Original Source: http://www.sff.net/people/julia.west/CALLIHOO/dtbb/feelings.htm

Character Feelings

You can describe your character’s feelings in more exact terms than just “happy” or “sad.” Check these lists for the exact nuance to describe your character’s intensity of feelings.

Intensity of
Feelings
HAPPY SAD ANGRY CONFUSED
High Elated
Excited
Overjoyed
Thrilled
Exuberant
Ecstatic
Fired up
Delighted
Depressed
Disappointed
Alone
Hurt
Left out
Dejected
Hopeless
Sorrowful
Crushed
Furious
Enraged
Outraged
Aggrivated
Irate
Seething
Bewildered
Trapped
Troubled
Desperate
Lost
Medium Cheerful
Up
Good
Relieved
Satisfied
Contented
Heartbroken
Down
Upset
Distressed
Regret
Upset
Mad
Annoyed
Frustrated
Agitated
Hot
Disgusted
Disorganized
Foggy
Misplaced
Disoriented
Mixed up
Mild Glad
Content
Satisfied
Pleasant
Fine
Mellow
Pleased
Unhappy
Moody
Blue
Sorry
Lost
Bad
Dissatisfied
Perturbed
Uptight
Dismayed
Put out
Irritated
Touchy
Unsure
Puzzled
Bothered
Uncomfortable
Undecided
Baffled
Perplexed
Intensity of
Feelings
AFRAID WEAK STRONG GUILTY
High Terrified
Horrified
Scared stiff
Petrified
Fearful
Panicky
Helpless
Hopeless
Beat
Overwhelmed
Impotent
Small
Exhausted
Drained
Powerful
Aggressive
Gung ho
Potent
Super
Forceful
Proud
Determined
Sorrowful
Remorseful
Ashamed
Unworthy
Worthless
Medium Scared
Frightened
Threatened
Insecure
Uneasy
Shocked
Dependent
Incapable
Lifeless
Tired
Rundown
Lazy
Insecure
Shy
Energetic
Capable
Confident
Persuasive
Sure
Sorry
Lowdown
Sneaky
Mild Apprehensive
Nervous
Worried
Timid
Unsure
Anxious
Unsatisfied
Under par
Shaky
Unsure
Soft
Lethargic
Inadequate
Secure
Durable
Adequate
Able
Capable
Embarrassed
Advertisements

I’m featured at about 30 seconds and then again at about 2m 8s.

Source: Indiana University

 

As a writer, I’m often asked why I need an editor and a proofreader after I’ve written. My simple answer is this:

1. The writer writes – focus on research, distillation, content, development, story. The writer tells the story.

2. The editor edits – makes sure the language is not clumsy, redundancies are removed, obvious language errors are fixed. The editor makes sure the story is intelligible and readable. It may involve re-writing the writer’s work but not changing the style or story.

3. The proofreader proofs – makes sure that there are absolutely no errors of spelling, grammar and style. No editing is done.

However, I found this explanation by Dianne Stirpe to be very clear. So here I am posting it wholesale:

As an editor, I want to chime in here and clarify what seems to be only lightly touched on in this discussion and has been possibly reinforcing some confusion.

After a book’s content has been thoroughly decided upon and is in at least a close-to-final written form, a “copyeditor” is then hired to work with grammar and spelling and structure, to conform the material to a particular publisher’s style (such as Chicago, Associated Press, etc.), and can help reword areas that still seem clumsy — that sort of thing. Many authors who don’t need a substantive editor will still need a copyeditor to recheck their choices and make certain of mechanics and style, as well as the basics of misspellings and such. Copyeditors work on a manuscript before it has been given to a designer for final layout.

A “proofreader” is the person who reviews the final “proof” pages or “galleys” of a manuscript right before it goes to press. These are copies of the typeset, formatted, designed pages that look just like the final book will look. The proofreader is the final set of eyes to see the manuscript before it is printed or published. S/he checks for errors introduced during the design/layout process and tries to catch any tiny misspellings or other errors that might have been missed by the copyeditor (since no one is perfect and having another pair of eyes to review it is always better). At this stage there are hopefully few if any content or grammatical issues because proofreading is NEVER done before a book is in its final designed form.

Just started reading this book by Kiran Desai. I’m a quarter of a way into it. Fantastic so far. It’s been a while since a novel sucked me in right away. Usually it takes a couple of chapters, sometimes longer. Even worse are those books that after going through it halfway, it still doesn’t grab you. Those books, I start skimming until I get to the end.

I’m actually surprised I like this book because it’s quite, how shall we say, mundane in its storyline. However, I love the language and the imagery that she is able to evoke. I feel the places that she writes about. That’s it. That’s why I like it. This is one of those “escape” books in which you are teleported into the story.

I had low expectations for the book as the last book I read which also won the Man Booker Prize, The Life of Pi by Yann Martel, was absolute rubbish in my opinion. That was one book where half way through I just said to myself, “even if this won the Man Booker Prize”, it’s still not worth my time. I skimmed it rapidly and read the last chapter. I’m so glad I didn’t bother wasting my time on that one.

But The Inheritance of Loss is a different story (pun intended). Really good stuff.