General writing fiction discussion thrad.

[Skan]

Whatever works for you!

For myself, I actually find that the script becomes even more important in character-driven stories, if only because character-driven stories sometimes have less explicit direction. So to compensate, it becomes more important to bring together the other aspects/details of the story (incl. the dialogue) to point in a specific direction so that the reader can get a solid feel of the story's trajectory.

 

[Fangu]

Whatever works for you --> Aye.

I think it also comes down to what kind of writer you are - whether you're a Planner or a Discoverer. I started out as 100% Discoverer but I've managed to get better at planning - slightly. But still, a story for me starts out with a few key scenes, snippets of dialogue (or flow of dialogue, more importantly) - with feelings, and not with logic. A part of the fun for me is to let the right side of my brain do the work with the characters instead of planning it out with my left. It's like submerging - then when you're back on the surface (and preferably have waited a few days) you can look over the stuff with your Logic Eyes.

It all depends on your motivation/ way of thinking/ source of inspiration/ etc.

 

[Clement Rage]

I suddenly really want somebody to write about a middle manager in a magic detective agency that has to deal with all these loose cannons that never listen to them and keep causing destruction. Is there anywhere I can commission this?

 

[LicoriceAllsorts]

Isn't that a bit like whatsisname, Coulson, in the Avengers?

 

[Clement Rage]

Sort of, but I'm thinking more Victoria Hand in the TV show where the writers don't hate her.

 

[Cabaret]

Working on this Turkfic where Reno and Rude are, without giving too much away, basically interrogating this dude who's a bit of a character and is very sarcastic and self-assured because he knows the score with how the Turks operate.

S'all well and good but I'm starting to get worried that it's becoming too dialogue heavy, but the dialogue's really the driving force of an interrogation scene. So do I keep it as is, or do I change it up to add in more descriptions and such? The characters move about a fair bit when they're talking, mostly Reno, and I've been putting in alot of different facial expressions and body tics. But that wee voice in the back of my head is nyammering 'bout how it's still too much talk. But so much of the opening part is description. NYAHHHH!

I think dialogue heavy can be very good, esp for the pace of a story. If there's a quick exchange, I think it get ruined by too much description. As long as the reader has the scene set, then all they need is reaction cues here n there. imo the rest can be done with dialogue.
However I used to love setting myself various dialogue based writing challenges, cos I love all that stuff.

 

[Ami]

I'm working on an untitled project centered around two young girls in their early twenties, Clara and Aria (nickname for Rosaria). The details aren't fully complete, but the gist is that they both get swept into this fantasy world (still unnamed), where the former learns she was born in this world and the latter is a fantasy nerd that's in heaven. Of course, there's the dispute of conflicted interests.

But as with any fantasy, there's nothing worse than saving the world from who - or what - ever threatens it.

That's the general idea. I've had it stuck in my head for weeks now, only just getting to brainstorming the whole thing out. I think it's going to be a trilogy if I can get really get my teeth into it.

 

[Skan]

Bit OT: I'm actually trying to think of the last books I've read that had that sort of premise. The main one that comes to mind for me is Guy Gavriel Kay's Fionavar trilogy, which is about a group of UToronto students who get sucked into Fionavar and end up having to do shit, whether they want to or not.

Odd trilogy ... very much a homage to Tolkien; GGK was one of the editors of The Silmarillion, and it kinda shows. In any case, the highest highs and the lowest lows. I hate some parts of the series and can never reread it in whole without cringing, but there's a bit in the first book that still remains, six years later, the most beautiful prose passage I've ever read (and which by itself is enough to redeem the whole series for me).

 

[LicoriceAllsorts]

I'm a big fan of Guy Gavriel Kay, but it has to be said he has his, as you put it, highest highs and lowest lows.

 

[Skan]

You have good taste! XP

He's one of my favorite living fantasy authors. Honestly, I can't think of another fantasy author out there who pays as much attention to thematic texture as he does. That said ... when he fails, he really fails. Which actually might be another reason why I love reading him; he makes it so clear what you should do and shouldn't do as a writer.

 

[Claymore]

I'm working on an untitled project centered around two young girls in their early twenties, Clara and Aria (nickname for Rosaria). The details aren't fully complete, but the gist is that they both get swept into this fantasy world (still unnamed), where the former learns she was born in this world and the latter is a fantasy nerd that's in heaven. Of course, there's the dispute of conflicted interests.

But as with any fantasy, there's nothing worse than saving the world from who - or what - ever threatens it.

That's the general idea. I've had it stuck in my head for weeks now, only just getting to brainstorming the whole thing out. I think it's going to be a trilogy if I can get really get my teeth into it.

That's really interesting. Maybe it's just the books I read but whenever someone gets thrown into an unusual situation that they should really love or be prepared for, it usually ends up with them being unable to cope (sometimes even worse than those who weren't ever prepared) despite all the years of reading and loving the material at hand. For example, video game geeks suddenly finding themselves in an apocalypse, and yet, the author usually makes them one of the first to die or collapse under the pressure.

So yeah, it's quite nice that Aria is actually loving and flourishing in this situation, and I can easily picture the tension with her friend.

 

[Clement Rage]

Magic Kingdom for Sale-Sold, Terry Brooks. Guy answers a classified ad in a paper to be king of a fantasy land. Years since I read it, but it was ok.

Fiona McIntosh also has a series where one of the heirs to the throne grew up interning at a hospital. Haven;t finished it, so I'm on the fence.

the author usually makes them one of the first to die or collapse under the pressure.

That really is the outcome that makes the most sense, though. Playing call of duty doesn't make you capable of handling a real assault rifle. With a setting like Death Note, information would be power, but in an apocalypse, even with something relatively harmless like zombies, knowing to aim for the head isn't super valuable unless you are a good enough shot to pull it off.

 

[Claymore]

That really is the outcome that makes the most sense, though. Playing call of duty doesn't make you capable of handling a real assault rifle. With a setting like Death Note, information would be power, but in an apocalypse, even with something relatively harmless like zombies, knowing to aim for the head isn't super valuable unless you are a good enough shot to pull it off.

Of course playing video games doesn't suddenly turn you into a GI Joe badass who is able to wield weapons and do army stealth tactics once the apocalypse hits, however, we've become so desensitized as a culture to blood and violence that having these geek / gamer characters always collapse under pressure is getting rather ridiculous now. And you kind of said it yourself, in any situation knowledge is power: most people know to aim for the head straight away, most people know to avoid contact and bites, most people know that they need to grab a food source straight away and form a group for survival as soon as possible. The 'staple' of these characters rocking in a corner crying for their mum is just not believable any longer.

They would cope just fine.

 

[Clement Rage]

I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Video game geeks, like other people, vary in their skills and mental resilience. But I'm not sure they have some huge advantage.

[QUOTEmost people know to aim for the head straight away, most people know to avoid contact and bites, most people know that they need to grab a food source straight away and form a group for survival as soon as possible.][/QUOTE]

Sure. But while many people know what to do, fewer know how to do those things...do you know a food source nearby that two hundred other people don't also know about? Just parroting a blog I read by an ex-military woman, food is actually a low priority, you can survive without it longer than water or shelter. No matter how many movies you've seen, the one rotting guy walking down the street is more likely to be assumed to be drunk from a costume party last night than a member of the living dead. And the average person in the street will still try to stop someone from biting them. Movie buffs will probably figure things out quicker, true enough, but not by that much.

 

[LicoriceAllsorts]

Maybe a cool story would be where two people who aren't friends and don't like each other are sucked into the game world - maybe one is a very sporty, outdoors person who despises games, and the other is a die-hard gamer. And as they struggle to survive in the world of the game, the non-gamer comes to really love it and all the physical challenges its provides, while the gamer slowly grows to hate the world he used to love....

 

[Dawnbreaker]

I wield a sword in a lot of the games I play but I've no doubt I'd cut my own head off if I had to wield one in real life. XD

You know they say 'write what you know'...well, I've learnt that you can take that too far. If you draw too heavily upon your personal experiences and they are recent and/or unresolved, you could be hindering your own recovery process. I wrote some of personal experiences into my recent novel and it's kind of fucked me up (cycling, what ifs, etc.). So I think the next time I write something in it needs to be something that's over and done with or something I don't have nearly as much involvement in.

Unfortunately this really leaves me stuck since it's an integral part of the story and I'm at a loss on how to proceed.

[first world problems]

 

[Claymore]

I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Video game geeks, like other people, vary in their skills and mental resilience. But I'm not sure they have some huge advantage.

Being suddenly confronted with the world that they have lived and breathed in different forms of media for years? Yes, just that knowledge in itself is a huge advantage.

But we're discussing cross-issues here. I'm not saying that every one of them would turn into the saviours of mankind. My initial point was that every variation of this character that I have come across in fiction is usually the first to collapse under the pressure, go mental, or messes up in a huge way.

I'm just not buying it.

Maybe a cool story would be where two people who aren't friends and don't like each other are sucked into the game world - maybe one is a very sporty, outdoors person who despises games, and the other is a die-hard gamer. And as they struggle to survive in the world of the game, the non-gamer comes to really love it and all the physical challenges its provides, while the gamer slowly grows to hate the world he used to love....

That's a cool concept.

 

[Fangu]

You know they say 'write what you know'...well, I've learnt that you can take that too far. If you draw too heavily upon your personal experiences and they are recent and/or resolved, you could be hindering your own recovery process. I wrote some of personal experiences into my recent novel and it's kind of fucked me up (cycling, what ifs, etc.). So I think the next time I write something in it needs to be something that's over and done with or something I don't have nearly as much involvement in.

Aye. Being too close to your main characters can make you not see them very clearly, AKA not giving a true/real representation of that character. The writer should always have 100% control of their character*, so when writing self lived stuff, you need a unique insight into your own situation to give a true picture. Which is never easy - I suspect the only way to do that well is to let it digest for a long time. A very long time. I suspect something like 10-20 years. Processing takes forever.

* Even if the reader is made to explore the problem like the character is, you need to be in control of everything surrounding the character, plus have enough insight to write the plot twists, story arches and resolutions that follows.

[first world problems]

Hey, this is a writing thread, any writing rant is free of the judgement axe

 

[Dawnbreaker]

From Three Genres: Prose, Poetry and Plays: "To avoid (this) lack of objectivity, make sure enough time has elapsed between the event and your attempt to convert it into fiction. The more emotional the experience the more time will be required to gain some measure of detachment."

Well, fuck me. xD

 

[Fangu]

I was very pleased to read that. XD

Anyway, what I also like about this is that it's a specific thing - talking about detachment, lack of objectivity, self insert. To me these are oh so important topics - technicalities - I think they matter a lot.

One of these technical issues I'm spending a lot of time on these days is the one of 'show vs tell'. I've been re-reading my old stuff since Kev's been reviewing it, and wwwooowwww, reading it has been a joy - because I've found so much stuff I would change XD

Really, I can spot it immediately. Most of it has to do with overdoing explanations. 'This has been suggested by character x already. This could be cut as 'tell' and put into the dialogue in the last paragraph. This can be told through props, scenery, costumes, or gestures instead', and actually a lot of them has simply been 'you don't need that sentence. Take it out.' I've realised that I could easily have cut 20% words from one of my chapters, which would make it much better writing - and reading!

Telling has a high risk of putting you in yawn mode. It's words you just have to get through because it's important backstory, or whatevs. But I've found that there's almost always a way to avoid the tell, and do the show instead. Showing always feels more dynamic to me - it's the blank spaces your reader has to fill, which engages their thought process and emotions, which makes the reading experience much more rewarding.

Link to an old example - I could probably come up with much better ones, but this is a specific change I made. (NSFW)

Does the book say anything interesting on this matter?

 

[Keveh Kins]

Rewriting the ending section of my fic. Still felt really weak to me, even after a few days away and the tone was off from the rest of it. It's been an interesting re-reading. I think a lot of my writing weaknesses really show up in it, often times I have what I think are good ideas and then I just execute them very poorly, or they just don't really work and aren't that good after all.

Back tay the drawin' board, says ye

 

[LicoriceAllsorts]

Do you want a beta, Kevs?

Showing versus telling is such a tricky one. I think it's crucial to know when you're doing one or the other, but beyond that there's no hard and fast rules. Like, I feel there's a limit to how many times I can show Tseng grappling with his feelings of inadequacy. After a while, the reader is going to get sick of it ("yes, Tseng hates himself, we know already!!!") and then all they need is for me to tell them: "Tseng felt the old self-doubt creeping over him, but shook it off and kept moving...."

"Telling" is a very traditional, fairy-tale style of writing. "Once upon a time there was a princess with coal-black eyes and rose-red cheeks, whose father loved her more than meat loves salt...." It's a very economical way of getting the information across, and it enables the narrative to pick up the pace.

Or again:
"For four days and three sleepless nights Kronar, son of man, pursued his wounded enemy across the frozen tundra...."
versus
"Kronar knelt to examine the human footprint, pressed into the fresh, soft snow of the tundra less than an hour before. By the count of the cuts he had nicked in his wrist, Kronar knew that this was the fourth sunrise. He had not closed his eyes since the hunt began. But his prey was close now. And weak: drops of blood blossomed like poppies in the snow, pointing him on his way. Tonight, he would sleep."

I would say that Number 2 makes for a better opening to a story; number one works better when you're trying to get to the main action as fast as possible.

 

[Fangu]

"Kronar knelt to examine the human footprint, pressed into the fresh, soft snow of the tundra less than an hour before. By the count of the cuts he had nicked in his wrist, Kronar knew that this was the fourth sunrise. He had not closed his eyes since the hunt began. But his prey was close now. And weak: drops of blood blossomed like poppies in the snow, pointing him on his way. Tonight, he would sleep."

tbh I'd put the bolded parts under 'Tell' as well. Which is what I feel often happens - you can't avoid the Tell completely, and so putting in a sentence here and there is an easy and economical way of solving the problem when you need to add information. But as in the quote above, you could take out the bolded part and still manage:

"Kronar knelt to examine the human footprint pressed into the fresh, soft snow of the tundra (less than an hour before). As the sun rose above the mountains* he cut another nick in his wrist to match the existing three, his blood mixing with the drops of blood blossomed like poppies in the snow, pointing him on his way. Tonight he would finally sleep."

idk. It's a matter of taste, style and calories.

* If time allows you

Like, I feel there's a limit to how many times I can show Tseng grappling with his feelings of inadequacy.

If they already know this, you wouldn't even have to repeat it, imo.

 

[Dawnbreaker]

Does the book say anything interesting on this matter?

Not sure. As I'm writing this post that specific book on writing is upstairs in my hubby's bedroom and it's midnight...I don't wish to wake him. I'll have a look at it tomorrow and see if it does.

You've brought up two interesting points, which I will address separately.

1) Show vs. Tell

Yes, it can be very boring for the reader to have everything put on a silver platter before them. At the same time it can be frustrating for a reader to not know quite enough. I think that's why you have to pull away from the writing for a while and then return to it, to see were you (a writer) may have spent time with too much exposition.

A trick I like to use (I think I may have mentioned this before) is the whole 'active description'. You describe or explain something but through some sort of action: the house is overgrown with weeds, birds nest in the windows and the paint is falling off. This is still an direct exposition of such, but at the same time a more interesting way of going about it.

2) Repeating yourself

I've done this a lot in the past, and then swung the other way (lol) and left the poor reader hanging while I felt it was explained well enough already. This is another case of putting aside the writing and coming back to it. If you're nervous that you've repeated yourself, try underlining what you think was repeated and see how often it pops up. You may have to get creative to find a way to get the information to the characters as they are suppose to have it and not bore the reader at the same time. It's a real juggling act.



On an unrelated note my brain is thoroughly bombarded with creative ideas for my series and I've spent the better part of an hour just writing them all down. This is probably the 'I want to go to another project and abandon my current novel' phase but it's also pretty stellar since I'm exhilarated by all the awesome characters and plot-lines that are flooding my mind.

If only there were more of me (or more time) in order to write all these novels. X_X

 

[Fangu]

Aye, active descriptions is one excellent way to go, and is pretty much how I'd define 'showing'.

At the same time it can be frustrating for a reader to not know quite enough.

You shouldn't avoid 'hard tells' completely, but imo you usually don't need more one or two sentences tossed in here and there - and only when absolutely necessary. My main issue is where you 're-tell' what has happened before, or say out loud what a character is thinking or feeling about a situation. 'Suddenly Alice felt very afraid.' 'She'd met him ten years earlier, not liking him one bit at the time, but now she had grown fond of him.' All of this can be explained throughout the story with shows. Like - is it really necessary to explain how she didn't like the man when she met him ten years later? Sure, this information is useful for characterization (how? Is it, really? They get along fine now, don't they?) but shoveling it out right away might feel kind of *shrug*.

In those situations I tend to think 'if this was a TV show, how would the author show us'? Most likely through some sort of dialogue: "I remember you weren't so fond of him at first." "a and b haven't always been friends." Or, they can show us a scene between the two characters where this She is getting annoyed with Him, pointing out that even for how they get along well now, there are still old ghosts.


Anyway yesterday I had that experience of chopping away words because they were simply doing nothing for the story. Valid information, sure, but not specifically interesting or relevant information for plot or character building. (When in doubt, I always start thinking about the extended version of Return of the King and how it kills momentum. Pace must come first.) Chop chop chop. Damn how good that feels.