Answering Chuck Wendig’s 10 questions

There’s a few reasons while I keep the swearing to a minimum here on my blog. The biggest one is that my kid (and my Official Author Photographer) will probably read this at some point — and well before she’s ready to see her dad drop f-bombs.

The other is that, despite whatever writing skill I may possess, no salty language I put forth will approach the sheer quality of the dizzying, euphoric, creative profanities that spew forth from the mind of Chuck Wendig. Plus, he’s an awesome writer in general.

I’m over at Chuck’s blog today, answering 10 questions about The Daedalus Incident. I loved the questions, loved the tone of his blog and had a blast answering them.

He also gives a ton of great writing advice and has more than a few amazing books of his own, so when you’re done reading about Daedalus — including a new tidbit from the book itself! — check out the rest of his stuff.

#SFWApro

3 Comments

Filed under Books, Writing

3 responses to “Answering Chuck Wendig’s 10 questions

  1. I just read your post on Wendig’s blog! I love the idea behind your book. Swashbuckling Spacemen? Dynamite! So it pains me to have to take off my plumed wide-brimmed swashbuckled hat to don my grammar grinch chapeau, but duty is duty, no? What do you think I found in your fabulous favorite paragraph? This: ” …to we simple men,…”!!! TO WE??? AYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEE!! Ahem (clearing throat, straightening hat, pushing spectacles back in place). It is my understanding that the pronoun following the word “to” must be in the objective case rather than the subjective. (throwing aside the ggc and slapping on the pwbsh once again) Wow! Gotta get this book! Good job, MM!

    • Thanks for the enthusiasm! I most certainly hope you do get the book, and furthermore, enjoy it!

      As to your note on grammar…yes. Absolutely, it’s grammatically incorrect. However, I felt it rather apt for the voice of the character in that moment, and it had a nice historical-sounding ring to it, even if it’s likely not historically accurate.

      There’s probably a few more of those in there, should you dive into the book. Those are, at the end of the day, creative choices on my part. I’m less about exacting grammatical (or historical) accuracy than hopefully telling a ripping good yarn about swashbuckling spacemen.

      Thanks for the comment, and enjoy the book!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s