the Characters absorb each others speech patterns, whether it surfaces as on-the-nose discussion of words, usage and meaning, or as is more congruent with verisimilitude, just unconsciously imitate each other.

That's how we learn language, imitating.

Try doing a scene where a younger Character learns some word-usage, or a "bromide" saying, from an old TV series (like Perry Mason in B&W), from an older Character who uses such a phrase naturally.

The reader may absorb lessons in appreciating language and its accurate usage, while the Characters you are depicting learn how much they mean to each other.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Theme-Dialogue Integration Part 4 Theme Stated

Theme-Dialogue Integration

Part 4

Theme Stated 

Previous posts in this series:

What's Eating Him?
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/09/theme-dialogue-integration-part-1-whats.html

What's Eating Her ?
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/09/theme-dialogue-integration-part-2-whats.html

Romantic Emotional Intelligence
https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2018/10/theme-dialogue-integration-part-3.html

What's Eating Them and the knowledge of it brought to articulation is the THEME STATED moment.

There is no right way to write.

You can start finding, chasing, constructing or spinning your story at any point or with any element we've discussed. Sometimes novels surface in your mind as a single line of dialogue, sometimes as a visual scene, or sometimes a bit of music.  Anything can be the first inkling you have an idea for a story.  Start anywhere.  But by the time you're done, you will have all the elements we've discussed in place.

The trick is to know when to END the story.  How do you tell you've finished the writer's job?  How do you know when to leave the rest up to the reader?

It's easy. And clarifying the theme avoids the worst criticisms of readers.           

Within a few pages of the impending ending, one of the Characters will blurt out the THEME and state it baldly, in words, as a way of restating the thematic statement on page 5 or so of Chapter 1.

You first symbolize the theme to cut out the material that you will sew together into a statement about life, reality and everything.  Then you unfold the story, like a flower opening, revealing the heart of the matter.

Then, you reassure the readers that they've understood what you've been saying by a Character saying it -- just straight out, boldly, in-your-face, and with finality and emphasis.

That's difficult, and often takes many rewrites to get the correct line of dialogue from the correct character in the correct place in the narrative.  But you can see it done in the most popular novels, and you will know when you've done it yourself.

It is your finale, and then just a few loose ends to tie up and let the readers cool off gently into a view of the long, happy ever after ending.

The story is over, but life isn't.  This THEME (whatever you've chosen) will continue to embroider, decorate and elaborate your Character's life.  It is a truth the reader will now notice in their own life, eternal truth.

That is theme.  It might be the last thing you bring to the surface of the novel in final rewrite, because you don't know it yourself, but you are not DONE writing until you have the theme-thread pulled through every scene, every character and every plot event -- culminating in the lesson learned.

Learn to view theme as the core of story, and conflict as the core of plot.  Integrate theme into every element, Character, Story, Plot, Description, Dialogue, etc etc.  It is most important in Worldbuilding.  Make your world make sense to your reader by stating the theme in every aspect and element of your World.

Make it match, like a decorator pulling together a room, with carpets, drapes, upholstery, and just the right flower vase to hold just the right flower.  That color shading that gives the "matched" look to a room is the equivalent of the theme of a novel. Find the theme after you write the first draft, then on rewrite, delete anything that clashes with the theme that turns up everywhere.

Create a palette of theme, and lay your story on top of it.  Make all the "colors" of the emotions and settings match - no false notes, no stray threads, everything neatly arranged in a set.  Once you know the theme, you will see what doesn't belong.  Snip it and save it for the sequel.

For further clues about how to structure Theme into your Plot, see the SAVE THE CAT! Series.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Theme-Dialogue Integration - Part 3 - Romantic Emotional Intelligence

Theme-Dialogue Integration

Part 3

Romantic Emotional Intelligence

Previous Parts in Theme-Dialogue Integration

What's Eating Him?
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/09/theme-dialogue-integration-part-1-whats.html

What's Eating Her ?
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/09/theme-dialogue-integration-part-2-whats.html

One big complaint men and women in a maturing Relationship have about each other is conversational style.  Anthropologists have long identified differences in the way women talk from the way men talk, over and above what they talk about.

Today's world is trying to make men and women THE SAME (not equal, but rather identical).  Apparently, women have changed as much as they collectively are willing to, and are now doing #metoo memes on men who refuse to change how they speak, and behave (hands-on, hands-off, threats of "sleep with me or you're fired).

So the Battle of the Sexes is now Headline News, ripping careers nurtured over decades to shreds of humiliation.

The birth rate is down -- and reports show intelligence tests for I.Q. are averaging down scale, too.

Legislation is the tool of social engineering.

None of these trends is making for peaceful conversation between or among the genders.

So any dialogue between male and female Characters, even in the hottest Romance, or perhaps especially in the hottest Romance, is going to involve some kind of "off the nose" agenda on each side, leading to misunderstandings and open hostility.

We have discussed off the nose dialogue in many posts -- dialogue that doesn't say overtly what it actually means.

This index has more than 4 parts listed. There is much to say on dialogue.
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2012/10/dialogue-parts-1-4-listed.html

Sarcasm is only one example of off the nose dialogue.  Changing the subject is another way of saying "I don't want to talk about that" or "That isn't important" or "You jerk! What do I  need you in my life for?"  The possibilities are as endless as the situations in which people speak to, or past, one another.

Today, however, the self-help and academic journals are full of the idea that "I.Q." is not the only kind of intelligence.

Historically, it is noted that I.Q. was invented as a racial divide, a way of keeping some kinds of people out of certain decision making positions.

The tests have been revised many times to eliminate the bias and single out individuals who can do certain types of intellectual tasks.

And that didn't work well enough to suit some people who took another look into the whole idea of "I.Q." or mathematically measuring future potential of a young person.

We all feel, as we meet dozens of other kids our own age, that there is a real difference between this one and that one, and there are those "like me" and those "not like me" -- even when everyone in the class looks like me!

Many studies have been done showing how the female of the species seeks males who are not so very "like me."  Females are exogamous.

But Relationships function -- somehow they do function because not all children are the result of rape -- along some OTHER axis than I.Q.

Researches are now focusing world attention on E.Q. or Emotional Intelligence.

I think this is interesting because in the 1950's, anyone who showed any emotion at all in support or refutation of any topic, anyone moved to fury, or laughter, or tears was considered a lesser being and obviously incompetent.

Women were kept out of managerial positions (and officer rank in the military, and university, too) because women CRY when challenged - they "get emotional" a couple weeks of the month.  This proves incompetence at all tasks.

The world has changed.   

So now there is a social competence score called Emotional Intelligence that is supposed to be independent of gender.

Dialogue in Romance Novels has to reflect this -- and it is now considered proper to "become offended" and as a result to "raise your voice" or even use words which would have gotten you banished from the workplace (fired) in the 1950's.

Which cultural attitude is "correct" or even preferable?

Answer that question and you have a THEME.

You need a Conflict to illustrate the theme, and a Resolution of the Conflict that will satisfy your target audience, and maybe leave them chewing on a New Idea.

Once you have nailed those two elements, you can work out both sides of the argument in dialogue.  It is in dialogue that "emotional intelligence" is most clearly depicted.

The current culture is arguing about what phrasing soothes another person's emotions and what phrasings insult or rile up negative emotions -- and how damaging negative emotions might be. None of this is settled, so it is an opportunity for Romance Writers to explore cultural aspects previously ignored.

Different academics have imposed different definitions of Emotional Intelligence on the words, and then proceeded to support their definition with science.  So you, as a writer, have to pick out a theory to discuss.

So let's just take, for example, a dialogue where one Character pours out his or her heart in a gush of angst (maybe a bereavement, or getting fired, or being passed over for promotion, or losing a driver's license).

Should Character 2 say, "I feel your pain."  To commiserate.  Suppose Character 2 wants to make Character 1 feel less pain -- what words should you write? What would an "Emotionally Intelligent" person write for that dialogue?  What would make the hurting person's heart open and embrace Character 2 as a Soul Mate?

Think through the theme.  Is Emotional Intelligence real or a figment of academic imagination having nothing to do with real humans?  Is it possible for one HUMAN to feel another HUMAN'S pain (really?).

In Magic and ESP worlds, you can have telepaths and empaths who collapse when others feel strong emotion.

But those without Talent would grope in the dark as we all do in our reality.  We have to theorize.  Writers of Romance fiction have to DEBATE the theories ripped from the Headlines.

So, Character 2 might espouse the idea that it is not only possible but laudable for one person to FEEL YOUR PAIN (i.e. have true emotional intelligence) and to say so out loud.  Character 1, who is feeling the pain, might consider this non-sense, and be convinced that Character 2 is feeling Character 2's own pain not Character 1's pain at all.

It is well established that we empathize by resonating with the pain of others, projecting ourselves into their position and feeling not what they are feeling but rather what we would feel in that position.

If you have been in that position (say, your mother recently died, too), you might assume that the other person is feeling exactly what you felt in that position.  But that is never true, because humans are such diverse individuals, distinctive and distinguished by unique relationships.

On the other hand, the similarities pretty much define what it means to be human.

If you've put Aliens into your mix, you have to rethink all of this from scratch.

So here are two sources to contrast/compare to begin building a world where your two Characters can illustrate the validity or non-sense perpetrated by the academics studying Emotional Intelligence.

First read this NBC News item on Conversational Narcissism and ask if such a concept has any validity at all.  Is this a discovery about the nature of humanity, or a ploy to perpetuate an old con game essentially giving academic support to grifters?

https://www.nbcnews.com/better/health/why-conversational-narcissism-can-ruin-your-relationships-ncna825676

------quote--------
We love to talk about ourselves. It’s what journalist and author Celeste Headlee calls “conversational narcissism.” Not only can it ruin conversations, she warns, it can also destroy relationships.

“Talking about ourselves is very pleasurable and conversational narcissism is what results,” Headlee tells NBC News BETTER. “It’s this tendency to turn conversations back towards ourselves and things that we’re interested in …sometimes consciously, but even subconsciously.”

The “We Need to Talk" author learned about conversational narcissism — a term originally coined by sociologist Charles Derber — the hard way. She once tried to comfort a friend whose father had died, she recalled, by talking about the loss of her own dad.
------end quote----

And later in the same article :  How to tell if you're a 'conversational narcissist'
The one thing you should never say to a grieving person — or anyone going through a rough time.
by Julie Compton / Dec.02.2017 / 2:59 PM ET / Updated Dec.04.2017 / 7:59 AM ET

-----quote------
WHEN PEOPLE TRUST YOU TO BE EMPATHETIC, THEY WANT TO TALK TO YOU MORE
Headlee says that using support responses in conversations has made her relationships better.

“People trust me more, and so they tell me stuff they may not have told me before,” she says.

Finding balance is conversations isn’t solely about helping others, Headlee explains: It’s also something you do for yourself.

“By doing this, you’re more likely to create an empathic bond,” she says.

“It’s a gift you can give to others at the same time that you bestow it on yourself,” says Headlee.

Want more tips like these? NBC News BETTER is obsessed with finding easier, healthier and smarter ways to live. Sign up for our newsletter and follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.
------end quote--------

Now, ponder all that advancement against the backdrop of Ancient Wisdom.

Here's an item about a World Renowned personal advisor commonly known as The Rebbe, the leader of a huge, popular and growing "movement."

-------quote--------

StorySunday at Chabad.org

This coming Shabbat, the third of Tammuz marks the 24th Yartzeit of The Lubavitcher Rebbe, of righteous memory. We share with you a small yet beautiful story of the Rebbe.

💧 Empathy

A teenage girl once wrote a letter of several pages to the Rebbe, in which she described her inner turmoil and anguish. The Rebbe responded to her letter and wrote, among other things, that he feels her pain.

She wrote back a letter and said, "Rebbe, I don't believe you. How can you feel my pain? You're not going through what I'm going through. What do you mean that you feel my pain?"

Within two hours the Rebbe answered. This was the gist of his response:

"When you will merit growing up and marrying, and will, G‑d willing, be blessed with a child, the nature of things is that during the child's first year, he or she will begins to teethe. The teething is painful and the child cries. And a mother feels that pain as if it were her own."

The Rebbe concluded: "This is how I feel your pain."

Read some heartwarming encounters, selected from over 1000 interviews of those who had a personal experience with the Rebbe, by JEM.
👉🏻 http://Chabad.org/lxprgw

-------quote----

The response is a grand example of "off the nose" dialogue that communicates more precisely than any "on the nose" explanation could have.

Saying, on-the-nose, "I feel your pain" does not convey the intended message.  Finding the way to say "I feel your pain" off-the-nose, encoded into the experiences Character 1 and Character 2 share is what the writer of a Soul Mate Romance has to do.

Readers don't "believe" what you TELL.  They believe what they FIGURE OUT FOR THEMSELVES from the Events.

So finding that one, exemplary, CLASSIC ONE-LINER expression that represents "I feel your pain" is the main job of getting the book written.  That line is not the opening of your story -- it is buried deep within, very possibly at the MIDDLE.

It is the experiences you carry the reader through, getting to know each Character, that allows the reader to decode the off-the-nose utterance that establishes the rapport to kick off the Romance.

Yes, the Romance starts with their first meeting, on page one, but that is just the spark.  The conflagration unites the two Souls when the MESSAGE is received and "I feel your pain" is a shared experience.

Most important to remember is that "I FEEL YOUR LOVE" is conveyed in the same way -- not by "I love you" but by deeds that acknowledge previously shared feelings.

Study this Emotional Intelligence headline issue, and especially the way people bandy about the term Narcissist (which has a technical psychological definition at odds with the redefining going on in 2018), and consider it in terms of the Art of the Grifter we studied in the TV Series, Leverage.

Are is a Post from the Believing In The Happily Ever After series.  It is Part 4 about Nesting Huge Themes Inside Each Other -- for the purpose of later unfolding them as you continue a long series of long and complex books.

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/10/believing-in-happily-ever-after-part-4.html

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Dialogue Part 15 Writing Inner Dialogue of Soul Mates

Dialogue 
Part 15

Writing Inner Dialogue of Soul Mates

by

Jacqueline Lichtenberg 

Previous parts of the Dialogue series are indexed here:

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2012/10/dialogue-parts-1-4-listed.html

We visualize the wedding moment as divine intervention to make life Happily Ever After - it is a supernatural moment.

A wedding is the beginning of a new life.  It changes everything including your self-image.

Usually, all the Romance happens before the wedding -- the wedding scene may be the final scene of the novel.

Sometimes, the story is about what happens if the anticipated inflection point of getting married somehow aborts -- one or the other gets cold feet, one or the other is accidentally killed on the way to the wedding, one or the other is put in the hospital by an accident at the verge of death, or one of them is murdered or deliberately attacked and left hospitalized.  Possibly, an ex or some jealous stalker emerges or a love-child situation is revealed during the ceremony.

Drama (Pluto is Drama) abounds at the peak pivotal moments of life.

The bigger the pivot the more spectacular and singular the drama.

For example, true Soul Mates rammed together by circumstances may experience Hate At First Sight.  Most Romance readers do understand this dynamic -- that the intensity of the aversion can be the sign that these two are Soul Mates.

Not just lovers, or two people having an affair or a one-night-stand -- but true Soul Mates.

Months ago, there was an article posted online at mindbodygreen.com that pointed out what all Romance readers know.

---------quote---------
Many years ago, I was sitting with a couple in my office, marveling about what a "perfect fit" they were: They were both into healthy living, rescue dogs, and hiking. They didn’t argue, their facial expressions were kind, and their nonverbal signals showed they cared.

Despite this, they were talking about ending their relationship. They couldn’t describe what was wrong, but both felt the relationship was empty. I followed the usual process: We looked for places of trouble, which were few, and explored the good parts of their relationship, which were many. However, it was as if a spark between them was never lit. In the end, they felt it was best to part amicably, which they did.

That session was followed by an hour with another couple who didn’t stop arguing from the moment they walked in the door. They had been waiting all week to "tell on the other," i.e., talk about the agreements each had broken and the far-reaching arguments about washing the dishes or sex, all with a plethora of eye-rolling and grimacing. However, the passion between them was palpable; under the power struggle, there was a lot of interest and passion. We worked hard for months, and they were eventually able to break their destructive loop and spend more time living with the pleasure they found in each other.

These two stories point to one of the most important truths my 35 years of working with couples has shown me. Though we know many of the qualities and skills that make a great relationship—most of which can be learned—there is no rule book for what makes two people work. Sometimes people just know their relationships are over; other times, even though it’s hard, they are willing to do the work to make it good again.

There are times you MUST leave ...

--------end quote-------

Read the article at:
https://www.mindbodygreen.com/articles/how-to-know-when-its-time-to-walk-away-from-your-marriage\

It is full of great novel ideas about when to admit the "Happily Ever After" so anticipated at the wedding is not going to happen, and what to do about it.

As a writer, look inside yourself and then examine the people closest to you -- you will find an abundance of "internal conflict" which is the raw material of such drama, the kind of deep realization that your HEA didn't happen -- and won't.  Many, in the grip of this realization or those suppressing the realization of this truth leap directly from "I don't have it" to "It does not exist."

What evidence would you accept that the HEA is real, possible, and you missed your chance?

Soul Mates are two individual, and very different, people who are two halves of a whole -- they become one at the wedding.  That's what "wedding" means - it is a word used in wine making for mixing two wines, so you can't take them apart again.

But once married, building a life together -- jobs, commutes, buying cars, choosing a house or condo or apartment, furnishing it, having children (or deciding not to), thousands of individual decisions suddenly become joint projects.

The two become one.

What is going on inside one person splashes over into the inside of the other.

The more emotionally heated the anger, love, passion, offense, indignation, jealousy, resentment, and demands that YOU (not me) change behavior -- the more likely the two actually do belong together.

Their inner conflicts have crashed into each other, and shards of hard-headed rocks are flying everywhere.  Bystanders can be sliced to the bone as collateral damage.

True Soul Mates rarely meet in tranquility and sail blissfully on into a calm life.

Depicting a pair of Soul Mates on their shake-down cruise is a serious challenge for a Romance writer who wants to explore passionate sex and carefree joys because after the honeymoon is over, the conflicts become riptides pulling the couple apart.

The inner dialogue - the unspoken thoughts - of such a pair differ as male and female differ, but reflect each other.  Each seeks justice which means having their own expectations fulfilled.  Or, with some, the inner dialogue is about fulfilling the expectations of the Other and having that fulfillment acknowledged in a specific way.

For example, the 2018 culture is grappling with the conflicts between the traditional image of "Being A Man" and a new self-image for healthy masculinity that has not yet crystalized.

It will take 4 generations for such attitudes to be "natural" to men and women, and the transition will be confusing.

Fiction writers can explore these options with inner dialogue -- and how what one person in the couple is thinking one thing, but forcing themselves to do another.

Last Spring a huge misunderstanding of a University of Texas program erupted around the idea that a University was officially regarding masculinity as a mental illness.  (What A Theme!)

But that's not exactly what was really going on.

---- quote -----

The University of Texas is facing ridicule after a new program called “MasculinUT” was announced in a way that insinuated it was treating masculinity as a mental health crisis.. The university has attempted to explain the program as simply an effort to “bring more men to the table to address interpersonal violence, sexual assault and other issues,” but the reality is that UT is still promoting a facetious connection between masculinity and assault and violence.

When the program was originally announced, its stated goal was to help male UT students “take control over their gender identity and develop a healthy sense of masculinity.” as PJ Media reported:

The program is predicated on a critique of so-called “restrictive masculinity.” Men, the program argues, suffer when they are told to “act like a man” or when they are encouraged to fulfill traditional gender roles, such as being “successful” or “the breadwinner.”

Though you might enjoy “taking care of people” or being “active,” MasculinUT warns that many of these attributes are actually dangerous, claiming that “traditional ideas of masculinity place men into rigid (or restrictive) boxes [which]… prevent them from developing their emotional maturity.”

“If you are a male student at UT reading this right now, we hope that learning about this helps you not to feel guilty about having participated in these definitions of masculinity, and instead feel empowered to break the cycle!” the program offers.

As mentioned above, the program is also run by UT’s Counseling and Mental Health Center “[l]ike other UT programs related to sexual assault and interpersonal violence.” And the website’s stated “project goals and guiding principles” still focus on the idea that certain types of masculine emotions and traits are negative and connected to sexual assault and violence.

For example, they are making an effort to “[p]romote an ethic of care for men and masculine-identified individuals who cannot escape expectations of masculinity,” “‘[e]ncourage a wider range of acceptable emotions,” and “[d]ecrease excessive competition and increase empathy.”

----end quote-------

Read the article at:
https://www.redstate.com/sarah-rumpf/2018/04/30/new-program-university-texas-conflates-masculinity-sexual-assault/

There is certainly enough material regarding the female self-image, and the idea that a woman "should be" this and never that (whatever the this or that involved in the current culture's demand might be) for writers to depict a woman's inner dialogue as bemoaning the requirement.

All of this raises the science question which makes the essence of Science Fiction Romance -- "what exactly is gender?"

And do Souls come in genders?  Kabbalah says yes, Souls are locked in a single, specific gender lifetime to lifetime.

Science Fiction plays with the theory that Souls can reincarnate as human even if their prior lifetime was non-human.  And the idea of a male reincarnating as a female is common.  Most Science Fiction TV shows (including Star Trek) played with the idea of a male identity being trapped in a female body (or vice versa).

If you want to write a novel involving Soul transfers, be sure to do a state-of-the-art search and read up on what has been done -- there is much more to say on this topic!

Consider if reversing gender for a day would change the Character's inner dialogue.  Is the inner dialogue a product of gender or of mis-match between Soul and body's gender, or merely of societal expectations?

What exactly is gender?

The question is relevant to the idea of "Mates" -- as we are currently challenging the age-old assumption that Mates must be a pair of opposite gendered people.

Does gender come in opposite?  Is it this OR that but nothing in between?

Is gender optional?  Are Souls neuter?

All of these questions must be answered only if the answers differ from your reader's everyday world.  These questions frame the world you are building around your story.

Consider the example from the marriage counsellor noted above, where the couple arrived arguing the moment they walked in the door.  If they exchanged genders, would they still be Soul Mates?  Would they also exchange arguments and the fighting just go on without missing a beat?

Is the reason they are arguing simply that one is trapped in a gender whose expectations he/she can not meet?  (Men to be the bread winner; women to bear and raise children).

Would expectations have to be adjusted in such a situation, to result in an HEA?  What hammering drama would have to pound their heads together to create such an adjustment?

Find answers to those questions and cast them as simple statements -- and you've created a THEME.  Telling the story may be harder than anything you've ever done.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Dialogue Part 14 Writing Inner Dialogue of Person Being Lied To

Dialogue

Part 14

Writing Inner Dialogue of Person Being Lied To

by

Jacqueline Lichtenberg

All the Previous Parts of the Dialogue series Indexed :

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2012/10/dialogue-parts-1-4-listed.html

In particular, remember Part 5 on writing the Liar's Dialogue

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2012/11/dialogue-part-5-how-to-write-liar.html

And be sure you have read A SPOONFUL OF MAGIC by Irene Radford. 

The whole novel's plot turns on spouses, liars all.  The main characters divorce over lies told.

This is a series where Magic is Real, where only certain people (usually families but not always) have different specific talents for certain things, where Imps (and presumably other mythical creatures) are real and can be used by Black Magic users, and where humans can be turned Evil by the sheer impact of discovering they have "Power."

None of that is anything I can match to my personal vision of Reality -- but I just absolutely love this novel, and have enjoyed Irene Radford titles without exception.  The craftsmanship is exemplary, the conceptualization broad and daring, and the thematic issues spot-on for these times.

So with this great example of how to use the BIG LIE in a story of families raising children to withstand the temptations of magical power that their associates can not match, consider how to write the dialogue between the Liar and the Character who is fooled by the lie, who believes the Big Lie because the person saying it passes muster.

You love someone, you believe them.  Does that make that person truthful?

We live in the era of Fake News - and fake Facebook posts - and a totally fictional  view of reality masquerading as true (even science - but fake science has always been the trusted source for a firm minority, with UFO non-fiction ruling the roost since the 1950's.)

So the sense of betrayal when an intimate family member is revealed to be a Liar is the fabric of grand fiction.  Irene Radford has put her finger on a main issue being researched by (real) science.  How much, how often, and why do we lie?  Do we all do it?  If you say you never lie, are you a liar?

And beyond that, what makes a lie a white lie?  At what age do we learn to twist words to cast illusions?  Does this practice do us harm on any level?  Are there certain people we never lie to? 

If someone lies to you and you believe them, does that make you a victim?

Here is an article from some months ago - that may not still be available:

https://www.bustle.com/p/how-to-tell-when-someone-is-lying-to-you-because-its-harder-than-you-think-8252077

Here are some salient quotes:

-------quote--------
What's more, a study published in the journal Psychological Science noted that your chances of detecting a lie is about 50/50. However, this isn't because you don't actually think someone is lying. While your initial reaction might be to call out a fibber, the study found that your conscious brain overrides the unconscious part that can spot a liar, which is why most of us are likely doubt our initial instinct when we think we're being lied to. Meyer calls this a "truth bias."

"Research suggests that Americans are especially predisposed to a 'truth bias' when dealing with other Americans," Meyer told Fraud magazine. "In general, they presume good faith on the part of others, and they believe that people are innocent until proven guilty. When someone answers the phone and says, 'I was just going to call you. You read my mind,' many of us give the benefit of doubt, even if we're not entirely convinced."

-----end quote--------

Here is the reason people insist on an actual, in person, meeting to settle an issue, to interview for a job, or just communicate over an emotional issue.  People learn, probably from the age where they learn to recognize their mother's face, to dicipher micro-expressions and decide if they "trust" this person (even if a person is a Liar, you might trust them to sift information to favor your agenda.

-----quote--------

Meyer explained that most people have a "tell" that lets others know when they're lying, and the most common tells are called micro expressions. A deviation from normal behavior, micro expressions can be anything from unusual facial expressions and overly formal language to how you hold a backpack, she told Fraud. People who are skilled in reading micro expressions can determine whether or not someone is lying with 95 percent accuracy.

-----end quote---------

In her TED Talk summary, Meyer gives some tips for how to identify some micro expressions, and some of these tells are the opposite of what you might expect.

--------quote------

On his blog, Dr. Joseph Mercola, author and physician, provides additional non-verbal cues from Susan Carnicero, a former CIA agent and author of Spy the Lie: Former CIA Officers Teach You How to Detect Deception, that can help you detect when someone is lying. These tips include unusual pauses in conversation, grooming gestures (like fidgeting or playing with their clothes), and hand-to-face movements (touching their face or hair). In the TV show Shades Of Blues, Lt. Matt Wozniak (Ray Liotta) is able to determine Det. Harlee Santos (Jennifer Lopez) is lying because her tell is pushing her hair behind her ear when she's being deceitful.

-------end quote---------

And here, in that article is the PLOT CLUE you need to move your plot with dialogue.  The Big Lie and the Little Lie and the White Lie all indicate the point where you use Dialogue to merge Plot (what happens) with Story (what the even means).  Apply this list to your dialogue and see if it improves your technique.

-------quote-------
According to Awareness Act, Meyer explained that people lie in order to avoid being punished or to avoid embarrassment; to protect another person from being punished; to exercise powers over others by controlling them; to protect themselves from the threat of physical or emotional harm; to obtain a reward that’s not otherwise easily attainable; to get out of an awkward social situation; to create a positive impression and win the admiration of others; to maintain privacy; and to gain advantage over another person or situation.
--------end quote-----

Read this article and chase down the references, especially the Ted Talks.  Puzzle out how to apply the White Lie to Romance.  Don't forget Aliens might be like Vulcans and tell the bald truth (mostly), or they might have no biological reason to shade the truth -- or they might never use words to convey the truth.  Maybe they don't even have the concept "Truth."

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Dialogue Part 13 - Writing Inner Dialogue Of A Hero by Jacqueline Lichtenberg

Dialogue

Part 13

Writing Inner Dialogue Of A Hero

by

Jacqueline Lichtenberg

Previous parts of Dialogue series are indexed here:

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2012/10/dialogue-parts-1-4-listed.html

And depiction posts are indexed here:

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2015/04/index-to-depiction-series-by-jacqueline.html

Depicting a Character is tricky if the Character's dialogue does not match what you, the writer, assert is true about the Character.

Dialogue is usually considered to be what a Character says aloud to another Character -- but in science fiction Romance, Paranormal Romance, and all our favorite variations, one must consider telepathy as part of Dialogue, even when not worded-thoughts.

Realistic Characterization includes the Character being unaware of his/her own true motivations.  Most silent, inner dialogue -- the things we repeat to ourselves -- are rationalizations for how we feel, justifications for feeling that way, and consequent "reasons" for why we act that way.

Real humans are complicated.

Characters have to be ultra-simplified, at least in the first few novels you write to introduce them.

Hollywood screenwriting insists Major Characters have 3 (and no more than 3) Traits that distinguish them from other Characters.  But in screenwriting, you don't usually get to reveal inner dialogue.  The Actors supply that counterpoint embellishment,and you, the writer, don't get to telll the Actor what the Character is thinking or in what words (telepathy being an exception).

But note how telepathy has been handled in Star Trek -- silence, leaving the audience to guess what Spock learned from the Horta until he interpreted -- and we don't know if he told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Here is a bold and inconvenient truth for Romance writers to ponder.

Readers judge Characters by the Character's inner (silent) dialogue with him/herself.

You can tell the reader this Character is a highly placed, powerful executive whose word is law in an international corporation (the "How To Marry A Billionaire" story needs a Billionaire readers can believe is real) -- but if the Character is not thinking (inside their own mind) like a successful Billionaire, the readers won't believe a word in the entire novel.  In fact they won't finish reading it.

But since writers aren't Billionaires, or action-heros of any sort, how do you learn what your Character (human or Alien) should be thinking in a crisis, where the stakes are saving the Galaxy, where failure is not an option?

We see in the remake of the TV Series, MACGYVER, how the ultimate problem solver thinks when everything he tries fails.  He "innovates."

Usually, in real life, that doesn't work, which is why it is so fascinating to see on TV.

What does work, what allows humans to survive on this fragile world, is team work.  But every team has a point-man, a leader, a person who thinks faster about more things, who sees the big picture and charts the course through the current mess.

A Hero in a 3 piece suit and tie.  Or coveralls and boots.

Every team has a Leader or it isn't a "team." (at least for humans).

However, at any given time, any particular Team may follow any one of the members -- whichever one has the Big Picture and a Plan.

Which team member is the Leader is not a distinguishing Characteristic (among humans).  Any follower might become a Leader in the right circumstances.  Take for example, a ship's crew in battle, and the Captain and First Officer get killed (or beamed off the ship), -- so a Lieutenant steps into the Captain's role and does what they've seen the Captain do.

Leadership is not a property of a given Character.

Leadership is a property of Inner Dialogue.

A lot of the mystique of Leadership is shrouded in Silent Dialogue.

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/10/dialogue-part-10-silent-dialogue-from.html

We discussed Culture and physical movement (all humanity has body-movement "codes" alike such as eye-blink-rate and mirroring or matching another's micro-moves), but Cultures differ in what means what.

Robert J. Sawyer has written a solid science fiction (somewhat Romance, too) about a psychiatrist who discovers a way to identify sociopaths by micro-movements of the eye.  We are, in fact, close to being able to do such fine tuned work.  The novel is QUANTUM NIGHT.

https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Night-Robert-J-Sawyer-ebook/dp/B00X59368Q/

The Characters are well depicted scientists (both the man and the woman) with real emotional lives, and a solid grasp of the sciences they are known for.

Now, put this all together, and study this article about how NASA trains mission control folks to avoid panic in an emergency.  It is so much better, more effective, and more realistic than the British WWII "Stay Calm" nonsense.

Telling someone to stay calm just makes them more acutely aware of all the reasons not to.

Read this article:

http://www.businessinsider.com/nasa-flight-director-stress-crisis-2017-11

Note this list of questions -- these will guide you to creating the thoughts.  Your Characters will not be thinking these questions -- but rather listing in their minds all the answers they know, and what specifically they can do to find more answers.  Study, internalize, practice using this list in your own life's panic-situations, until you have polished the performance.

---------quote from NASA Flight Director--------------
Mission control has a strategy for staving off panic
This intense focus is partly how the flight controllers are able deal with potentially catastrophic situations. Instead of "running down the halls with our hair on fire," Hill said the team would focus on a series of questions.

• What was everything they knew — and did not know — about the situation at hand?

• What did the data actually say about the situation at hand?

• What was the worst thing that could happen as a result of the situation?

• Did the team have enough information to know for sure — and how could they get more information?

• What immediate steps could be taken to continue making progress in the mission or keep everyone safe?
--------------END QUOTE-------------

It is vital not to fall into the habit of assuming that things will now go as they always have before.  Old solutions can not be relied on in new situations.

That is the source of the non-Leader Character's paralysis before fear in a crisis.

When time closes in, and a correct action must be chosen and executed perfectly without thinking, Characters who have graven habits will fail.

Characters who avoid letting habit rule them, but who use habit as a tool, subordinate habit to achieving objectives, who go to the trouble to understand all the moving parts, will succeed in an emergency.

It is the same sort of training that is done in Martial Arts.  The objective is to identify an incoming threat and counter it WITHOUT THINKING.

In Martial Arts this is "muscle memory" and reflex -- in Mission Control it is Situational Awareness and a holistic grasp of the Big Picture.

Thus, Billionaires and other successful people generally have a sports hobby -- whatever is most popular in their circles.  Handball or MMA -- whatever uses the body-brain interface, because that same brain circuit provides the instant response to emergencies -- new emergencies never dreamed of before are met with smooth idea processing and solution generation.

Study the new TV Series, MACGYVER.  It is silly, contrived, not nearly as cleverly done as THE A-TEAM or the original MACGYVER -- but well worth studying for the depiction of smooth response to crisis.

The Successful Billiionaire, and the (still alive) Astronaut respond smoothly, and stay in control of the moving parts of a complex Situation gone awry, by drilling constantly (starting as toddlers) in that series of Questions from NASA Mission Control.

The Character who can meet a bizarre - ever seen by humans before - Event, parse it, decide, and act successfully, will not be telling themselves inwardly "don't panic" -- they will not be thinking of all the ways things could go wrong, they will not be picturing their messy deaths, they will not be AFRAID for their Soul Mate.

The Hero Character -- to be convincing -- must be working the problem using that list of bulleted questions.  Not one at a time, but the whole list all at once.

The Leader of the team will be taking what information the team can supply from that list of questions and DEVISING (improvising) ways to acquire more answers.

This process occupies so much of the brain, all at once, that the Hero Character's inner dialogue convinces the Reader that this is a Hero.

More than that, it convinces the reader to practice being like that in their own lives.

Ultimately, this is why we read novels -- to find role models that are not present among those we know personally.  Or perhaps, are present but not recognizable until we start practicing these habitual thought patterns.

Note, processing problems via NASA's list of questions will make sure that this Character is never a victim, never thinking of him/herself as a victim.  But this Character is also never -- ever -- an attacker, a victimizer.

Successful people are not attackers, not victimizers, not bullies.

If you see success and you see a bully -- suspect there is something else going on that you don't yet know about.

Make your Characters realistic by giving them an inner-voice commentary on events that reveals a true understanding of Life, of human psychology, of History, and Reality.  Such Characters are always questioning, always curious, always marveling, always certain they don't know everything -- and their awareness of their ignorance does not make them afraid.

What you don't know can kill you.  So what?  Don't bother me.  I'm busy solving this problem.  Focus.  That's the secret to inner dialogue.  Unfocused, random, wandering, distracted inner dialogue is the sign of a very weak Character who will not succeed.

Depict your Hero Character as able to deal with catastrophe with his hair on fire, and people will believe that Character is heroic (but the character will deny it.)

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelictenberg.com

Dialogue Part 12 - Plotting An Executive's Story by Jaccqueline Lichtenberg

Dialogue

Part 12

Plotting An Executive's Story

by

Jacqueline Lichtenberg

Previous parts of Dialogue are indexed here:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2012/10/dialogue-parts-1-4-listed.html

All the parts through 12 are linked there.

Hitherto, we have taken great care to distinguish between Plot and Story -- because confusing the two leads to the biggest (and least fixable on rewrite) errors beginners make.

Which element you call Plot and which you call Story really doesn't matter much.  Different "schools" of writing use different nomenclature.  But I've never met a prolific professional writer who does not hold the stark distinction in mind, and finger it unerringly in beginner's manuscripts.

The Plot-Story dichotomy is very often the last thing new writers learn, and upon mastering it, they begin selling.  It is hard to learn because real life does not have any such distinction.

I use "Plot" to refer to the "because-line" (a term I invented) -- the sequence of Events, Decisions, Actions that drive the visible scenes of a novel.

I use "Story" to refer to the effect the Events have on the Characters.

For me, a good novel is "about" the effect the events have on the Characters.

I have read many best selling "action-thrillers" in which the wildly adventurous Events mean nothing to the Characters -- net-net in the end of the novel, they are the same people they were at the beginning.

This lack of "Character Arc" was a requirement in Anthology TV Series like Star Trek, so the episodes (which were, technically, just that, episodes not stories) could be viewed in any order.  That was required because of the way the distribution system worked.

The fiction distribution system has changed, drastically.  So now we can have major Character Arcs in Series like Babylon 5, or the remake of Hawaii 5-O.

Dialogue is the show-don't-tell tool the writer has to convey the impact of Plot Events on the Character, and "tell the story."

What people say, how they say it, how what they say changes upon Event Impact, is Dialogue.

What the Characters DO in response to Events is PLOT.

Speaking is Doing!!!

In other words, spoken words are plot -- but they are also story.

Here's the thing.

Spoken Words are Theme-Plot-Character-Story-Worldbuilding.

The Dialogue makes the reader figure out (and thus believe) all those plot elements.

See Dialogue Part 11 for where in dialogue you can put exposition about your Worldbuilding that readers will believe.

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2018/01/writing-executives-dialogue-part-11-by.html

So, deeds are plot. But not just the deeds.  The criteria by which a given Character chooses what deed to do in response to which Event is Characterization which shows up in inner-dialogue (thoughts) as well as word said to other Characters.

The phone rings -- some Characters answer it; others wait for the Butler to answer.

Answering or waiting (with or without patience) is a deed, a plot element.  WHY the answering is done, or not done, is worldbuilding.  A Character shifting attitudes about phone answering is story.

For example, in scene 1, bad news arrives by ringing phone.  In the final scene, the phone rings, and the Character hesitates, chewing her lip, before answering -- clearly thinking about bad news arriving by phone.

Characterization relies a lot on Dialogue, at the point where words and deeds intersect.

Here is an article (listicle) that lets you Depict a successful person.  The opposite traits would work to convey that the Character is a Loser.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/successful-unsuccessful-people-10-major-differences-career-goal-achievement-a8033166.html

This is a list of what people do when things happen, and what the public looks for to find a person poised for "success."

Successful People:
embrace change
talk about ideas
accept responsibility for failures
give credit where it's deserved
want others to succeed
ask how they can help others
ask for what they want
understand themselves (their motivations)
always listen without talking much

This is a list as old as the hills -- you can use it in a pre-historic setting, Middle Ages, or Space Age.

Each of these attitudes is backed by an upbringing that infuses self-image with strength -- and that can be transmitted only by a parent who had such an upbringing.  Therefore, depicting Characters with these behaviors, reactions and responses to their world (study Captain Kirk's humor) telegraphs to the Reader that this Character will succeed, and depicts their upbringing in show-don't-tell.  Sometimes it is not an actual "parent" that transmits the attitude, but a surrogate (Mentor, Sports Coach, Science Teacher, Boy Scout Troop Leader, step-father, local beat cop, etc.)

I assert it is as old as the Hills - because this set of traits is actually depicted and prescribed in the Bible, and other writings from the BCE epoch.

So Dialogue is where the rubber grips the road in writing.

With two or three well chosen words you show-don't-tell if your Character is an Executive and if she is Poised For Success -- and if the other Characters see and understand that, or may be blindsided by the Character's success (this works particularly well in Paranormal Romance).

Who will be the "winner" and who the "loser" at the end of the novel is clearly presented on Page 1, with a few well chosen words.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Dialogue Part 11 Writing An Executive's Dialogue by Jacqueline Lichtenberg

Dialogue
Part 11
Writing An Executive's Dialogue

by

Jacqueline Lichtenberg 

Previous entries in this series are here:

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2012/10/dialogue-parts-1-4-listed.html

All the 10 previous parts are there.

One epic fail new writers experience when presenting a story that really grabs them is a disparity between what they tell the reader about a Character and what the Character seems to be to the reader.

We all have different experiences of "life" at different ages.  As we meet and work with different people, we get an idea of "who" a person is by "how" they talk.

Writing dialogue is nothing like transcribing real speech.  Dialogue, every line and every word or grunt, must propel the plot -- create an Event -- to which other Characters react, or which creates consequences.

In Mystery as in Romance, and even Science Fiction/Paranormal genres, one powerful plot driver is all about who knows what, and when they know it.

Who does not know what?

Who understands the connections among what they know -- and who doesn't.

Maybe most important, who can "fake it" until they "make it."

Getting a promotion, for example, often involves concealing what you don't know, then going out and frenetically learning it.

If you read fanfic, especially adventure fanfic, or space adventure-drama like Star Trek, you will have to write dialogue for a Ship's Captain, an Admiral, or even a Lieutenant who is in charge of some Ensigns.

What distinguishes the ranks -- and what tags a Character as ripe for promotion?

It's very simple -- but hard to create if you, yourself, do not have these traits.

Here is a way to acquire the speech habits of Captains and Admirals, of Corporation Heads, Planetary Governors, etc -- cocktail party conversation that moves the plot, depicts the top level a Character will be considered eligible for, and conveys reams and reams of exposition without any lumps and without disguising exposition as dialogue.

Remember, I pointed to an epic fail of expository lump in a previous post when discussing the Best Seller contrasted with a fun read.

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2017/12/reviews-35-best-seller-vs-best-read-by.html

So how do you craft dialogue to do all these things?

The process -- as opposed to the end result -- is by successive approximations.

You just write out the conversation as the Characters yell at each other -- write down all of it.

Then you edit out the kernal, the central operating system that runs all the "programs" you have to run to get the reader to know everything you want them to know.

Dissect out the central plot moving dynamic of the conversation.

Then carefully add back in, layer by layer, each objective for this scene.

Dialogue is the best tool for Characterization, but it works only if the two (or more) people conversing are sparring, jousting, jockeying for position (social or competitive).  One-upsmanship is a great tool.

So whether you're doing a Victorian Paranormal Romance, or a formal Conference of two Interstellar Civilizations in a War of Extinction, Dialogue is a potent plot tool because it can "show don't tell" motivations.

But along the way, even if your Main Character is on the wait-staff, you will have to craft dialogue for Movers And Shakers -- people who have worked their way up to top decision makers.  You have maybe two paragraphs to convince the reader this Character really is a top executive of his/her/its species.

How do you do that?

Here is an Article that explains, succinctly, just what your Reader will believe is the hallmark of a top executive (or someone on the way up that ladder, for sure).

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-win-an-argument-even-when-youre-wrong-2017-10

-----------quote-----------
I taught Andrew a technique called PREP, which he reported back to me, worked wonderfully.

It stands for Point, Reason, Example, Point, and it's a great tool to help you structure an impromptu speech or to answer a tough question when you're put on the spot.

This is how it works. Think of a situation where you might be required to defend your position or argue your point of view on a critical issue. This might be at your next executive meeting or perhaps in front of a potential client. Or at that next dinner party.

To illustrate, let's take an extreme example.

Suppose you're attending your next executive meeting and the CEO puts you on the spot, singling you out, she asks:

‘So, what's your view on how we're functioning as a team?'

If ever there was a question guaranteed to provoke an emotional response, this is it. It would be easy to become defensive and evasive in this situation, but that's not how a top executive would respond.

This is where having the structure of PREP to fall back on can help.

Note –before responding, pause and count to two. We sound ill-considered when we rush straight in. By pausing for two seconds you will sound more considered and it'll give you the thinking space to provide a concise and structured response using the PREP approach.

Point: "I think there is room for us to improve."

Reason: "The reason I say this is I feel we are tending to operate in silos and this is impacting our ability to cross-market and to service our clients effectively. It is also affecting our ability to communicate a consistent message to the business."

Example: [Provide one and preferably two relevant examples to illustrate your point.]

Point: "So, on that basis, no I don't believe we are operating effectively as a team right now. I think we have room to improve."

PREP allows you to deliver a mature and reasoned approach, which relies on facts not emotion. Others might not agree with you but you've delivered a mature and reasoned response befitting of an executive.

---------end quote----------

You should read the whole article if it's still available, or look up that technique.

Reading books advising executives how to behave and how to speak, how to do a Powerpoint, etc., will help you evoke the image of such a person with any Character.

But this simplification is an wonderful clue how to let your Characters "overhear" something that will motivate them to move the plot while letting the Reader figure out what is really going on that various Characters don't (yet) know about -- i.e. you create suspense!  With Dialogue - the most versatile tool in your craft tool box.

Note where the speech pattern inserts "example" -- it is inside that example that you hide your exposition, which has to be OFF THE NOSE.

In other words, you don't just say what you want the reader to figure out, you "code" the information so that the Reader can figure it out.

People believe what they figure out for themselves, not what they are told -- well, maybe not people in general, but I guarantee this is true of inveterate Science Fiction readers, and the modern Romance reader.

Here is the dialogue post on OFF THE NOSE.  This is "the nose" as in "hit you right in the nose" -- or force an eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation with an inconvenient truth.  Fiction works better when it sneaks up from the blind side, or hits in the back of the head (or the gut).

"On The Nose" is for nonfiction (which you might have to craft in the course of a novel), but fiction is about the emotional nuances that color our comprehension of facts -- so off the nose is the technique to master.

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/12/dialogue-part-2-on-and-off-nose.html

So, learn this PREP structure to keep your exposition off the nose, AND at the same time, depict Characters headed for the top of their professions (which makes a guy very sexy, you know.)

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Depiction Part 24 - Depicting A Villain by Jacqueline Lichtenberg

Depiction

Part 24

Depicting A Villain

by

Jacqueline Lichtenberg 

Here we come to the main question a writer must answer if weaving a conflict between Hero and Villain: Why Does The Villain Want To Rule Forever?

Here is the index to the previous parts in the Depiction Series:

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2015/04/index-to-depiction-series-by-jacqueline.html

By "depicting," I mean show don't tell -- create a visible consequence of what you want to say, instead of saying it.

Saying what you want to say is "telling" not "showing."  In screenwriting, that is called "on the nose" -- dialogue that is the author speaking to the viewer, not one character speaking to another.

Here is the index to Dialogue:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2012/10/dialogue-parts-1-4-listed.html

One reason we gravitate to Romance, go away and come back over and over, is that the two main characters are not "Hero" vs. "Villain."

The two main characters are both Hero Quality Material -- great novels start before the Hero Quality in either is fully in charge of their decision-making.

TV Fiction is gravitating toward the Ensemble Cast -- a rag-tag group of Hero and/or Apprentice Hero Characters striving to overcome impossible odds to achieve a worthwhile goal.

Star Trek: The Original Series (ST:ToS) did this using mostly the Kirk-Spock-McCoy triad, which Roddenberry told us ( in the many interviews we did with him to excerpt for the Bantam Paperback STAR TREK LIVES! ) that Kirk, Spock, and McCoy were three parts of his own personality.  This is actually a well known secret of fiction-writing, dating probably way back before the Ancient Greek plays.

It is how you "tell the story" -- "tell" being the operative word. A writer "tells" a story.  That is what it feels like while writing words, one after another.  When you get stuck, you ask yourself, "What Will The Other Characters Do?" and you don the role of that Character.  As all good Character Actors will explain, to don a role you must reach inside yourself for that trait, pair away all the rest of the real you, and bring that single aspect up to the surface where the audience can see it and recognize it.

That is the secret to "targeting a readership," -- find a fragment of a real person and depict that single trait so that a lot of people can understand it and find within themselves the laudable or reprehensible trait which is dominating the Character's decision making.

Here is the Index Post to the series on Targeting a Readership"

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/10/index-to-targeting-readership-series-by.html

Screenwriting manuals give a formula for creating Characters -- identify 3 Traits, specify them and then write that character ALWAYS showing one or two or all three of those traits.

When done mechanically, just following the formula, the procedure produces "cardboard  Characters" viewers do not believe.

This happens more in movies and TV Series than in novels -- which is why some people prefer reading novels to watching TV.

A good case in point is the TV Series, The Librarians,

which is a blatant copy of the TV Series Warehouse 13.

https://www.amazon.com/Warehouse-Pilot/dp/B002GJRP6A/

https://www.amazon.com/Librarians-Season-01-Matt-Frewer/dp/B01L00HWN6/

The Librarians is a TNT TV Series:
http://www.tntdrama.com/shows/the-librarians.html?sr=the%20librarians

Returning to the universe of TNT's hit movie franchise, The Librarian, this new series centers on an ancient organization hidden beneath the Metropolitan Public Library dedicated to protecting an unknowing world from the secret, magical reality hidden all around. This group solves impossible mysteries, fights supernatural threats and MORE...

In Season 3 - Episode 1 - The Librarians And the Rise of Chaos -
http://www.tv.com/shows/the-librarians-2015/and-the-rise-of-chaos-3425989/
we get that wondrous line from the Villain -- " ... and rule forever."

This is delivered (rather well, considering how corny it is) as "on the nose dialogue."

This is what this Villain (adversary, opponent, nemesis ... ) aims to achieve.  It is the statement of the goal.  By that choice of goal, the viewer can instantly identify the Villain as a really Bad Guy (especially because he has enough magical power to make it happen!)

The Librarians is designed to be comedic -- like Warehouse 13, it is very broad comedy, somewhat akin to the TV Classic My Favorite Martian -- which was the only real science fiction on TV for years.

http://www.tv.com/shows/my-favorite-martian/

And from TV.Com --
CATEGORIES
Comedy, Fantasy, Science Fiction
THEMES
witty remarks, planetary explorers, secrets and lies, space travel, outrageous situations

My Favorite Martian is actually a SitCom with Science Fiction elements (but in those days it was considered Fantasy).

In both cases, we have the adversary of the week -- and the team (the Martian and his host human on Earth) unites to defend -- the Guest Martian or The Library.)

From TV.Com
My Favorite Martian first aired in September of 1963 on CBS and was probably one of the first sitcoms with a "bizarre" or fantasy premise to emerge in the early to mid 1960's. It joined the ranks with Mister Ed which began in 1961.

Star Trek: ToS began in 1966.

My Favorite Martian paved the way for Star Trek - and all the Science Fiction Romance that has come out of the fanfic.

The Librarians is ensemble cast, like Star Trek - but has a "story-arc" like Babylon 5.  Star Trek was an "anthology" show - designed to be viewed in any order, with the adversary of the week (usually not very villainous).

So My Favorite Martian and Star Trek were stories about "How To Make Friends With Adversaries - who are quite Alien."  They begin the continuum which has resulted in Science Fiction Romance about "How To Marry An Alien."

One of my all time favorite novel series about marrying an alien (even having the Alien's kids!) is Gini Koch's Alien Series.  The 2016 entry in that series is Alien Nation (yes, the author knows all about the TV Series by that name.)

Gini Koch depicts her Hero, Kitty Kat, a woman with fiery determination to make things right, as having a knack for converting enemies into friends or at least allies against the monsters trying to kill everyone.

In Alien Nation, Kitty manages to convert some of the most voracious monsters into friends.  It sounds ridiculous -- but Gini Koch makes you believe every word.  The secret is in how she depicts what is going on inside Kitty Kat's head -- this great Hero that everyone trusts to avert disaster has no idea what she's doing, and no plan that she knows of.  She has a few clues from a super-being (not a god, but a Being who understands the universe as the creation of God), but Kitty Kat has to figure things out and take chances on the fly.

When things work out well, you believe it could actually happen that way, and it is not just that Kitty is married to an Alien and has acquired "powers" while having his children.

Gini Koch's novel series is not comedy -- it reads more like a well played video-game, with comedic moments, absurdities turned to opportunities, and drama writ large.  The target audience is familiar with Star Trek -- maybe not with My Favorite Martian -- and games.

In the 1960's, we were just beginning to launch orbital vehicles and dreaming of real space travel -- wondering if our ships would bring back Alien Diseases we could not contain.  We were focused on finding Alien Life Out There.

Hundreds if not thousands of novels and short stories had been published about First Contact. The film, The Day The Earth Stood Still, is classic because it addressed all those issues.

Here is the 1951 Classic:
https://www.amazon.com/Day-Earth-Stood-Still/dp/B000UL5YW8/

And here is the 2008 remake:
https://www.amazon.com/Day-Earth-Stood-Still/dp/B001THAS5K/

Again, the 1951 film focuses on how the fearsome, formidable, monstrous Alien is actually a nice guy having a hard day at work.

As with the 1984 classic film, Starman,
https://www.amazon.com/Starman-Karen-Allen/dp/B004ZCM2Q4/
we end up wanting to leave Earth with the Alien -- absolutely smitten with this valiant figure and torn up inside to lose him.

Much of the most famous science fiction of those decades depicts the Alien as a potential friend, lover, ally, advocate, even though the Alien may start out at odds with Earth, or perhaps Earth authorities order an all-out attack on the Alien.

The consensus seems to be that Aliens are not necessarily Villains.

Just like humans, Aliens have a variety of potentials within them.  Some are friends, some are stupid, some are silly, some are immature, some are powerful but inept, some are misinformed - the list goes on.

These very humanistic aliens were the most popular during those early decades.

Then came the pronouncement from unimpeachable experts that there just weren't going to be ANY planets around other stars "out there."  The solar system we are in is unique, and just is not going to have anything like a duplicate anywhere -- probabilities are absolutely against the idea of Alien Life Like Us.

The academic power behind this pronouncement, fraught with every mathematical proof you could name, believed and espoused by the Einsteins of the era, drained most of the funding from NASA, and nearly killed off the space program.

Along with it, went Star Trek and most of the Science Fiction Romance you might see made for large audiences (such as film, or TV).

Then funding was squeezed out for orbital telescopes, and other instrument packages to explore our solar system.  Meanwhile, physics and math marched on.  It takes a lot of very fancy math to slice and dice the information garnered by our orbital instruments, and even our mountain-top instruments.  It takes a lot of computing power to understand that data -- computing power we didn't have in the 1960's.

So recently, the unimpeachable experts are pointing at actual planets around stars so distant it makes no sense to quote distances in miles.

We have a whole new generation of unimpeachable experts publishing in peer reviewed journals, as prestigious as the ones that declared how improbable an Alien Civilization Out There was.  Now, the calculations are trending toward the inevitability of there having been Aliens somewhere.

Of course, we are looking at data that is millions of years old.  Light travels way too slowly for us to have any idea what is actually happening "now" (the very definition of "now" and "time" is changing as we figure out what gravity is.)

So, once again, films and TV depict interstellar civilizations -- but this time, the Aliens are not so friendly.  War is more fun, so we have Star Wars continuing.  And Star Trek has become more about War than Exploration of the Unknown.

But while Science Fiction's depiction of interstellar civilizations was relegated to the absurd, another branch of the Science Fiction genre called Adult Fantasy (Fantasy that is not morality plays for children) has formed and taken off.

Early among the Adult Fantasy entries was Katherine Kurtz's Deryni Series
https://www.amazon.com/Deryni-Rising-Chronicles-Katherine-Kurtz/dp/044101660X/

Reprinted many times over the decades, this series depicts an alternate universe -- set around our year 900 AD -- and involving Royalty.  Every book in this series is about "who shall be King" -- it is about who shall "rule."  One faction vying for rulership is purely human (with all the villainy that goes with human mindset), and the main opposing faction is Deryni, basically human but with "powers."

The worldbuilding behind the Deryni universe includes the existence of "gods" and "demons" and forces and powers both Dark and Light (as in Star Wars).  In the Deryni Universe, there is also competition between Deryni and humans for control of "The Church" -- which is pretty much depicted as if it is Christianity.

The humans are convinced Deryni and their "powers" (of telepathy, fireball throwing, teleportation, etc) are of the Devil.  Deryni understand their powers as being simply Power -- like any capability -- and the "Light" side of their force comes from the God worshiped by the humans in the Church.

So the whole "who shall be King" plot line is driven by the argument over the truth of Religion.

I do highly recommend this series -- it does have some hot Romance laced through it, but like any story of hereditary Aristocracy, pivots on arranged marriage.

This series was one of the earliest in the Adult Fantasy market and helped shape that market, define the sub-genre.

Later, whole series arose depicting Power without God, and God or gods without humans with Power.  For the most part, "The Church" as a governing body and institution commanding the culture was deleted from Adult Fantasy.  Aristocracy, Dukes, Kings and their necessary wars persisted, but the power of God was left out.

That deletion of God from fiction parallels the rise of the atheist movement in today's world.

People want fiction that seems realistic -- and the real world was systematically rejecting the concept of Religion (even though God persisted, the institutions designed to serve God's purposes became despised for hypocrisy and lack of tolerance and diversity).

Political Power became the sole bone of contention in the plots, even when magical power was "real" in the fictional world, and the special people who could wield magic were organized (Hedge Witches or as in Babylon 5, a Guild).

For a long time, ESP (telepathy, telekinesis) was accepted as a science fiction element while "magic" involving summoning demons or angels or praying for acts of God was relegated to Fantasy.

Most recently, though, the Fantasy Genre has emerged as the flip side of the Aliens of the 1950's and 1960's (The Day the Earth Stood Still, My Favorite Martian).  After a couple of decades of mixing and blending ESP and Magic, reinventing the premises behind why they work and who can work them, the Fantasy Genre has focused on angels, demons, djinn, sprites, brownies, fairies, vampires, were-creatures, shapeshifters, zombies, ghouls, all the mythical Supernatural creatures and peoples, to tell exactly the same stories we saw about Aliens From Outer Space.

In modern Fantasy, the Mythical Creatures perform the same role and function as the Aliens did in early Science Fiction -- friend or enemy, opposition, voracious attacker bent on stripping Earth of all its wealth, eating humans, or whatever their objective.

Some of these Mythical Creature adversaries want to "escape" from some other dimension, penetrate the barrier between dimensions, and "rule the earth."

Those are the Villain Aliens.

The friendly Aliens become allies using their power and knowledge to help the human hero vanquish the Evil Supernaturals.

In the 1950's and 1960's, Aliens from Outer Space were either bent on "ruling" Earth or were potential friends.  Potential friends were the most popular.  Gradually, the assumption that anything Alien out there just had to be Bad Guys - so Potential Rulers became the most popular.

Today, some Mythical Supernatural People are potentially friendly, but the prevailing assumption seems to be that Supernatural Creatures are bent on ruling Earth, and therefore any Supernatural that intrudes must be destroyed before it can "take over."

Remember when the Vampire Romance shot to the best sellar lists in mass market paperback?  That sub-genre grabbed enough market share to get spine-labels and logos so you could find them on the bookstore shelves.  It took a while for writers to gear up to produce a lot of Vampire Romance -- and meanwhile, the readership lost its taste for "The Vampire As Good Guy" novel.

As manuscripts flooded into publishers, publishers reduced the number of slots for Vampire Romance.  As the e-book market began to form, many of those unsold manuscripts went to e-book, but the sub-genre disappeared from mass market shelves.

Hot-steamy Vampire Romance still thrives in e-book, with every type of Vampire being the  Hero, and writers inventing new types.

Blending the Supernatural with the Scientific Alien, I did a Vampire-Alien-From-Outer-Space Romance in my St. Martin's hardcover release, Those of My Blood, which has had many reprints.

https://www.amazon.com/Those-My-Blood-Tales-Luren-ebook/dp/B00A7WQUIW/

So, among Aliens From Outer Space, and among Supernatural Aliens From Another Dimension, we find those who want to "rule forever" and we label those with the ambition to Rule as villains.

The blackest of bad guys are always bent on "ruling."

Those with "Powers" want to "be King."  We always create genres around Villains, Bad Guys, Malevolent Forces, Evil Masterminds that want to RULE as the Supernatural creature in Season 3 - Episode 1 - The Librarians And the Rise of Chaos -
http://www.tv.com/shows/the-librarians-2015/and-the-rise-of-chaos-3425989/.

Those who are driven "to rule" are Evil.  That's how you identify Evil - it is determined to "take over" and to "rule."

Good stories are about opposing Evil and thwarting its Rule.

Why is that?  Why do we depict Villains as wanting to Rule?

Why do we know that the Character who wants to Rule Forever is the Villain, the Evil that must be stopped at all costs?

If the Villain does not tell us, "...and I will rule, forever!" how do we figure out that this Character is the Villain?

There are thousands of right answers to that question.  To do Fantasy worldbuilding, a writer has to pick an answer (or generate a brand new one) to why the need to Rule is villainous.  Depict that reason without the on-the-nose dialogue line, "...and I will rule, forever!"  If you can do that, you will show-don't-tell the Villain of your piece.

Creating and depicting good Villains (who are dead set on Ruling) may require a writer to learn more about the inner workings of their own minds than they want to know.

Sometimes, bringing that knowledge to the conscious level creates "writer's block."  And sometimes getting hold of that knowledge breaks "writer's block."  So experiment carefully.

Live Long and Prosper,
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com