How Much Writing Does it Take to Not Suck?

[Zack]

Brian K. Vaughan recently wrote a MySpace post (http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=37507226&blogID=93985391&MyToken=d78787b8-b8d6-4d6b-8dc5-22c3984b9b12)postulating that it takes about 10,000 pages of writing to stop writing crap.

This intrigued me. I'd previously heard that it took about 1,000,000 WORDS of writing to get the "visceral material" out.

For perspective -- back in the old days of typewriters, a page was considered to represent roughly 250 words. 1,000 words = four pages. 1,000,000 is about 4,000 pages. 10,000 pages would equal...roughly 2.5 million words.

I decided to go through all of my writing that I had on my computer and put the numbers into a calculator.

This was counting EVERYTHING I'd written since 1999 toward this -- newspaper articles, interviews, short stories, screenplays, comic scripts, personal essays, etc. In some cases, I estimated.

The total came to roughly 750,000 words, which is around 3,000 pages. That means I'm either 3/4 on my way to being decent by the million words standard, or less than a third of a way there by Vaughan's standard.

And I'm not even sure if most of my stuff counts.

Writers, I ask you -- how much do YOU think it takes to really gain your footing?

Of course, the real answer is, "just keep writing," but I'm curious as to how MUCH writing one needs to do before they've really mastered their trade.

[Lester C.]

How Much Writing Does it Take to Not Suck?

As much time as it takes for you to edit and refine your manuscript until you so ecstatic about the final product that you will have no problem putting your real name on the cover and submit to work to a worldwide audience. As an unpublished author the time you put into revising your work is your greatest strength, as you don't have to worry about deadlines, so use this advantage to the utmost.

[Sarah Beach]

I suppose there are things you could do to help you polish the craft, as you work to upping the count. Because it isn't just about the quantity of the verbage, it is about the quality.

You could set yourself exercises. For instance, one of my problems is that I can easily slip into passive language for prose. So I have developed what I call the "Dreaded Is Test" -- after I've finished something, I do a word search of the text for the word "is" (Find word - space-is-space, so that you don't get every appearance of the letters I & S together).

Once you get a hit, read the sentence and determine if the thing really needs "is" in it: that is, do you have a case where you really do want an equation of A is B, or are you using "is" to do mere descriptive work, such as "the night is cold". Because if it is descriptive, you can suddenly change the situation by using adjectives -- instead of "the night is cold", you'd have "the cold night....." which would then go and do something, rather than just be something.

Also.... read your stuff aloud to yourself. Listen to what you say.... do you like the rhythms? In fact, have someone else read it back to you! And then sit down and rewrite.

But practice, practice, practice. And polish.

But how many pages??? I don't know. And if you're focusing too much on making that count and not on polishing your craft, you might hit the count and still end up with clunky prose. Just sayin'. :)

[amboy00]

I'm not a writer. But I type a lot. :-)

I really liked BKV's post. It's a goal of mine to be a better writer, and I can tell that I'm improving somewhat. When I look back at my older stuff, I notice a measurable difference.

[Joshua Pantalleresco]

Good is relative. I find I still have a long way to go. Yet people who have read my stuff think it's not too bad. So maybe I just cover my weaknesses better :D.

David Eddings has said a few thousand pages...others have said a million words. I really can't say. The only real way to get better though is to write and keep writing. Like all things the more you use it, the better. I don't really think there is a set amount of pages though.

But it is a great BKV post.

JP

[Sarah Beach]

Good is relative. I find I still have a long way to go. Yet people who have read my stuff think it's not too bad. So maybe I just cover my weaknesses better :D.

David Eddings has said a few thousand pages...others have said a million words. I really can't say. The only real way to get better though is to write and keep writing. Like all things the more you use it, the better. I don't really think there is a set amount of pages though.

But it is a great BKV post.

JP

Eddings? You're quoting Eddings?

OOOoooooooooookay. And... "a few thousand pages"? Well, that would explain a lot. <walks away shaking head> :)

(Yes, I know. Tastes vary.) :)

[Joshua Pantalleresco]

Eddings? You're quoting Eddings?

OOOoooooooooookay. And... "a few thousand pages"? Well, that would explain a lot. <walks away shaking head> :)

(Yes, I know. Tastes vary.) :)
lmao...

Hey, the Belgariad and Mallorean were good...who knew that would be a habit with EVERYTHING he does?

JP

[NickThompson]

IMO, that point will never come. I could write 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 pages, and I will still suck :D

[Sarah Beach]

lmao...

Hey, the Belgariad and Mallorean were good...who knew that would be a habit with EVERYTHING he does?

JP

I read the Belgariad when it came out. It did have promise. But in the end, the characters were cardboard, and he didn't seem to understand the concept that victory actually does have to cost the victors something (besides time and energy). I was very disappointed by the conclusion. "Eat your cake and have it too! Plus gain powers!"

But like I said, tastes vary, and I do realize that he has an audience.

[MartinRedmond]

I think it's more about how well you know your subject and depends if you have anything to actually say.

[Joshua Pantalleresco]

I read the Belgariad when it came out. It did have promise. But in the end, the characters were cardboard, and he didn't seem to understand the concept that victory actually does have to cost the victors something (besides time and energy). I was very disappointed by the conclusion. "Eat your cake and have it too! Plus gain powers!"

But like I said, tastes vary, and I do realize that he has an audience.

Reasonable criticism. I do agree with it actually. Still, I found him entertaining (at least that series anyways). Actually his best work believe it or not is a book called The Losers. That book is in my opinion his best work and while not great is very solid. You'd be impressed.

JP

[NickThompson]

On a more serious answer, I think it really depends on the writer and what they are writing. Some will need 10% of the pages, some will need 10,000%

[Joshua Pantalleresco]

On a more serious answer, I think it really depends on the writer and what they are writing. Some will need 10% of the pages, some will need 10,000%

I think there is always improvement to be had with whatever you are writing, no matter who you are. The more you learn, the more you realize how far you still have to go. I think what really separates good writers from bad ones is that they understand this and strive to improve.

JP

[Cam63]

As always, it depends on the skill of the writer.

[Corrina]

People seem to approach writing by thinking that talent is all that matters.

"I can't write, I don't have any talent."

Or

"I have talent, so I just need to write."

A pox on both of these.

Writing is like any other creative skill. It takes practice, the ability to be open to new ideas, and the clear-headedness to look at the prose and know what needs to be fixed.

So, how many pages to be good? It depends on the initial level of skill, and in what area. I was a journalist, so I could some up with a coherent plot right away. And I have an ear for how people talk, so I could write good dialogue too.

Character development, though, kinda sucked. As did things like rising tension, the saggy middle, and the emotional intensity.

Each writer develops a different element of craft in a different timeframe. At the moment, I write in layers. First drafts are short because I tend to rush to the endings, then I go back and smooth out the plot, then I make sure what the characters are doing make sense, then I micro-edit making each word justify itself...and so on.

But I'm convinced if a person has the will and drive to write, then they're writers and can develop the level of skill they want with hard work and practice.

And even published writers should continue to develop. Too many of them seem to settle in and never get better or even get worse, as they grow bored with the same idea. I think good writers never stop trying to learn something new.

And there's no page count to that.

[Zack]

I'm diggin' your jive, Corrina. There's triple-truth in your words. I say this in part because I'm a journalist as well, and yeah, I have run into problems with character development, soggy middle, etc.

But I think you hit the nail on the head. I've read that even Oscar-winning actors will still take acting courses to keep their skills sharp and find new notes in their performances. Why should it be any different for writers?

Something I ran into back in college was that I would write stuff, like a screenplay...and then go crazy trying to figure out how to edit/fine-tune it. And this was usually done without input from people with backgrounds in that type of writing, whose reaction was usually a confused, "um, I thought it was okay."

So I would try and rewrite it over and over without being sure exactly what I NEEDED to fine-tune, and convinced myself that the way to avoid this problem in the future was to do way more research and pre-writing on my next project, so I wouldn't get stuck.

I think this DID help me gain some skills...but it also wasted a lot of time trying to come up with a really tight, fleshed-out "treatment" for a screenplay/graphic novel/prose novel that I could have used actually WRITING any of those.

So one thing I really agree with in your post is that it's like getting to Carnegie Hall -- practice. It's the only way to make sure your weak points get stronger, your strong points get stronger still, and the end result is a dead-solid package.

Whew, rant-time. I'll feel qualified to do one of these when I've actually gotten something fictional published. (>:

[Sharpandpointies]

Corrina's right, as far as I'm concerned.

You want to write? Write. And read. Reading is essential - see how other people do it, because as Corrina says, you never, ever stop learning.

There's no magic number where suddenly everything 'gels'. You work at it, and work at it, and what you think is a shining diamond turns out to be paste the moment someone else sits down and starts editing it.

Then you do it again. Until you get it right. And you figure out what you did right, compare it with what you've seen from other writers, and go from there.

[Sally Sensational]

I think you hit the nail on the head. I've read that even Oscar-winning actors will still take acting courses to keep their skills sharp and find new notes in their performances. Why should it be any different for writers?


True, true. I once knew a professional tuba player who taught college master classes for a living. He would fly to New York once a year and pay 10 grand for a lesson with someone else.

Oh, and a note from the English teacher: if you find yourself having to "edit" your own work (editing is about spelling and grammar, btw - content is dealt with in revision), read whatever it is BACKWARDS one sentence at a time. That way, it comes at you in an unexpected order and you're more likely to catch small mistakes. This is especially effective for skipped words, verb endings, plural indicators, etc.

[Sarah Beach]

The important thing to realize is that you have a unique point of view. There's no one else like you. If you have a desire to tell stories, go for it.

There are a lot of things that I use. As a screenwriter, and someone interested in the process of writing, I buy lots of books on screenwriting. Not because I necessarily need what they're teaching, but more to see "what's out there". And someone else might have a way of conveying a point that suddenly just clicks for me. That's always useful.

If you're stuck on problems of having your story come together, I'd suggest the book Save the Cat! by Blake Snyder. Although it is aimed at screenwriters, what Blake has to say about conceptualizing your story before starting out works across the board, regardless of what medium you're working in. I keep the book at hand, and am in fact using it to help me shape up some comic book pitches.

(Truth in advertising here: Blake has become a friend of mine. I met him after first reading his book over a year ago. But I was already recommending his book left, right, and center before I met him.)

Heh. Sorry.... getting on my hobby-horse there. It's just that I'm working at setting up as a writing consultant. So there's a lot I could say on the subject. But I give good notes.... ask Corrina. ;)

[Corrina]

Yes, Sarah is v.v. good at spotting craft mistakes. :)

Mostly, I've been extremely lucky in finding help on the internet, really qualified help, like Sarah.

Years back, I stumbled onto a yahoo group headed by a published author who also used to be a teacher and man, can she teach. I don't always agree with her but like any great teacher, she explains things really well. And on another group, I found a critique partner whose blunt advice is always excellent.

And then I met other great writers, too. I'm feeling like I let them down a bit, because since we met, several of them have become published writers, and I'm not holding up my end, but I keep plugging at it. One thing I've learned, though, is that publication seems not to affect the worry about 'my writing sucks.' SOICO is our groups acronoym for published authors worried about how their next book is terrible. (Stinks on Ice, Career Over.)

If anyone is interested, here's a year-long writing workshop, with new lessons each week:
http://www.crusiemayer.com/workshop/

The two of them approach writing craft very differently but their discussion about the differences make the workshop more valuable, at least in my opinion.

Other great books:
Stephen King's "On Writing." Not only practical advice but I wish the man would write more non-fiction because he's a helluva story-teller.

Annie Lamott's "Bird by Bird," which is more about how writers think but pretty much every writer I've ever met loves this book.

P.S. Yes, my first manuscript is bad. Really, really bad. I couldn't figure out how to fix it, so I wrote another one. And that was better. But everyone has their own process--the key is to respect it and keep on keeping on.

[Red Jack]

A couple of thoughts.

Writing non-fiction will not help you to write better fiction, no matter how much of it you turn out. Different skillsets. Writing novels will not make you a good screenwriter. Different skillsets.

Not every writer can write well in every format. It's good to try them all to see which fits. One might be a crappy comic writer but a gifted poet.

And yes, there's no magic number of words but more is always better. Write. Write write write.

Read whatever you like and then read everything you don't like that is written by popular writers. Even the ones you hate have skills that grab a reader and hold them.

Be Faustian about it. Write the story, move on to the next. Editing should be done at the end and only to correct basic punctuation and for clarity. Too much English 101 will gut your originality.

A wise man once passed on the words of a wiser man to me and I pass them on whenever I can. Whenever I get wobbly I remind myself:

Rule One: You Must Write
Rule Two: Finish What You Start
Rule Three: You Must Refrain From Rewriting, Except to Editorial Order
Rule Four: You Must Put Your Story on the Market
Rule Five: You Must Keep it on the Market until it has Sold

Robert Heinlein

My add-on would be this: The writer has little or no ability to judge their own work. That's the editor's job. Some of my "best" stories have yet to find homes while some of the ones I'm lukewarm about have.

[Solaris]

People seem to approach writing by thinking that talent is all that matters.

"I can't write, I don't have any talent."

Or

"I have talent, so I just need to write."

A pox on both of these.

YAY! Truer words were never spoken! Bless you!

Writing is like any other creative skill. It takes practice, the ability to be open to new ideas, and the clear-headedness to look at the prose and know what needs to be fixed.

So, how many pages to be good? It depends on the initial level of skill, and in what area. I was a journalist, so I could some up with a coherent plot right away. And I have an ear for how people talk, so I could write good dialogue too.

Character development, though, kinda sucked. As did things like rising tension, the saggy middle, and the emotional intensity.

Each writer develops a different element of craft in a different timeframe. At the moment, I write in layers. First drafts are short because I tend to rush to the endings, then I go back and smooth out the plot, then I make sure what the characters are doing make sense, then I micro-edit making each word justify itself...and so on.

But I'm convinced if a person has the will and drive to write, then they're writers and can develop the level of skill they want with hard work and practice.

And even published writers should continue to develop. Too many of them seem to settle in and never get better or even get worse, as they grow bored with the same idea. I think good writers never stop trying to learn something new.

And there's no page count to that.

I think trying to put a word count or page count on "becoming good" is silly. In fact, it rather smacks of the mentality spoofed in "Dead Poet's Society," where the textbook told students that the quality of a poem could be calculated on a graph by using a precise mathematical formula. :D

Quality writing isn't about the numbers---it's about working hard, and attitude.

One thing that I think far too many hopeful writers miss is that criticism can be a wonderful thing. It's easy for the author to see where the story is going, what it's saying, etc... because we fill in any blanks in our own minds, and thus, don't SEE the blanks. By getting feedback from others, it helps an author to catch places where their communication is unclear, wordy, boring, contradictory, etc. I see criticism as pure gold, because it gives you those things. Yes, professional (and some amateur) critics can at times be opinionated asses... but even then, it's best to listen to what they say with an open mind, and look for yourself to see if they're right or wrong, or something in between. Most of the time, criticism is a vast help, IMO.

That's one thing that many people don't understand about Editors: while in some cases an editor may also function as a proofreader, the two tasks really are separate, and as I understand the publishing industry, are usually divided into two separate jobs. Proofreaders search for typos, grammatical errors, etc.; Editors mainly review and critique the work for content: appeal, readability, continuity within the work, etc. Pre-readers (I don't know the professional term, but they're the folks who work for authors who read the work before it goes to the publisher/editor) often take on both tasks. Sometimes they're spouses or friends, sometimes they're paid employees, or any combination thereof.

I learned the value of criticism in an upper level composition class, in college. We were blessed with a fine professor (who would've made a wonderful editor for any publisher out there!). Not only did he critique our work himself, he also divided us up into groups, different ones for each assignment, and had us critique each other. I learned an awful lot about the "but it's my baby!/it's a PART of me!" syndrome in that class. Once a student was happy with their work (be it on the first draft or the third, etc.), this syndrome grew very strong, and often they'd dig in their heels and refuse further changes. Sometimes a writer is correct in doing so... but most of the time, they've stopped growing on the project. The students exhibited a range of behaviors in the class: at one extreme there were those who would listen to criticisms and keep trying to improve what they'd done; at the other end, those who thought their writing was just fine at first draft, and exhibited strong resistance to even listening to what we, or the professor, tried to tell them.

Just so you know, this class wasn't about following the formulaic "introduction, three paragraphs, conclusion" papers that the basic comp class covers. Instead, it was about communication, conciseness, and clarity. It's one of the best classes I ever had, because it taught me so much about honing one's craft as a writer, and the importance of feedback and of the willingness to change and to improve your work.

(Oh, and please don't judge my writing skills by my posts---I post more like I'm writing informal letters to friends, and among other things, tend to run on a bit! Heh.)

In all honesty, I think the biggest stumbling block aspiring writers face is two-fold: one, that "it's my baby!" syndrome, and two, never having had prior experiences with someone who (like an editor) can point out problem areas. For many, their first editorial critique is a shock, and they take it on a personal level, rather than trying to look at their work with objective eyes, bearing the criticisms in mind.

Aside from having pre-readers to help you, one other method that can help you gain objectivity on the work is to put it aside for a while and work on other projects. At the time of writing, often you're too close to the work to be able to see it objectively. Going back to it after giving it a rest helps problem areas stand out more strongly.

Many authors will tell you "practice! practice! practice!"... and they're right. What they're leaving out is that not only do you have to make yourself sit down and take the time at the keyboard, you also have to keep your attitude open to criticism, and try to learn as much as you can from each session of writing and re-writing and re-re-writing. :D Much like practicing the piano, over time as you do this, you'll stop making some errors, start catching them earlier, and overall, your flow will improve. The goal is to lessen the number of times you *have* to re-write a piece, because practice has allowed you to avoid many errors before you even type them in. Going from, say, ten re-writes, down to 2-3, is a wonderful thing.

(By the way, this holds true as much for poetry and lyrics as it does for novels or short stories. I've noticed people tend especially resist changing their poems from the first draft... but most of the time, there certainly *is* room for improvement!)

Argh, gotta run the munchkin to school, but I've said what I wanted to say anyway. Good luck with your writing! :)

[PatrickG]

This intrigued me. I'd previously heard that it took about 1,000,000 WORDS of writing to get the "visceral material" out.


a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for a the of a the of a the of a the of by for

[Cam63]

...Try hard.

[Sarah Beach]

Very funny, Patrick. Heh.

But I echo Solaris, too! Well, maybe not "echo", as there is one thing I want to add about being open to criticism....

Yes, be open and pay attention to it. If you feel that the critics are not "getting" what you are doing, do trust your instinct about your story concept (after all, that's what is driving you to write in the first place). However, and this is the important thing, you DO have to take into account why the critics are reacting the way they are; if they are not "getting" something important about the piece, it could be because you didn't get it on the paper.

I once gave my screenwriting writers group the first act of a play I've been "working" on (that is, I dig at it every once in a blue moon - it's not a top priority). It was clear to me part the way into the discussion that they were NOT "getting it". For one thing, dialogue in a play is doing something different than dialogue in a screenplay, and I don't think they'd made that switch. A second thing, they didn't like the way the heroine was behaving toward her romantic interest at the end of the first act (which was all they had). That was, of course, the point -- I mean, good grief, it's the end of the ACT! of a two act play -- there were some things she still had to learn. The third point was that they wanted me to bring "on stage" a "character" that everyone is refering to, someone who had had a major influence on the two principal characters of the play. But since, again, part of the whole point of the play is the influence of the "dead character" on the two principal characters, it's sort of important that we ONLY see the influence (besides, that would have meant doing "flashbacks" in a stage play, which sort of made me cringe).

Anyway, the point of my long story was that after that meeting of the group, I had to sort through their critiques: WHY were they reacting that way. And the conclusion I came to was that it was only PARTLY because they had not made the adjustment for a difference in end performance medium; there were also some key things I was NOT getting on the page. So I knew that even though most of their specific suggestions for remedy (like putting the "dead character" on stage) would not work, and were NOT what I wanted to do, there were a number of things I have to address in revising the play.

Your attitude in receiving criticism is important. "You don't understand what I'm doing" is certainly a legitimate reaction for the creator, but you absolutely have to follow it by asking yourself, "Why are they not understanding what I'm doing?" As we say in Hollywood, "If it's not on the page, it's not on the screen." If you're failing to get into the words key parts of your idea, you have to accept that the readers are not going to pick up the missing elements by telepathy. :)

Okay, enough with the babbling from me.

[hellokittykat]

Yes, Sarah is v.v. good at spotting craft mistakes. :)

Mostly, I've been extremely lucky in finding help on the internet, really qualified help, like Sarah.

Years back, I stumbled onto a yahoo group headed by a published author who also used to be a teacher and man, can she teach. I don't always agree with her but like any great teacher, she explains things really well. And on another group, I found a critique partner whose blunt advice is always excellent.

And then I met other great writers, too. I'm feeling like I let them down a bit, because since we met, several of them have become published writers, and I'm not holding up my end, but I keep plugging at it. One thing I've learned, though, is that publication seems not to affect the worry about 'my writing sucks.' SOICO is our groups acronoym for published authors worried about how their next book is terrible. (Stinks on Ice, Career Over.)

If anyone is interested, here's a year-long writing workshop, with new lessons each week:
http://www.crusiemayer.com/workshop/

The two of them approach writing craft very differently but their discussion about the differences make the workshop more valuable, at least in my opinion.

Other great books:
Stephen King's "On Writing." Not only practical advice but I wish the man would write more non-fiction because he's a helluva story-teller.

Annie Lamott's "Bird by Bird," which is more about how writers think but pretty much every writer I've ever met loves this book.

P.S. Yes, my first manuscript is bad. Really, really bad. I couldn't figure out how to fix it, so I wrote another one. And that was better. But everyone has their own process--the key is to respect it and keep on keeping on.

Corrina, I've been meaning to thank you for a few weeks now because your recommendation of Stephen King's "On Writing" was an incredible help. I am so grateful that you mentioned it because everything that I thought I was doing wrong is apparently correct, the biggest surprise being that he doesn't use plot either.

Thank you so much for pointing me in such a helpful direction:)

[hellokittykat]

In all honesty, I think the biggest stumbling block aspiring writers face is two-fold: one, that "it's my baby!" syndrome, and two, never having had prior experiences with someone who (like an editor) can point out problem areas.

"Kill your darlings."
:)

I know a couple of 'darlings' of my current project that I will bet money will eventually be 'killed'. *sniff!*:o

[Sharpandpointies]

Your attitude in receiving criticism is important. "You don't understand what I'm doing" is certainly a legitimate reaction for the creator, but you absolutely have to follow it by asking yourself, "Why are they not understanding what I'm doing?" As we say in Hollywood, "If it's not on the page, it's not on the screen." If you're failing to get into the words key parts of your idea, you have to accept that the readers are not going to pick up the missing elements by telepathy. :)


Not babbling at all! This is critical. It hit me when I handed a manuscript over to my wife - she read the first chapter and said something like 'I love it, but where did these criminals come from?'

I wanted to say 'those weren't criminals, they're corrupt cops!' Or that world's analogue. But then I realized...I hadn't explained it properly.

I know what I want to say when I write. And when I write it, if something is missing on the page my brain fills it in when I edit, and I might miss it. Sometimes it takes someone else to point out to me the flaws (not all of them - I'm not completely obtuse), to catch the plot holes, the character errors, that sort of thing. As Sarah says, they're not going to figure it out by telepathy. And neither might they figure out something you consider 'easy' to figure out just by intuition and connecting the dots. It's simple to say 'oh, but that was EASY - how did you miss it?' when you can see the whole picture. All they have are a few jigsaw pieces and whatever of the whole picture you have chosen to show them.

Don't get offended. Instead, figure out where you went wrong, what you can change.

Now sometimes you do need to stick to your guns. If someone says they don't like something, and you really, really do and absolutely believe it works (and that it IS them, not you)...well, maybe you should just take your own instincts on the matter. Just be sure that you're 'right', and not just being stubborn and insulted about the criticism to the writing.

It helps to get a second opinion on the matter. :) And if that opinion is the same...maybe you might consider a change, after all. It doesn't have to be to what others think you should have written - but surely there is another way to write it yourself that will make things more clear?

[Corrina]

I'd be wary of Heinlein's rule #3--no rewriting except what's asked for by an editor.

Like all writing rules, the point behind it is more important than strict adherence to the rule itself. Getting too much feedback can make a writer go insane by trying to please everyone and that can cause you to lose your voice, which is the most precious part of your writing.

But without enough feedback, your work may never be good enough to get in front of an editor.

Plus, Heinlein sold the first story he ever submitted, Lifeline. As is. And it's such a damn good story, I can't hate him for it. <g> But it means he jumped right into editorial direction.

All most writers can say is that X worked for them. Look around long enough, and you'll find a writer who says Y worked for them, and Y is the opposite of X. What's most important is finding the advice that calls to you, makes you nod your head and think "yeah! that's it!"

Thanks, kittycat! I actually don't like most writing books but "On Writing" has such good practical advice. And I'll disagree with Heinlein again because I think some non-fiction writing *can* help fiction writing. Depending, of course, on the person. :)

P.S. the last critique I received on a first chapter basically said "you have no conflict, there's no push or pacing and the voice of your main character sounds like a bad actress. Get out of first person, using a first person voice who is not you is suicida. Back to the beginning, grasshopper." So, yeah, harsh. But true and I knew it the moment I read it.

[hellokittykat]

Thanks, kittycat! I actually don't like most writing books but "On Writing" has such good practical advice. And I'll disagree with Heinlein again because I think some non-fiction writing *can* help fiction writing. Depending, of course, on the person. :)

P.S. the last critique I received on a first chapter basically said "you have no conflict, there's no push or pacing and the voice of your main character sounds like a bad actress. Get out of first person, using a first person voice who is not you is suicida. Back to the beginning, grasshopper." So, yeah, harsh. But true and I knew it the moment I read it.

I've noticed that a lot of fiction, atleast books that I've looked into reading that were suggested by King at the back of his books, are in first person. I was wanted to find -what's it called third person focused or something-which is what I'm doing. I'm glad that someone else thinks that first person isn't the be all end all. I love writing anecdotal stories, I find it very easy, but I don't want to write something that comes across as a memoir. I'm enjoying the challenge of telling the reader what going on in a character's head with actually telling them.

Thanks for all the helpful links too, Corrina! I bookmarked a bunch from another thread that you responded to about fiction writing. I haven't had the chance to look at them all but the help is much appreciated.:)

[BcAugust]

This is interesting... mainly because I always thought(and was told) I'd grow up to be a writer. And now, it isn't something I really want to do(Though I enjoy it), because I've found I work better at something else. Roleplaying, if that doesn't sound too silly.

I've been told by enough people that I'm a good gm and roleplayer that I'm starting to believe it. But it puts stresses on skills that I enjoy a lot more then writing anything but short stories(Dialouge, setting characters up, atmosphere), that I've pretty much stopped writing entirely that isn't for that. Admittedly, I should brush off my short story skills again, just for the practice.

[Rob on the Job]

I guess I'm fortunate in that I never had a problem stringing words together, either as a reporter or now as a short-story writer. Clarity and brevity -- say what you want in as few words possible.

My ongoing struggle these days is on the next level of writing: structure.

In other words, how to open and end a story, and how to do so in a way that is compelling to the reader. What voice do I use, what point of view, and do I go with sequential narrative or an alternative form?

My days in newspapers taught me that readers have only a few seconds to decide if they want to read a story, so you had to grab them by the throat in the first graph or so.

I think the same rule applies with fiction -- because there are just so many other things someone can do these days other than read, and you have to make your story extra-special to compete with TV, the internet, cell phones, video games, etc.

Once I finish a short story and edit it several times, I set it aside for several months while I go on to something else. Then, I pull it out and re-read it ... there will always be new ways to tweak the story, but if the story holds up otherwise, then I know I've done the best I can do.

[PatrickG]

In all honesty... The worst writer I ever met was this sexually repressed mormon kid who would insist on mormon moral tropes in debate constantly... But then was repeatedly caught looking at BDSM porn and masturbating IN PUBLIC. Nothing against mormons, per se. I have some good friends that are mormon but this kid was a bad fit and probably needed some serious drugs and counseling.

I was in a workshop writing class with him.

He would struggle for these twist endings by deliberately trying to force you to misunderstand what he was telling you in his stories.

The Twilight Zone does this kind of "selective detail" thing very well -- although I know many writers advise young writers never to engage in this kind of thing. And I think this kid (we'll call him "Evam" since that's how he misspelled his name on a paper) probably should have taken that advice.

The Twilight Zone usually worked a clever observation about society into its reveals. Evam... well... one of his twist endings was that the main character who was hated by his father and asexually comforted by his mother all night long in bed was.... dum, dum, DUM... a lawyer. Yes. That was the twist ending.

Ian's father (named Father) hated him for what he was and threw a tantrum at dinner in front of Brother and Sister. His mother (named Mother) told him he had special abilities and powers and needed to be trained by people with special abilities and powers and she massaged him in his bed until dawn. And then we learn that he's a lawyer. His "special abilities and powers"? Lawyer powers. His father's reason for hating him? He's a lawyer.

I read several stories starring this Ian character by Evam. Keep in mind that Evam is over 21 and in college and in a class where people have been frankly talking about sex and murder and adultry and mature issues.

One was a story was about Ian's online crush with "tymlyrd" (Evam began physically beating himself when I and a friend pointed out that this was a Dr. Who reference in feedback; in fact, anytime someone got ANY reference made by Evam, he would ball up his hands into fists and start bashing at his own skull and muttering). Ian becomes myspace friends with tymlyrd, who helps him get off academic probation (curiously, Evam was on academic probation when he wrote this) and the two become myspace friends and fall into an online love affair at the sight of eachother's profile pictures, culminating in a meeting at a cafe involving a rose... And then realize (after having seen eachother's photos online and chatted for months) that they're taking the same class at the same college, they attend the same church, they've known eachother since high school and they're neighbors. And the story ended with the sentence: "And so they decided to go steady."

This was NOT parody. This was intended with all sincerity.

My teacher saved the critique of this story for the last feedback session on the last day and began mercilessly railing against it as Evam literally began chanting and pounding his head against the table. I felt bad for the kid and tried to defend him. My final feedback session ended with the professor saying that he looked forward to reading my novels over a long and healthy career. Evam's ended with the teacher calling him absurd and saying that his writing had NO merit as Evam tugged at his hair and pounded his head into the table repeatedly.

After that last class, we filled out instructor review questionnaires and I watched as Evam spent five minutes furiously (and unsuccessfully) trying to jam his instructor review sheet into an envelope.

Anyway... The point that all of this illustrates is this: There's always someone more clever than you. In fact, the uncomfortable truth for any of us is that EVERYONE might be more clever than we are and too nice to say anything. So it's probably better to get the hang of being sincere before you ever try to be clever, in terms of writing.

[DarkOra]

If you're stuck on problems of having your story come together, I'd suggest the book Save the Cat! by Blake Snyder. Although it is aimed at screenwriters, what Blake has to say about conceptualizing your story before starting out works across the board, regardless of what medium you're working in. I keep the book at hand, and am in fact using it to help me shape up some comic book pitches.

(Truth in advertising here: Blake has become a friend of mine. I met him after first reading his book over a year ago. But I was already recommending his book left, right, and center before I met him.)
I'm not a friend of Blake's, but I'll gladly second this recommendation for Save the Cat!. I'm about halfway through the book, and I've already found a number of good tips and strategies I've integrated into my writing method.

[Sharpandpointies]

I've noticed that a lot of fiction, atleast books that I've looked into reading that were suggested by King at the back of his books, are in first person. I was wanted to find -what's it called third person focused or something-which is what I'm doing. I'm glad that someone else thinks that first person isn't the be all end all.

Good lord, no. I'm not a fan of First Person. Other people's milage may vary, but...no.

Third person, Point of View. The story from the point of view of ONE character (which may change from chapter to chapter, but keeps constant during a scene so you only get their impressions of what's going on).

[DarkOra]

Writers, I ask you -- how much do YOU think it takes to really gain your footing?
Depends on how well you write. And by that, I mean... do you just write? Or do you write, review your writing for areas of improvement, focus on those areas as you continue to write, review your writing for other areas of improvement, keep writing while focusing on improving those areas, etc., etc., ad calloused digiti?

[Corrina]

There's a couple of SF author who do third-person limited (staying in one person's head for the whole story or chunks of the story) really, really well.

One is Lois McMaster Bujold, and the other is Linnea Sinclair. Sinclair's a little more fast-paced, and Bujold probably more insightful on human nature, but I love their books. But stick to the Vorkosigan series by Bujold--the fantasy series lacks some of its spark.

I learned a ton by reading Bujold and seeing how she managed to convey the emotions and thoughts of the other characters without ever breaking out of the strict third person point of view of the main character. Just excellent.

[hellokittykat]

Good lord, no. I'm not a fan of First Person. Other people's milage may vary, but...no.

Third person, Point of View. The story from the point of view of ONE character (which may change from chapter to chapter, but keeps constant during a scene so you only get their impressions of what's going on).

That's what I thought it was called. My writing is like 'button jamming' in a video game. I don't know what the heck I'm doing but it somehow gets me to the next level.:D

[hellokittykat]

There's a couple of SF author who do third-person limited (staying in one person's head for the whole story or chunks of the story) really, really well.

One is Lois McMaster Bujold, and the other is Linnea Sinclair. Sinclair's a little more fast-paced, and Bujold probably more insightful on human nature, but I love their books. But stick to the Vorkosigan series by Bujold--the fantasy series lacks some of its spark.

I learned a ton by reading Bujold and seeing how she managed to convey the emotions and thoughts of the other characters without ever breaking out of the strict third person point of view of the main character. Just excellent.

Again Corrina I thank you for your generous advice:)
I'll have to send you flowers if my books ever sell.

[Sarah Beach]

On POV, I think you mean Third Person Limited Omniscient. That means the narration is in Third Person ("He went", "He said"), but that you are also given access to the thoughts of one person (usually the main character), but not of other characters.

If you want a really good example of this, the Harry Potter books are fine examples. Of course, you have to step back and disengage from the story, which isn't easy because JKR is such an excellent craftsman.

But basically, she uses the TPLO. You get Harry's thoughts and attitudes, you see everything as Harry sees it. There are a few passages that are not this, where we see people interacting without Harry being present. But not many. It's one of the ways she keeps the readers so intensely engaged in Harry: he's the one we're traveling with.

She also does not label people in the text. You will not find narrative statements that flatly say "Lockhart is a liar and a fraud." She shows you his behavior, lets you hear his words. She will give you the reactions of the characters: Mrs. Weasley and the female students are enamoured of his charm, Ron has no patience for him, Snape is contemptuous of him, Dumbledore is dryly amused by him - and obviously has only a tolerance for him. But the reader is the one who has to decide how to regard him. And... that's why you will find so much debate about the character of Snape: the narrator has not told us "the whole picture" of the man. All we have is evidence: the report and support of Dumbledore, the actions and statements of the man himself. And all of it colored by Harry's reaction to the hostility he feels coming from Snape toward him personally.

Anyway.... (as you can see... I can get REALLY distracted talking about writing! :D )

[SamuraiJack]

I'm still waiting to hear back from Ted (who was kind enough to read and comment on my stuff) about my trainwreck I sent him *winks*, but I think most of the ideas and thoughts represented here are sound. I'm going to try something new soon, and I have to give my 8-year old credit for it. He asked me for a spiral notebook with Spider-Man on the cover and said he's going to write a page a day, maybe more, of a prose Spidey story until he fills the book. He's really gung-ho about it, and he has me playing sounding board while he throws out ideas left and right.

I thought it sounded fun, and I'm going to do the same starting this weekend. I think my biggest challenge is laziness/distractions. Kinda like the point BKV made about video games. I sit there and think, "Wow, that's a great story idea!" But instead of getting the pad and pen sitting on my desk, I fire up CoH or SWAT 4 and let it go to waste. My second biggest is fear of rejection. I know Stephen King wasn't published with his first submitted work, nor was most anyone else, but that inevitable 'your work was good, but not what we're looking for,' or worse- no reply at all, is not something I deal with well.

But, as part of my New Year's resolution, I've decided I'm going to crack down on myself and get my writing skills honed and start submitting work for publication again. Damn the torpedoes! I'm going to be a published author, even if it's only one book in my lifetime!

[hellokittykat]

(snipped)
If you want a really good example of this, the Harry Potter books are fine examples. Of course, you have to step back and disengage from the story, which isn't easy because JKR is such an excellent craftsman.
(snipped)

I'm up to number four, I think, of Harry Potter. Just like you said, I can't learn a thing from them because I'm way too interested in what's happening to focus on the mechanics of the book.;)

[Solaris]

Thanks to Sarah and the others for adding to what I said about criticism. :) Dead on.

One of the greatest difficulties I've found in doing first-person writing is that it's incredibly difficult to do description at times. You're working it from the "I" viewpoint... and of course, no character is omniscient... so sometimes description can be hard to do, MOST especially when you're trying to describe how *other* characters are seeing the protagonist. Some authors get around this by changing the viewpoint back and forth between two or more characters, but this too has it's pitfalls, and has to be done very carefully and consistently. One of those pitfalls is when the author slips up and doesn't establish and maintain separate "voices" for the characters. Also, indicating *which* character is currently talking in the "I" voice, and when that has changed to a different character, can be tough.

I recall Andre Norton did that in one of her books: The Crystal Gryphon. The entire story is told from the alternating viewpoints of the two protagonists. She solved the "who's talking now?" problem by separating them out by chapters: one chapter the male would speak, the second the female would speak, and so on. One problem she ran into with it was this technique tends to incur a certain amount of repetition of description. Granted, you're hearing two different viewpoints on circumstances where the characters were both present at the time, and it *can* be used valuably to show the difference in how each character *perceives* what's happened... but it can also get a bit tedious for the reader.

So, I would say that switching between characters and keeping to first person throughout *can* be a good technique... but it takes a lot of work, and has to be done very carefully. Like many techniques, it can either be an advantage in a work, or a disadvantage, and it's up to the author to figure out if it will work or not, for the story they're telling.

[Solaris]

On POV, I think you mean Third Person Limited Omniscient. That means the narration is in Third Person ("He went", "He said"), but that you are also given access to the thoughts of one person (usually the main character), but not of other characters.

If you want a really good example of this, the Harry Potter books are fine examples. Of course, you have to step back and disengage from the story, which isn't easy because JKR is such an excellent craftsman.

But basically, she uses the TPLO. You get Harry's thoughts and attitudes, you see everything as Harry sees it. There are a few passages that are not this, where we see people interacting without Harry being present. But not many. It's one of the ways she keeps the readers so intensely engaged in Harry: he's the one we're traveling with.

She also does not label people in the text. You will not find narrative statements that flatly say "Lockhart is a liar and a fraud." She shows you his behavior, lets you hear his words. She will give you the reactions of the characters: Mrs. Weasley and the female students are enamoured of his charm, Ron has no patience for him, Snape is contemptuous of him, Dumbledore is dryly amused by him - and obviously has only a tolerance for him. But the reader is the one who has to decide how to regard him. And... that's why you will find so much debate about the character of Snape: the narrator has not told us "the whole picture" of the man. All we have is evidence: the report and support of Dumbledore, the actions and statements of the man himself. And all of it colored by Harry's reaction to the hostility he feels coming from Snape toward him personally.

Anyway.... (as you can see... I can get REALLY distracted talking about writing! :D )

Oooo, I love this analysis! It takes a lot of skill to *show* the reader a character and let them draw their own conclusions, rather than simply *telling* the reader what the character is like... but I think it's well worth the effort, because it more strongly engages the reader in the story.

For instance, saying "Hermione gave a dismissive shrug," works so much better than saying "and then Hermione said, 'I think he's not worth thinking about.'" Describing her body language conveys the general idea without laying it out in black and white (and boring).

[Sharpandpointies]

I'm still waiting to hear back from Ted (who was kind enough to read and comment on my stuff) about my trainwreck I sent him *winks*, but I think most of the ideas and thoughts represented here are sound.

My bad, Jack. I've been working on it on and off, but my wife made me promise to finish up my stuff so she could read it over Christmas. It's not her fault - I've been keeping her waiting on this other thing for a while, too. :(

*kicks self* I'll get on it tonight/tomorrow. I know you're not bugging me, but it bugs me that I didn't. I really want to get that back to you. I'll work on it tonight/tomorrow, and send you what I have so far.

Rejection is rough. REALLY rough. And dealing with distraction is pretty tough, too (this cursed messageboard is hard to ignore, sometimes). But kudos for making that decision. Now stick with it, and get your Butt In Chair (as I believe Holly Lisle puts it). :)

For those who like Robert Jordan (I don't, not anymore, but his earlier stuff was pretty good), he does a good job with Third Person Point of View. It's good stuff to look at from that perspective.

[SamuraiJack]

My bad, Jack. I've been working on it on and off, but my wife made me promise to finish up my stuff so she could read it over Christmas. It's not her fault - I've been keeping her waiting on this other thing for a while, too. :(

*kicks self* I'll get on it tonight/tomorrow. I know you're not bugging me, but it bugs me that I didn't. I really want to get that back to you. I'll work on it tonight/tomorrow, and send you what I have so far.

Rejection is rough. REALLY rough. And dealing with distraction is pretty tough, too (this cursed messageboard is hard to ignore, sometimes). But kudos for making that decision. Now stick with it, and get your Butt In Chair (as I believe Holly Lisle puts it). :)

For those who like Robert Jordan (I don't, not anymore, but his earlier stuff was pretty good), he does a good job with Third Person Point of View. It's good stuff to look at from that perspective.

Don't mind me, man. I'm just busting your balls here. *grins* I couldn't be more tickled that you showed an interest in reading it and actually gave me some VERY helpful hints/constructive criticism. One day I hope that text sees a printing press, but it's still got a lot more story to go...

And I'm with you on Jordan. His early stuff (up to I think the third book of the ridiculously long-winded Wheel of Time) was awesome. Now? Not so much.

[Sharpandpointies]

Don't mind me, man. I'm just busting your balls here. *grins*

You're 'just' busting my balls?

.....

I do not think you know what that means.

:)

Seriously, though - I'm on that tonight and tomorrow. We'll see what I get done, but it should be a lot. I'll send it to you tomorrow night. :)

[SamuraiJack]

You're 'just' busting my balls?

.....

I do not think you know what that means.

:)

Seriously, though - I'm on that tonight and tomorrow. We'll see what I get done, but it should be a lot. I'll send it to you tomorrow night. :)

Not a problem at all man! If anything, I'd much rather read something new from you than have all your time devoted to reading my half-finished ramblings. And unless we have radically different ideas about slang terms, I think we're on the same page regarding the 'busting'. If it means anything other than "I'm just giving you a hard time" I must have missed that somewhere in the shuffle...

[Sharpandpointies]

And unless we have radically different ideas about slang terms, I think we're on the same page regarding the 'busting'. If it means anything other than "I'm just giving you a hard time" I must have missed that somewhere in the shuffle...

Bugging you, man. Giving back a bit of a hard time. :)

The new stuff...well, that could still be a bit, right?

[SamuraiJack]

Oy vey! You mean I have to wait for more MacKinnon (sp?) goodness?

Bastich...

Anywho, you really don't have to do that tonight, my friend. I'm in no rush. Besides, I still have to go back and work on your previous revisions. Yeah- I've been lazy.

[Shonzi]

there's some really good advice for becoming a better writer in this thread.

too bad getting published doesn't require being a good writer. :rolleyes:

[Red Jack]

I'd be wary of Heinlein's rule #3--no rewriting except what's asked for by an editor.

Actually #3 is about newbie writers staying too long "fine tuning" their precious babies. Lingering on them for weeks or months or years prevents more writing and is often a trap.

It's a story. It's done. Go make more. Easier to kill or cut your darlings when you've got hundreds.

As for prereaders and critiques I would be shy of them and their insights. Only if you're extrmeley lucky will they have value. Most writers don't know writers who are far enough ahead of them to make good suggestions so what they get is a bunch of freshmen or journeymen sharing bad habits back and forth. For a professional scribbler the only opinions that actually matter (beyond your own) are your editor's and the purchasing public's.

Classes are also okay, but shy away from teachers who hang too much on stucture (unless it's a screenwriting teacher). Basics of grammar and punctuation and then get writing. All that theory is useless unless you're a critic.

Writing, like love, is doing, not trying. Not practicing.

But, you're right. Every writer finds their own process. I listen to old jazz standards while writing and, for the most part, can't get much done otherwise.

The best rule of thumb is, "If some part of your process prevents you from writing, it shouldn't be part of your process."

[Joshua Pantalleresco]

http://www.sfwriter.com

Robert Sawyer has one of the most complete websites on writing there. Great reference point.

Heinlein's rules rule. Although it should be noted Heinlein had problems with rule three...I think every writer has a problem with that rule, not just newbies...the trick is recognizing when tweaks evolve into spinning your wheels. But i've been guilty of this myself. Robert Jordan publically proclaimed that if it wasn't for his wife, he might never have finished Eye of The World.

Anyhoo, check out the site. You will be quite happy you did.

JP

[SamuraiJack]

Robert Jordan publically proclaimed that if it wasn't for his wife, he might never have finished Eye of The World.

Anyhoo, check out the site. You will be quite happy you did.

JP

Wait- wha? EotW is FINISHED? *faints*

Thanks for the link. I'm off to check it out now...

[Solaris]

Plays and screenplays have been mentioned in this thread as two of the forms that require a specialized style of writing. Aside from the content itself needing to fit the medium, there's also the simple format issue---the formats are standard, and make it much easier/quicker for people in the industry to read and understand them.

So here's an interesting question:

Does anyone know of sourcebooks (or online sites) that *provide* examples of the basic formats, along with advice/info on writing for these media? I ask that also in regard to writing for comics. What's the basic format for writing/scripting a comic? Average length, etc.?

[PatrickG]

Comics have no standard format. People tend to adopt conventions from screenwriting.

JMS wrote a book on screenwriting that I'd recommend. There's also a lot of software (both free and paid) that you can buy for formatting.

There are a number of scripts online but thanks to HTML they neglect indentions, usually.

You can find screenplays, plays and teleplays at any Barnes & Noble.

I used to know the conventions for stageplays off the top of my head but I've forgotten most of the formatting.

Again, you can find this in an actual script, a book on writing or a quick google.

Plays and screenplay formats have some slight variants that different people will tell you to use regarding to the precise indenting and such. Screenplays, you capitalize names of characters when they appear.

Comics? Create a format that's readable. There are a number of books with script samples from pros. Priest and Gail both have online scripts you can find. Mark Millar lets people access his old scripts if they pay a $10 a year subscription fee for upkeep on his message boards. Moore and Gaiman and Morrison and Waid have all had projects which featured the script.

With comics, it's about the result. I imagine you could get by without a script if you lived with an artist and just described everything verbally.

[Joshua Pantalleresco]

Wait- wha? EotW is FINISHED? *faints*

Thanks for the link. I'm off to check it out now...

EotW is finished...The Wheel of Time however...:D That said...with his health issues right now, i don't blame him if A Memory Of Light comes out later.

JP

[Corrina]

The best rule of thumb is, "If some part of your process prevents you from writing, it shouldn't be part of your process."

Absolutely. Anything that gets in the way of your writing is something you should ditch. I know published writers who insist on having beta readers. And I know published authors who let no one but their editors go near their books.

Heinlein had a great editor for his short stories. I think toward the end of his career, he could have used another great editor, though, because his later books are just a teeny bit incoherent. Fun, but they don't make an enormous amount of sense.

Off-topic: though I often lately think of a comment in one of the Lazarus Long stories, with Lazarus stating that once a society starts requiring everyone to carry identification at all times, it's time to get out.

[Sarah Beach]

For screenwriting formatting, I recommend The Hollywood Standard by Chris Riley. He explains why the film script conventions are as they are (they mostly have to do with making things easier for the production crews, so these are points well worth knowing).

For comic book scripting.... For conceptual understanding of what makes comics different than prose or film, Scott McCloud's Understanding Comics. This is important, because it really makes you understand how the contents of the panel function. And to write to that, you have to know it. Although his new book (which is, in some ways, tougher reading - like the second semester of a course), Making Comics seems to be more geared toward the comic artist, I think comic writers ought to know it as well. After all, the comic book writer's first audience/reader (discounting the editor) is the artist: you want to inspire and energize the artist to deliver terrific visuals for your story. Don't bore the poor artist. :)

For the actual scripting, there are... from Will Eisner, I believe, two books on "Sequential Storytelling". There are various sites on the net that also go into comic script formatting. Beyond that, there is a book that Denny O'Neil wrote a couple of years ago on comic book scripting the DC way (ie, full script first).

Chuck Dixon has a number of articles on his site that are the most succinct you will EVER find on key points of comic book writing. And they are SHORT. Check them out.

Ooooookay. Enough references? Heh.

[Solaris]

Cool! Thankyee, folks! :)

[Red Jack]

After all, the comic book writer's first audience/reader (discounting the editor) is the artist: you want to inspire and energize the artist to deliver terrific visuals for your story. Don't bore the poor artist. :)

Hear, hear!

I revise my earlier two cents.

The only way I know I'm onto something is when Todd calls me after reading a script and says "Geoff, you are out of your ever-lovin' mind."

Only he says it different, like.

That's just a paraphrase.

[TomStillwell]

Hear, hear!

I revise my earlier two cents.

The only way I know I'm onto something is when Todd calls me after reading a script and says "Geoff, you are out of your ever-lovin' mind."

Only he says it different, like.

That's just a paraphrase.

I know exactly what you are talking about.

[Zack]

Holy God, this thread has EXPLODED! And in a good way!

Some notes/comments...

1) In agreement over Harry Potter...the limited perspective is a definite advantage. You can introduce new characters through the EXISTING characters....and this actually has a two-fold advantage. One is that it creates a deeper sense of connection between the reader and the main character, and second is that it lets you introduce the other characters through their words and actions.

This actually ties heavily into the "show, don't tell" rule of screenwriting, which, frankly, can be a bit overused. There are a lot of scripts these days that rely very heavily on giving characters obvious physical habits that are spelled out by dialogue or by the camera, or try so hard to be clever that they undercut the story. But done correctly, it can save on dialogue and make the reader/viewer feel smarter.

2) Screenplays on the net are often very messed-up formatting-wise if they're done in HTML. The thing is, HTML screenplays usually read as continuous documents, like a Word document, but part of the usefulness in reading a screenplay is seeing how it looks ON THE PAGE in format.

By that, I mean seeing how a hard-copy page of a screenplay looks is a great tool for figuring out how to pace dialogue, action, scene transitions, etc. If you look at a page and you see how blocks of dialogue are broken up by lines of description, or how often the scene changes, then you have a great tool for figuring out how to pace your own screenwriting.

I recommend www.dailyscript.com -- it has a lot of screenplays as .PDFs. If you reduce the size a bit, you can actually see what the page looks like in hard-copy form.

BTW, I have had absolutely no fiction published in my life, no fiction WORTH publishing, and am now trying to finish a children's book I did for a web site while back in college, so anyone wants to see my own work and realize how little I know about what I'm talking about, drop me a PM. (>:

[heystacy]

"Kill your darlings."
:)

I know a couple of 'darlings' of my current project that I will bet money will eventually be 'killed'. *sniff!*:o

Gotta put those irons in the fire. Though I admit, being "rough" on a character you like/admire can really make me feel bad...:evilangry

...Then I get over it. :evilsmile

[scribe54321]

My biggest problem whenever I'm trying to write is overcoming the frequent urge to succumb to any idea that flies into my mind and I will immediately drop whatever it was that was working on earlier to clamp onto the new idea.
It's become a huge stumbling block to get anywhere with my writing.

My biggest fear involving writing is not the editing process, the critiquing or even getting the "dreaded" rejection slip from publishers, but that I will have something that I think was not good enough, that I wasn't completely satisfied with what I did and didn't feel happy about. That it was all for nothing in my own mind.

However pessimistic I might feel about the process of writing, I feel that I can't give up on it, in spite of doubts and fears. I have to overcome them and strive to attain a sense of happiness and contentment with what I've done and what I will continue to do.

[hellokittykat]

Gotta put those irons in the fire. Though I admit, being "rough" on a character you like/admire can really make me feel bad...:evilangry

...Then I get over it. :evilsmile

I finished a section the other night that fleshes a character that is very important to the protagonist. I ended up really loving this character and it breaks my heart that this character is going to die.

I guess that's a good thing though when your own writing, eventhough you know what's coming, can make you cry.

[Sarah Beach]

I finished a section the other night that fleshes a character that is very important to the protagonist. I ended up really loving this character and it breaks my heart that this character is going to die.

I guess that's a good thing though when your own writing, eventhough you know what's coming, can make you cry.

This is exactly true. In fact I have a quote sitting around somewhere -- and it's appalling that I don't know who said it off the top of my head -- that says "No tears from the author, no tears from the reader."

You really do have to get that far "into" your stories, because if you don't, if it's just an intellectual exercise for you, it ends up showing in the work. And that's the voice of experience for you. I went through a whole period where I didn't "get into" my characters, and it showed -- they were cardboard.

[heystacy]

I finished a section the other night that fleshes a character that is very important to the protagonist. I ended up really loving this character and it breaks my heart that this character is going to die.

I guess that's a good thing though when your own writing, eventhough you know what's coming, can make you cry.

I hadn't done any "killing" in the current story I'm working on, but a betrayals and some out of control actions are realized by a character. It did make want to stop writing for a couple of days. That hurt me. Sometimes the characters take me places I was unaware of. Iteresting experience, to say the least.

[hellokittykat]

This is exactly true. In fact I have a quote sitting around somewhere -- and it's appalling that I don't know who said it off the top of my head -- that says "No tears from the author, no tears from the reader."

You really do have to get that far "into" your stories, because if you don't, if it's just an intellectual exercise for you, it ends up showing in the work. And that's the voice of experience for you. I went through a whole period where I didn't "get into" my characters, and it showed -- they were cardboard.

Cool! I love to hear that I'm doing things the right way. I've learned so much of what I'm doing my instinct, that I thought was wrong, has been turning out correct!:)

When I killed the character, weird as it sounds, it's like it hurt so good. Cliched I know, and probably masochistic too:p, but if I can touch a nerve within myself, I hope that it touch that same nerve within the reader.

[hellokittykat]

Oh and on your recomendation, I bought 'Save the Cat' for my husband yesterday.:) He's the screen writer, but I'm going to read it too since you mentioned that it would be useful for other writers as well.

[Solaris]

Here's some wiki sources that might help:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiction_writing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writing_style

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narration

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_of_view_%28literature%29

[Bright-Raven]

Scribe 54321: My biggest problem whenever I'm trying to write is overcoming the frequent urge to succumb to any idea that flies into my mind and I will immediately drop whatever it was that was working on earlier to clamp onto the new idea.
It's become a huge stumbling block to get anywhere with my writing.

My biggest fear involving writing is not the editing process, the critiquing or even getting the "dreaded" rejection slip from publishers, but that I will have something that I think was not good enough, that I wasn't completely satisfied with what I did and didn't feel happy about. That it was all for nothing in my own mind.


Suggestion:

Write down the idea in its most purist, basic form. Whatever the gist of the idea may be. Save it on disc. Finish what you're currently writing, then go back to your disc and see if that idea still moves you. If it does, then write about it. If it doesn't give you the spark, then leave it and find something else to write about. Finish it. Come back and check again.

Do that about five times, and if the spark of interest isn't there, it likely wasn't the grand idea you thought it was when it came to you initially. And if it is there, then write.

Just a thought.

Oh, and for the record, there will always be stories that you will finish that you will not be entirely happy with. The trick is to know when to let go and let the story find its audience. If it finds one, then no matter how lesser a work you might find it to be as an author, you succeeded on some level. Better to have met with some level of success than to hide your stories away from the world never to be seen.

As SF Author James Alan Gardner said to me in an interview back in 2002 when I asked him who he thought would be the next generation of influential writers, "Why kick anyone out of the party? Even the worst schlock might inspire some twelve-year-old to magnificence."