Category: Editing Rant

Editing Rant: Unwavering Support Trope

Erin Penn Leave a comment

Photo by Jocelyn Allen on Unsplash

Within military science fiction and military romance and military fantasy, and well everywhere, is the trope of a woman standing by her man with great understanding. She knows he has “Gone Through It” (Trademark) and quietly supports him through everything – whether him blowing up in anger or never expressing his softer feelings because of his trauma.

He never has to apologize.

She is a saint for this.

And yet … and yet. If the Understanding Woman makes a mistake or the Damaged Man misinterprets something, she must apologize and go through the obstacle course he puts in her way.

He never has to understand her, because she understands him. She gives everything.

I would like to see this trope start working its way out of our collective consciousness. It isn’t that those who stand between us and darkness shouldn’t get special treatment, but that the special treatment should be in the way of therapy, not the privilege of damaging their loved ones.

Special treatment should be in the way of therapy, not the privilege of damaging their loved ones.

Especially if the author is writing science fiction where the dream of amazing therapy is available.

It is time to do away with the martyrs on both sides of the damage. Adults need to apologize and work toward their healing, whether the Damaged Warrior or the Understanding Loving One.

No one should accept anger without an active change in behavior to prevent future woundings of the relationship. If you love someone, remember to say it, show it, share it, not just take it.

While not a toxic trope as yet, without changing with the times, the Unwavering Support is damaging both to those wounded and those supporting the walking wounded. One of the places we, as writers and editors, can help society is changing the dynamic of this trope by including in the Unwavering Support driving to therapy, supporting roleplay to relearn emotional skills, and setting up clear borders to develop a healthy relationship.

Geeking Science: Not not wrong

Erin Penn


ID 36641551 @ Mohammed Anwarul Kabir Choudhury | Dreamstime.com

“She’s not not wrong.”

I stare at the sentence in the middle of my edit. A double-negative – kill, burn with fire!!!

Except…it’s in dialog. Rules are different there. They need to match the character and how they talk. Also, well, the scene, … the woman isn’t right, but she’s also not wrong. Can she be only “She’s not wrong.”? Or is the impact of the double negative “not not” needed to get the shade of meaning just right?

How does that work? How does the mind twist the meaning between halves of negative? Or is it three negatives? Is “wrong” a negative?

If double negatives are so frowned on, why does each generation use them? Other things have worked their way out of our language, but double-negatives refuse to die.

A 2024 study might give some insight to the problem. They are studying negation for AI programming purposes. AI hates negations because, even with the simpler “She’s not wrong”, it isn’t an absolute but this shade of gray depending on the people involved, what is happening, and the present cultural circumstances. “She’s not wrong.” isn’t “She’s right.” and, at this time, AI programming cannot handle it. Running into a negative makes the large-model language-processing computer flip everything to the opposite meaning, and that is NOT the case. (Devitt)

What happens, scientists have discovered is “not” mitigates the adjective. “Not hot” doesn’t mean cold, but, depending on the circumstance, meanings vary anywhere from “it won’t catch on fire” to “it won’t burn your tongue” to “room temperature.” Basically, “not” is letting you know that the normal things a HOT version of “this” (whatever “this” is) is not what will happen with this object. The firewood isn’t going to reignite, the pizza isn’t napalm on your tongue, and the coffee might need a run through the microwave before you drink it.

The test monitored reaction time to words on a screen as well as brain function. Negations slowed things down, forcing further engagement from the reader. The connections had to be processed and weighed to consider how “not” is the “not.” And while they didn’t cover double negatives, I bet these logical nightmares force even further engagement.

How does this apply to writing and editing?

Well, while we want the reader engaged with the reading, we don’t want them to work for understanding. Clarity is the ruler of the fiction world, and double-negatives (and it looks like normal negatives as well) decrease clarity. Shades of meaning: nearly, only, almost – add tension to the storytelling. “Not” adds tension as well. But too much uncertainty releases tension; the story just isn’t almost there.

For the publication community, the recommendation would be sharpen clarity and certainty in the narrative. The narrator voice should be trustworthy and easy to understand. The reader should breeze through the narrator voice, not stumbling on words and cutting shades of double-negatives to figure if the not-not-wrong is dark, light, or medium gray.

Dialog, though, can slow things down. Usually a dialog page has less words, but more character reveal. The words on the page are both part of the forward motion of the plot and the character development. Shades of gray, figuring what the character knows by what they are saying and what they are hiding and what they are misdirecting.

Negation should be in every writer’s toolbox, and every editor should hone the tool for best use within storytelling.

Who would have thought Negation is where “philosophers, psychologists, logicians, and linguists” (Zuanazzi) overlap with writers, editors, and readers?

Bibliography

Devitt, James. “How does the word ‘not’ affect your understanding of phrases.” Futurity.org. 2024 June 3. https://www.futurity.org/negation-language-interpretation-brains-3226342-2/ – last viewed 10/13/2025.

Zuanazzi, Arianna, et.al. “Negation mitigates rather than inverts the neural representation of adjectives.” PLOS Biology. 2024 May 30. https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3002622 – last viewed 10/13/2025

 

Editing Rant: Systemic Bias in Reading and Buying Books

Erin Penn

Photo by Michael Newton on Unsplash

“I’m not racist in my reading. I don’t even look at the author when I buy books (at the bookstore) / (online).”

Doesn’t matter, the system is racist. Even if you are not racist, the existing system is based on problematic structures.

Did you know that black romance is in a separate section from “contemporary romance” in most book stores? I find it in a completely different section, if the population is large enough near the bookstore to “justify” having a “black reader” section.

Did you know that the books facing cover out are best sellers, or paid to be facing out by the publisher to the bookstore owner since it costs more money to be in that position, and the publishers only pay for books they think will be best sellers? The outward facing books are more likely to picked them up, and therefore becoming the expected best seller.

And publishers, and bookstores, base the predicted best sellers, even in the  fantasy and sci-fi on historic sales – so if history of the genre is white male, guess what is cover side up for eye catching – making it a best seller, and making the next books also be white male – the SYSTEM is set up this way.

“But I get my books for the library.”

I went looking in the library for a person-of-color in the science fiction / fantasy audio section for a long drive. I found three books total: two black and one Hebrew out of four double-sided shelving units of audio books. Why? Because libraries buy what is asked for by their patrons, and their patrons ask for best sellers that have buzz- and, well, best sellers are best sellers because … see above SYSTEM that keeps history in place.

The system needs changing even if you don’t, and to do that, well, you need to change how you interact with the system.

You will need to ACTIVELY work on choosing books that are BIPoC (Black, Indigenous/Immigrant, People of Color). Same with Queer. Same with Women. Look again at that picture I have for this Editing Rant. How many are male and how many are female? Are any of them BIPoC or Queer?

I did a full youtube series on how the publishing industry is systemically limiting new authors based on the historical structure.

 

Editing Rant: Tied up or only tidied up

Erin Penn

ID 59228595 © 22tomtom | Dreamstime.com

“Tie up all the loose ends.” Conventional wisdom for completing a story, right?

Nope, do not do this. Yes, a plotline, or book, or even a series is ending, but life is messy. Fiction, being a mirror of life, also is messy. Tie up MOST of the loose ends, but leave room. Leave room for fanfic, for “what happens next,” for short stories and “what ifs?“. Maybe even another series.

Tidied up the loose ends, but don’t tie them up.

Have a climax, then ease your reader out of the story by hinting life continues on. Just like at the beginning of the story, when “the normal” is established. The ending has the new normal, just a bit. Maybe a chapter.

But don’t go – this person got a job, and this person had a baby, and this weapon was lost to time, but this weapon is passed down for generations.

Not every question needs answering. Clear out the gore and emotions. Tidied up the tears, and show life continues.

But do NOT tie up everything like a Christmas Turkey complete with a bow. Don’t cook the ending until every last bit of juice is out of the meat of the story.

Don’t tie up all the loose ends.

Editing Rant: Build on the Reveals

Erin Penn

Photo by Gabriel Silvério on Unsplash – Cropped, duplicated, and assembled by Erin Penn

Don’t keep repeating information. Your reader likely caught it the first time. EXPAND on it each time, either adding additional information or showing how the character perspective is changing.

So many edits I do keep on having the SAME info drop. Yes, it takes three times to make something real, so you need to keep reminding people of an important piece of information. But it shouldn’t.be.the.same.thing.each.time.

OMG.

For a recent edit, one of the romantic interests had been abused by their ex, physical, emotional, magical…the most important part of the abuse for the plot was gaslighting and holding back information, because the other romantic interest, the NEW and “GOOD” love interest (I will call them MC) is holding back some serious information on the magical side. And the magical THREE times to make it real, when the MC trips across the problem, EACH time they go “I really need to tell them or they will be angry.” Same level of emotion, same level of processing, same level of balance in the relationship. The fourth time, the trip-wire problem is tripped, and guess what? The person who wasn’t told by the MC was angry.

Because no building happened, no transformation of the character happened, the reader response is “dumb-ass, you knew better and had half the book to address it.”

INSTEAD OF a simple three-to-be-real:

One) This secret that would make her angry based on how her last spouse treated her.

Two) Dang, I can’t believe the secret is still my secret. I need to keep it from her or she will be angry based on how her ex used to manipulate her.

Three) She hates stuff like that, I need to keep my secret or she will react badly based on her last relationship.

Result) Secret’s out and she reacted in anger as expected based on her last husband.

THE BUILD COULD HAVE BEEN:

I have a secret that would make her angry based on how her last spouse treated her. (focus on her past)

Dang, I can’t believe the secret is still my secret. I know she will be angry, rightly so, for me keeping it this long. Can I let it out? I don’t want to lose her friendship. (focus on self)

She hates stuff like that. I am shit for not telling her about my secret and I dare not tell her now because she will break up with me for the betrayal. (focus on the interaction between them)

Secret’s out, and she reacted in anger expected based on her last husband AND my betrayal of not telling her things. (focus on both their actions, but his taking responsibility for his choices)

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF BUILDING

Another recent edit kept having the same description of how attractive the male found his love interest. The description was the same each time, something along the lines of “her eyes mesmerized me”, then a couple chapters later “I was mesmerized by her eyes”, a couple chapter later “I fell into her mesmerizing eyes.”

Don’t just describe. Build the description, show how the relationship is changing. In the next four examples, each time the description of “blue eyes” changes, becoming more emotionally connected.

She had blue eyes.

Her blue eyes looked like home, like where I wished home had been, like the lake we visited every year growing up.

Her eyes flashed in anger, sparkling like sapphires. Her lips pressed white in rage, but still reminded me of rubies. She is my treasure. … And I really needed to stop being in awe that she loves me, before she kills me.

Tears rimmed the lakes of her eyes, and I fell in downing with her, drawing her into my arms as we wept.

Don’t worry about these fixes during the first draft. “BUILDING ON THE REVEAL” ARE FIXES – which means they need to FIX something. The first draft has to be written in order to fix something. But once you are done writing, and you made sure the plot is plotting (Second draft), then create the characters, seed the builds, show – don’t tell – us the emotional development of the relationships (Third draft). Have fun.

Building on the Reveal is all about the first rule of writing fiction: Don’t be boring.

And repeating information is boring. If you have to talk about it three times because it is important, then don’t REPEAT what you are talking about.

Chekhov’s gun is on the wall in the first act. The characters’ comment on the history, who owned it, in the second act. Third act at the start, they notice the maid had dusted it. End of the third act, it goes off. If it just sat on the wall, mentioned three different times in the book when characters walked in the room as being on the dang wall, well, that is snooze-worthy boring. (And thus finishes the third example of building on the reveal.)

Don’t be boring.

Build on the reveal.