A method of writing that I've been using

I'm working on a new novel. I posted some parts in a couple of threads a while back, and got some great feedback on them, but right now I'm in the part where the first draft is almost done, and I need to draw back a bit and read other books to separate myself from it for the second round -- the editing and welding and filing and grafting and hammering draft.

 

But what makes this novel different is that I've found a middle path between outlining at the get-go (which drives me nuts) and simply plunging in headfirst with no idea where I'll wind up, which makes for too convoluted a plot with an unsatisfying ending.

 

In this novel, I had a pretty good idea where the story would end up -- the climactic scene is almost required in this sort of book -- and a good idea where to begin, so I loosely imagined an arc for each character, and then wrote the scenes out of order. For example, I might sit down and happen to think of something for the scene where Brian is trying to tell Sarah how he feels, does it very badly, and leads to a break-up between them. Or the scene where Brittany is in the library and runs into the professor.

 

By taking the scenes out of order, I never have that feeling of slugging through the boring scene to get to the good scene. I can go back later and weld the scenes together, and then in the second draft I'll worry about getting the continuity right, keeping the timeline straight, and all the details like that.

 

I've got a folder on my desktop, and as a scene occurs to me, I write it as a new document and drop it into that folder. Then to compsoe the first draft, I just welded together all those fragments. I'm kind of happy with this method. There's always been some debate among writers, between those who outline religiously and those who fly-by-the-seat-of-their-pants, but hopefully this will make a bit of a common ground, or a middle path.

Comments

  • Language is such that every story is written with an end in mind, but this end is generally unknown of the author until it comes naturally as a consequence of events described so far. In other words, whether you are conscious of it or not, when you start a story you posit a virtual end.  Besides, the accumulation of adventice developments is natural with prolific writers. They generally have to trim the final text.

  • Skoob_ymSkoob_ym ✭✭✭

    There is an element like that in these fragments. When I place two characters at a table, and they start to talk and to interact, they bring things that I can't anticipate. Each has a natural tendency, and it is my job to try to steer those natural tendencies while permitting them to be true to themselves.

     

    At times, it seems like I am chasing after my own creations, trying to herd them back into the story line. All they, like sheep, have gone astray... Smiley Very Happy

  • You'll see some will leave you in quest of another author. Smiley Frustrated

  • I'm working on a new novel. I posted some parts in a couple of threads a while back, and got some great feedback on them, but right now I'm in the part where the first draft is almost done,

     

    Gosh, that was fast. How many words?

     

    and I need to draw back a bit and read other books to separate myself from it for the second round -- the editing and welding and filing and grafting and hammering draft.

     

    I do that 'on-the-go'. I will do a chapter or two, or even just a few paragraphs, then go back to the start, or just back to where I just sat down and started to type again, reading and adjusting. Often just because the original creating can be a bit taxing whereas adding a bit of extra detail it not.

     

    But what makes this novel different is that I've found a middle path between outlining at the get-go (which drives me nuts)

     

    Yes, I never do that. Although I may start with the idea of the story in my head before I start to write, but there's no planning. Often I have the start and the possible end, and fill in in between.

     

    and simply plunging in headfirst with no idea where I'll wind up, which makes for too convoluted a plot with an unsatisfying ending.

     

    Well, that's where you keep going over and over it fine-tuning it until you do like it. I sometimes write whole chapters and then delete them. Word Processors are the best invention since sliced wheels. I am amazed you have got to the end so fast.

     

    In this novel, I had a pretty good idea where the story would end up -- the climactic scene is almost required in this sort of book -- and a good idea where to begin, so I loosely imagined an arc for each character, and then wrote the scenes out of order. For example, I might sit down and happen to think of something for the scene where Brian is trying to tell Sarah how he feels, does it very badly, and leads to a break-up between them. Or the scene where Brittany is in the library and runs into the professor.

     

    Spontaneous writing can be as fun as reading a novel by someone else. And it's not carved in stone if you don't like what you have written. I even have drafts I lost interest in or was not sure what the hell I was doing! They seemed like a good idea at the time!

     

    By taking the scenes out of order,

     

    Gosh, I cannot do that! They are all linked and follow on from the previous chapter. We are not creating films where they are often filmed out of order then edited in to the right one.

     

    I never have that feeling of slugging through the boring scene to get to the good scene.

     

    Never write boring ones. Would you read them?

     

    I can go back later and weld the scenes together, and then in the second draft I'll worry about getting the continuity right, keeping the timeline straight, and all the details like that.

     

    Hrmm. If I spilt the people up I often go back and forward over those chapters tinkering, especially if they are still communicating with each other, but usually I concentrate on one person's story continuously. (There may be a flashback or two though.)

     

    I've got a folder on my desktop, and as a scene occurs to me, I write it as a new document and drop it into that folder.

     

    Why not simply type them as notes under your text? To be deleted when no longer needed. If I am away from my PC I just keep fresh ideas in my head until I get back on my WP. There's often times when I think, "I could say/add there ..." right after I have turned off my PC. I eventually write down stories on and off I am creating in my head almost all the time.

     

    Then to compsoe the first draft,

     

    I don't really have a first draft. With me alterations are continuous. That's the great advantage of a WP over paper.

     

    I just welded together all those fragments. I'm kind of happy with this method. There's always been some debate among writers, between those who outline religiously and those who fly-by-the-seat-of-their-pants, but hopefully this will make a bit of a common ground, or a middle path.

     

    You can often tell those who plan, because all their novels usually follow the same formula. One day they will just let their PC write it.

  • Language is such that every story is written with an end in mind, but this end is generally unknown of the author until it comes naturally as a consequence of events described so far.

     

    I always know the end, because if one does not it's not easy to lead towards it. But I have no problems thinking up things to go between the start and the end. Often my intended short stories end up as novelettes, and as per my series of books, it was not intended it should be a series but I thought up many short mini-adventures along the way (it seemed more natural that way considering the story) and ended up with three times more pages than I had intended with the possible end a long way off, so ended Part One at a crucial point, started Part Two, ditto, next came Part Three, ditto,

     

    "A unexpected flash brighter than daylight and terrific boom rocks the train and still going at fifty MPH it twists over in its now twisted tracks and leaves them completely because further on they are no longer there. Even the battle-hardened soldiers scream as they tipple out of their seats as the spinning train joins the warped and hot metal of a large section of bridge as it plummets the almost ¾ mile to the rocky valley floor.

     

    Continued"

     

     and one day Part Four may be finished, and the intended main adventure will be concluded at the end of that (but I have many other ideas how the main characters can continue in other stories, partly placed in my mind by some things that had already been hinted at.)

     

    In other words, whether you are conscious of it or not, when you start a story you posit a virtual end.  Besides, the accumulation of adventice developments is natural with prolific writers. They generally have to trim the final text.

     

    I usually add to it. One problem prolific writers have is knowing when to stop tinkering. We have no deadlines, so we can tinker.


  • kevinlomas a écrit :

     

    I always know the end, [...] and ended up with three times more pages than I had intended with the possible end a long way off, so ended Part One at a crucial point, started Part Two, ditto, next came Part Three, ditto,

     


    Smiley Happy

  • Skoob_ymSkoob_ym ✭✭✭

    kevinlomas wrote:

    I'm working on a new novel. I posted some parts in a couple of threads a while back, and got some great feedback on them, but right now I'm in the part where the first draft is almost done,

     

    Gosh, that was fast. How many words?

     

    Skoob_Ym: in the first draft, as it sits, 71,000; I will need another 1500 to weld the main narrative and the long climactic confrontation. Then I hope to pick up another 15,000 or so with scenes that will be needed for continuity, to provide a smoother flow, as refined segues, or ideas that I forgot in the heat of composition. Third read-through / edit, I may pick up another 2000 or so, assuming that I don't X out any

     

    and I need to draw back a bit and read other books to separate myself from it for the second round -- the editing and welding and filing and grafting and hammering draft.

     

    I do that 'on-the-go'. I will do a chapter or two, or even just a few paragraphs, then go back to the start, or just back to where I just sat down and started to type again, reading and adjusting. Often just because the original creating can be a bit taxing whereas adding a bit of extra detail it not.

     

    Skoob_Ym: I do some editing on the fly, usually the next day or next working day, but I try not to worry too much about the editing until I've gotten the basic story on "paper" (so to speak). I just use an editing session as a warm-up to put me back into the plot, which gives me the next portion.

     

    But what makes this novel different is that I've found a middle path between outlining at the get-go (which drives me nuts)

     

    Yes, I never do that. Although I may start with the idea of the story in my head before I start to write, but there's no planning. Often I have the start and the possible end, and fill in in between.

     

    and simply plunging in headfirst with no idea where I'll wind up, which makes for too convoluted a plot with an unsatisfying ending.

     

    Well, that's where you keep going over and over it fine-tuning it until you do like it. I sometimes write whole chapters and then delete them. Word Processors are the best invention since sliced wheels. I am amazed you have got to the end so fast.

     

    Skoob_Ym: As I said, with this story, I knew where it would wind up almost from the start. I did have to ditch one possible ending as too far-fetched, early on -- as I tried to see it from different angles, it just seemed too sappy -- But the main story arc practically wrote itself.

     

    In this novel, I had a pretty good idea where the story would end up -- the climactic scene is almost required in this sort of book -- and a good idea where to begin, so I loosely imagined an arc for each character, and then wrote the scenes out of order. For example, I might sit down and happen to think of something for the scene where Brian is trying to tell Sarah how he feels, does it very badly, and leads to a break-up between them. Or the scene where Brittany is in the library and runs into the professor.

     

    Spontaneous writing can be as fun as reading a novel by someone else. And it's not carved in stone if you don't like what you have written. I even have drafts I lost interest in or was not sure what the hell I was doing! They seemed like a good idea at the time!

     

    Skoob_Ym: I call those my scrap-pile, and I dig out a few good bits here and there to use on something else. Many of my best stories incorporate the bones of stories that died young.

     

    By taking the scenes out of order,

     

    Gosh, I cannot do that! They are all linked and follow on from the previous chapter. We are not creating films where they are often filmed out of order then edited in to the right one.

     

    Skoob_Ym: But having the general idea, I know that I will need a scene like this -- so I write it. Or I write a scene I like, and -- hey, that would fit nicely in this part.

     

    I never have that feeling of slugging through the boring scene to get to the good scene.

     

    Never write boring ones. Would you read them?

     

    Skoob_Ym: Unfortunately, a certain amount of exposition is necessary. It can't be entirely car chases and shoot-outs.

     

    I can go back later and weld the scenes together, and then in the second draft I'll worry about getting the continuity right, keeping the timeline straight, and all the details like that.

     

    Hrmm. If I spilt the people up I often go back and forward over those chapters tinkering, especially if they are still communicating with each other, but usually I concentrate on one person's story continuously. (There may be a flashback or two though.)

     

    Skoob_Ym: In this story, I'm trying to use "Sliding Perspective." It's not easy, and one of the first criticisms from readers was that the jumps from one mind to the next were not always clearly defined. I'm trying to balance this by not being too deeply inside any one mind for too long, and making natural segues when possible.

     

    I've got a folder on my desktop, and as a scene occurs to me, I write it as a new document and drop it into that folder.

     

    Why not simply type them as notes under your text? To be deleted when no longer needed. If I am away from my PC I just keep fresh ideas in my head until I get back on my WP. There's often times when I think, "I could say/add there ..." right after I have turned off my PC. I eventually write down stories on and off I am creating in my head almost all the time.

     

    Skoob_Ym: I've tried that and I hate it. It breaks me out of the narrative when I read it back. I judge the quality of a scene by how well it holds me inside the narrative. When I suddenly read "This scene is a little dry -- spice it up" or "Should Charlie really be left-handed?" it's kind of like crashing a ferrari into a brick wall.

     

    Then to compose the first draft,

     

    I don't really have a first draft. With me alterations are continuous. That's the great advantage of a WP over paper.

     

    Skoob_Ym: First draft, figuratively speaking. First complete compilation, if that works better for you.

     

    I just welded together all those fragments. I'm kind of happy with this method. There's always been some debate among writers, between those who outline religiously and those who fly-by-the-seat-of-their-pants, but hopefully this will make a bit of a common ground, or a middle path.

     

    You can often tell those who plan, because all their novels usually follow the same formula. One day they will just let their PC write it.

     

    Skoob_Ym: I have stopped reading some writers because their plots all follow exactly the same course.


     

  • Skoob_ymSkoob_ym ✭✭✭

    potetjp wrote:

    You'll see some will leave you in quest of another author. Smiley Frustrated


    I make them sign a contract in the preface:

     

    1. I am the author, thy author. Thou shalt have no other authors before me. Smiley Very Happy

     

  • Yes, one has to be tough. Smiley Happy
  • kevinlomas wrote:

    I'm working on a new novel. I posted some parts in a couple of threads a while back, and got some great feedback on them, but right now I'm in the part where the first draft is almost done,

     

    Gosh, that was fast. How many words?

     

    Skoob_Ym: in the first draft, as it sits, 71,000; I will need another 1500 to weld the main narrative and the long climactic confrontation. Then I hope to pick up another 15,000 or so with scenes that will be needed for continuity, to provide a smoother flow, as refined segues, or ideas that I forgot in the heat of composition. Third read-through / edit, I may pick up another 2000 or so, assuming that I don't X out any

     

    Don't take this the wrong way, but would it not be best to slow down a bit? I have been working on a story that's now up to 17,500 words, but that's only from around an hour a day, often with days in between. I will write a short paragraph, thinking hard, then keep going over and over it, every now and then back to the start of the chapter. I doubt I could cope writing down 70,000 words, and then finally tinkering with them. I leave that to a couple of final edits (which are often boring because I have already read it all in bits and bats a 100 times) but by that time it's more or less already how I want it to be.

     

    and I need to draw back a bit and read other books to separate myself from it for the second round -- the editing and welding and filing and grafting and hammering draft.

     

    I do that 'on-the-go'. I will do a chapter or two, or even just a few paragraphs, then go back to the start, or just back to where I just sat down and started to type again, reading and adjusting. Often just because the original creating can be a bit taxing whereas adding a bit of extra detail it not.

     

    Skoob_Ym: I do some editing on the fly, usually the next day or next working day, but I try not to worry too much about the editing until I've gotten the basic story on "paper" (so to speak). I just use an editing session as a warm-up to put me back into the plot, which gives me the next portion.

     

    That stage is not so much as editing, but still creating.

     

    But what makes this novel different is that I've found a middle path between outlining at the get-go (which drives me nuts)

     

    Yes, I never do that. Although I may start with the idea of the story in my head before I start to write, but there's no planning. Often I have the start and the possible end, and fill in in between.

     

    and simply plunging in headfirst with no idea where I'll wind up, which makes for too convoluted a plot with an unsatisfying ending.

     

    Well, that's where you keep going over and over it fine-tuning it until you do like it. I sometimes write whole chapters and then delete them. Word Processors are the best invention since sliced wheels. I am amazed you have got to the end so fast.

     

    Skoob_Ym: As I said, with this story, I knew where it would wind up almost from the start. I did have to ditch one possible ending as too far-fetched, early on -- as I tried to see it from different angles, it just seemed too sappy -- But the main story arc practically wrote itself.

     

    Sometimes endings write themselves based on what happened previosuly. Occasionaly I will have a  basic idea and see where it leads to. Is "far-fetched" possible, if it makes sense? But one preson's idea of "far-fetched" could just be normal to another. But I do write SF/F!

     

    In this novel, I had a pretty good idea where the story would end up -- the climactic scene is almost required in this sort of book -- and a good idea where to begin, so I loosely imagined an arc for each character, and then wrote the scenes out of order. For example, I might sit down and happen to think of something for the scene where Brian is trying to tell Sarah how he feels, does it very badly, and leads to a break-up between them. Or the scene where Brittany is in the library and runs into the professor.

     

    Spontaneous writing can be as fun as reading a novel by someone else. And it's not carved in stone if you don't like what you have written. I even have drafts I lost interest in or was not sure what the hell I was doing! They seemed like a good idea at the time!

     

    Skoob_Ym: I call those my scrap-pile, and I dig out a few good bits here and there to use on something else. Many of my best stories incorporate the bones of stories that died young.

     

    I cannot do that because I use a lot of dialogue, it would be hard to splice in to something else, but while I am writing bits of text it can give me an idea for another story, which often never get written! Although one of my stories is about a team, who now also appear in the latest book I published.

     

    http://www.kevinlomas.net/Keep-That-Noise-Down-by-Kevin-Lomas.html   a sort of follow in from - http://www.kevinlomas.net/Demonstrative.html

     

    By taking the scenes out of order,

     

    Gosh, I cannot do that! They are all linked and follow on from the previous chapter. We are not creating films where they are often filmed out of order then edited in to the right one.

     

    Skoob_Ym: But having the general idea, I know that I will need a scene like this -- so I write it. Or I write a scene I like, and -- hey, that would fit nicely in this part.

     

    But do you not write a story continuously? I am spontaneous, it still sounds as if you are using the preplanning method.

     

    I never have that feeling of slugging through the boring scene to get to the good scene.

     

    Never write boring ones. Would you read them?

     

    Skoob_Ym: Unfortunately, a certain amount of exposition is necessary. It can't be entirely car chases and shoot-outs.

     

    It does not have to fed in all at once, and there are ways of breaking it up, and there's no cars in my stories or small shoot-outs. Well, OK, in one story sort of guns are used, but it's not exactly a shoot-out . Smiley Very Happy But you have to consider that if even the first draft of a section is boring you as the creator, think how a reader may view it. 

     

    I can go back later and weld the scenes together, and then in the second draft I'll worry about getting the continuity right, keeping the timeline straight, and all the details like that.

     

    Hrmm. If I spilt the people up I often go back and forward over those chapters tinkering, especially if they are still communicating with each other, but usually I concentrate on one person's story continuously. (There may be a flashback or two though.)

     

    Skoob_Ym: In this story, I'm trying to use "Sliding Perspective." It's not easy, and one of the first criticisms from readers was that the jumps from one mind to the next were not always clearly defined. I'm trying to balance this by not being too deeply inside any one mind for too long, and making natural segues when possible.

     

    I try to stick to the thoughts of the main character, or none at all. Imagine that you are the main character, can you directly read peoples' minds? But it is possible to put across an emotion by observed body-language - Jane crossed her arms and scowled - or even by what they say - "This place makes me nervous" replied Fred, shivering.

     

    I've got a folder on my desktop, and as a scene occurs to me, I write it as a new document and drop it into that folder.

     

    Why not simply type them as notes under your text? To be deleted when no longer needed. If I am away from my PC I just keep fresh ideas in my head until I get back on my WP. There's often times when I think, "I could say/add there ..." right after I have turned off my PC. I eventually write down stories on and off I am creating in my head almost all the time.

     

    Skoob_Ym: I've tried that and I hate it. It breaks me out of the narrative when I read it back.

     

    I don't see why, unless you cannot 'write' a story in your head.

     

    I judge the quality of a scene by how well it holds me inside the narrative. When I suddenly read "This scene is a little dry -- spice it up" or "Should Charlie really be left-handed?" it's kind of like crashing a ferrari into a brick wall.

     

    Are you describing a story you are currently writing or one you have already published? But what you are really saying is you cannot write unless you plan it first.  Smiley Happy

     

    Then to compose the first draft,

     

    I don't really have a first draft. With me alterations are continuous. That's the great advantage of a WP over paper.

     

    Skoob_Ym: First draft, figuratively speaking. First complete compilation, if that works better for you.

     

    But from what you say, it's not complete.

     

    I just welded together all those fragments. I'm kind of happy with this method. There's always been some debate among writers, between those who outline religiously and those who fly-by-the-seat-of-their-pants, but hopefully this will make a bit of a common ground, or a middle path.

     

    You can often tell those who plan, because all their novels usually follow the same formula. One day they will just let their PC write it.

     

    Skoob_Ym: I have stopped reading some writers because their plots all follow exactly the same course.

     

    They could be written by a PC, but at times with those who sell (and write) a lot of books, it's their fans who like them to be all the same, and therefore even what their publishers eventually insist on. I can't say they are all bad because some are decent escapism. One of my guilty pleasures is Clive Cussler.

  • Skoob_ymSkoob_ym ✭✭✭

    The problem for me with Clive Cussler is that while his narrative is sound and well-paced in most places, sometimes the story shows so grotesque a misunderstanding of political and legal realities that it breaks me out of the story.

     

    An example would be the story in which the two copies of a treaty between the US and the UK are both lost in the 1910s, but are uncovered again in the 1980s -- at which point, the US is on the verge of declaring bankruptcy, you see -- and it turns out that the missing treaties were a sale of the Commonwealth of Canada to the US by the UK, with consideration (that is legal payment under a contract) having been performed under the Lend-Lease Act in 1939.

     

    So Canada, where a huge vein of untapped gold and other resources has just been discovered, is suddenly the property of the US, and everybody's happy except the English, who had hoped to renege the deal.

     

    Now, from a legal, economic, and political standpoint, that plot is so wrong on so many levels that I could barely finish the book, and several times I had to walk across the room to retrieve my eyes, which had rolled right out of my head.

     

    Nothing against Cussler; it was a fine narrative, though a silly (imho) plot.

     

    Well, you're welcome to write  as suits you. Me, I now write as this way, and it seems to be the best of both worlds to me.

     

    As for the speed of writing: Shadowmonkey and I wrote our Easter book, Daddy, Who's That Man?, in four weeks, including edits and revisions. When you really know where the story is going, it seems to just come to you as fast as you can type.

  • The problem for me with Clive Cussler is that while his narrative is sound and well-paced in most places, sometimes the story shows so grotesque a misunderstanding of political and legal realities that it breaks me out of the story.

     

    Well it is fiction, but some of it is true, and some points could be true. What mainly annoys me is he sort of gives away the basis of the plot at the very start with his journey into almost but mainly theoretical history.

     

    An example would be the story in which the two copies of a treaty between the US and the UK are both lost in the 1910s, but are uncovered again in the 1980s -- at which point, the US is on the verge of declaring bankruptcy,

     

    Are you saying that the US have never been on the verge of bankruptcy, or that it was? Because it has been, a few times. Currently it's in hock to China and the UK.

     

    you see -- and it turns out that the missing treaties were a sale of the Commonwealth of Canada to the US by the UK, with consideration (that is legal payment under a contract) having been performed under the Lend-Lease Act in 1939.

     So Canada, where a huge vein of untapped gold and other resources has just been discovered, is suddenly the property of the US, and everybody's happy except the English, who had hoped to renege the deal.

     Now, from a legal, economic, and political standpoint, that plot is so wrong on so many levels that I could barely finish the book, and several times I had to walk across the room to retrieve my eyes, which had rolled right out of my head.

     

    But many things like that have happened in the past. It's like the US buying Alaska off the Russians in 1867 thinking that us Brits would use it to go to war against Russia. Many such things happened before the discovery of how valuable oil would become, or even that it existed, a far greater value than gold. Many transactions were done in the name of strategic advantage, not for assets.  I don't recall the dateline in that Cussler plot, but was it not bases on some fictional thing from 100s of years ago, outlined in the semi-made up history he insists on starting his stories with? when such things happened a lot. Landmasses actually still belonged to people in those days.

     

    Nothing against Cussler; it was a fine narrative, though a silly (imho) plot.

     

    It's fiction, partly even SF (I bet you don't like James Bond either) and are you suggesting that politicians and business leaders do not take bribes and often have hidden agendas? (the CIA used to bump key members of other countries off.) What about the arms deals agreement between Bin Laden and Bush? Sometimes such things later discovered using the Freedom of Information Act?  Smiley Happy

     

    Well, you're welcome to write  as suits you.

     

    Oh I don't write like Cussler.

     

    Me, I now write as this way, and it seems to be the best of both worlds to me.

     

    Well you was asking for opinions about you trying a new method. I was not putting it down in anyway.

     

    As for the speed of writing: Shadowmonkey and I wrote our Easter book, Daddy, Who's That Man?, in four weeks, including edits and revisions. When you really know where the story is going, it seems to just come to you as fast as you can type.

     

    Cussler writes around 5 novels a year. Oh I can type a draft very fast, it's the tinkering to get it perfectly how I want it that takes the time. As I said, I perhaps spend an hour each time, and often with days and even months between those hours. It's just one of the hobbies I have. You must be at it most of your waking hours.  Smiley Happy There's no harm in that. Especially if you have a deadline.

  • Skoob_ymSkoob_ym ✭✭✭

    Not my waking hours... I do my best work when I should be asleep. Smiley Very Happy

  • I catch up on my sleep when driving, or I try to, the screams of my passengers often wake me.

  • Skoob_ymSkoob_ym ✭✭✭

    I'm reminded of the old joke:

     

    When I die, I want to go peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather. Not yelling and screaming, like the passengers in his car.

  • This sounds like a process that could be very enjoyable to write with. Often I get stuck in a scene and find myself having to trudge forward with bad writing just to get to a scene where I can write again. And that leaves me with much slower writing at the time and a much harder struggle during editing. Your approach does away with this problem.

    However, I would be interested to hear how your editing goes because it sounds like trying to link everything together cohesively and remember what information has been revealed to the reader and where (sequentially) could be very challenging.

    Good luck with the approach. I think that most approaches can work. It mostly depends on the mentality of the author.

    For example, I could never write a story from an absolute framework because I need the freedom for my characters to grow and evolve while I'm writing. It's something important to my process. However, I would imagine that some people with far better memory and organizational skills than myself would be unable to write without a detailed framework beforehand. It's all preference. Your approach would probably cure the struggles of some people and create new struggles for others, all dependant on how they approach writing. Kind of a neat thing about the art, the diversity of approaches that can be applied to it.

  • Skoob_ymSkoob_ym ✭✭✭

    Well, I'm through the primary edits. I think it's come together rather cohesively. Of course, I have to keep in mind each character and where I want that character to go in the end, but this way I find myself guiding the characters rather than leading them by the nose.

     

    Kurt Vonnegut talked about having his characters as marionettes, but attached by long stretchy strings that gave them lots of leeway and free will. I believe it was in Breakfast of Champions that one of his characters punched him in the nose... But that's Vonnegut, and he had a different perspective on the whole process.

     

    The story topped out at a shade over 75,000; I had hoped to go maybe to 80K or 85K, but I've reached the point where all the vital scenes are there, and adding something else might actually dilute the good work so far. It seems, in itself, to be complete as I imagined it, which is probably a good palce to stop.

     

    Now for the beta readers. I've had two so far, and I'm trying to line up one or two more. Then it's covers, covers, covers.

Sign In or Register to comment.