Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
The Workshop - Tips, Tricks, and Theory
Posts
It's just as bad as when characters tell each other things they already know to bring readers up to speed.
"Tell me again why we're here?"
"As you know, John, we're here to steal the MacGuffin Diamond."
It's called subtext people. Let that do the talking for you. No one likes being hammered in the head with meaning.
Let's start with three act structure. Every story has a beginning (first act), a middle (second act), and an end (third act).
1. The beginning of your story must introduce a problem.
A lot of people will say the first thing to do when creating a story is to establish a setting or to introduce characters, but a story doesn't work without a problem. You must create a problem that will eventually be resolved in the ending. But let's go ahead and talk about characters since you're probably going to introduce them at some point.
Characters have wants.
Your characters' wants will be reflected through their actions and dialogue. Don't worry about writing witty discourse about how the Green Lantern is able to beat any superhero because Kyle Rayner's ring lost the charge limit, enabling him to make anything he could ever possibly want without having to re-charge his ring. Worry about your characters' wants. Your characters' wants can and probably will serve as obstacles to the main problem. You can also use them as a subplot device or in a way to create tension between two characters. There's a lot you can do, but keep in mind that your characters are trying to get what they want, and what they say and do will reflect that.
The next time you read a story or watch a movie, write down all the major characters and what their wants are. Then find out how they go about getting what they want and how obstacles keep them from getting what they want. Find out how their wants relate to the main problem.
The last note about your first act, the beginning of your story, is that by the end of it, your main character must enter a 'new world.' You can be as up-front or as subtle as you want to be about this. For instance, in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (movie), Earth blows up at the end of the first act and Arthur and Marvin are beamed up into a spaceship, where they have now entered a 'new world.' Maybe your main character gets diagnosed with cancer or a family member dies. It's up to you.
2. The middle of your story consists of attempts to resolve the problem.
first act: Bob is hungry.
second act: Bob attempts to resolve his hunger by looking for food.
third act: Bob resolves his hunger (problem) by finding food and eating it.
The middle of your story is not merely "stuff" or "what happens" or "content." You have to attempt to resolve your problem. To keep it simple, we'll say that your characters are trying to resolve the problem. In my example, Bob tries to find food to eat. But let's say he didn't find any food. So he searches elsewhere. Maybe he goes to the grocery store where he notices that his wallet is empty, so has to find another way to get food. He walks outside and finds $10 on the ground. He walks back into the grocery store and buys some food. He goes back home and eats his food and is no longer hungry, thereby resolving the main problem. The middle of your story consists of attempts to resolve the problem because your characters are usually met with obstacles or failure in trying to do so, until the problem is finally resolved.
Numerous things can happen in your second act, but do not forget about your main problem. The second act must work towards resolving your main, overarching problem that was introduced in the beginning.
3. The end of your story is the resolution of the problem.
Simply put, the problem is solved. Maybe the characters fail outright and everyone dies, or they succeed and you get a happy ending. Your ending must be resolved in some way.
It should also be mentioned that aftermath is not part of your third act (End). Once your problem has been resolved, anything afterwards is aftermath (meaning that, yes, prologues come before your first act are not considered the "beginning").
-Stephen King
"Read and write a lot."
-Stephen King
That's all there is too it if you ask me. Well, not ALL, but a lot of it.
I think this is better advice and less intimidating to many fledgling writers than some of the more patronizing "Schedule time to write every day for an hour or so."
It does have its merits and I wouldn't tell anyone not to do it...but to throw that at someone is like asking them to immediately begin lifting 300 pounds with the justification that, eventually, you will be able to lift all that.
I had a lot more to say but I felt really pompous when I finished. I've just begun re-reading Gardner's Art of Fiction. I originally hated it for the tone. I feel less alienated by the tone this time around and while I still find the examples and exercises interesting, I am having trouble truly getting behind all of what he is saying. Which, I suppose, is better than just accepting what he says and not engaging it...I was wondering if anyone else had read this book or had thoughts on him.
I haven't read that particular book, but I've seen him interviewed (well, paraphrased at least). I'd agree that his tone is somewhat dismissive and holier-than-thou, but a lot of guidance books take that path...
The problem with writing advice is that too many people take it as gospel regardless of the source or veracity- and if we all did, every book would be broadly the same. So it's a damn good sign that you've listened to the message but questioned it, if you ask me
But I can't deny that King's glib quips are true to form- reading is never a bad thing for a budding writer. Of course, it shouldn't get in the way of finding time to actually write, but I reckon we can all juggle that requirement (although I sometimes feel like I live on the internet).
I think short statements like that are far easier to agree with than epics detailing every single step of the creation of a novel. There's more chance that you'd find an entry in a huge guide that you firmly disagree with, but basic advice like "read your own work and other people's work a lot" is much easier to take on board.
You should post whatever you think works PatboyX- it's the reader's own problem if they choose to construe you as "pompous". I never read writing advice and think the author's saying "you must write like this or you suck/don't stand a chance".
Uh, unless they actually say that, in which case they can go verb themselves with an incredibly painful metaphor.
Act 1) Get your characters up a tree.
Act 2) Shake the tree.
Act 3) Get 'em down.
But yeah, it's like essay writing. Stick with the basic structures until you know them so well you don't have to stick to them anymore. THEN you can branch out.
I really enjoy reading and watching terrible examples of any art form. I love terrible fiction. To me, it makes transparent those elements that our most adored artists can mask in good story-telling, character or just plain style. I don't think anything has helped me understand the functions of story as much as watching someone fail spectacularly at it. In part, I feel like an asshole for this. However, I also feel like the works I put under this umbrella are seldom up for debate. I'm not talking about Bret Easton Ellis last novel, I'm talking about the poetry of Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings.
You have a point, sure - but bad writing is best demonstrated through selected examples, as opposed to you know. Getting it in the wild.
I mean, the purpose isn't to only read crap. But once you finish Ulysses, I think it's time for a break. Google "fan fiction" and relax a little. Part of the appeal is that people like Joyce and Pynchon will have toiled over their work to make the pieces fit, to make this improbable universe feel natural. Which can be a wonderful teacher. But for me, it helps to then look at pieces where it absolutely fails to come off. Then I can compare where things are going.
And, since I mentioned Pynchon, I am wondering if anyone has read Slow Learner. I got excited by the premise of the book and had been a fan of the stories collected in it (especially "Entropy") but I was disappointed to see how general the introduction was. With him, I was expecting almost a parsing of entire sections but was instead giving these sweeping complaints he had.
I've been on a reading about writing kick lately and I was wondering if anyone had a book like the one I was hoping to get out of Slow Learner. A book where someone presents their own stuff and, years later, goes through to explain what is going on and how they feel it worked or didn't.
Read though. I am amazed by the number of writers who have never read anything. They're the ones who usually go on the kick that writing has no rules. Maybe there's no guidelines to what makes a story work, but there's a LOT of things that can make it suck.
She is unarguably, the finest short story writer of this century (and the last)
You can't argue with that.
And now, for the links:
Writing Well - Installment One
Writing Well - Installment Two
Writing Well - Installment Three
Writing Well - Installment Four
Writing Well - Installment Five
Writing Well - Installment Six
Now the challenge - give up? Or use it to get better. hmmm...
twit feed
twit feed
I think what Munacra means here is "do the latter, later". It's the only explanation :lol:
Brilliant post, Grid. Simmons certainly hits home the fact that a lot of budding authors are blatantly aware of the "ground rules" but find it inceasingly hard to actually follow them...
I could argue with it.
I won't because I love her.
Please read Wise Blood.
I think Ernest Hemingway gives her a run for that title, but anyways, I always recommend that story, for some reason I find the Misfit one of the most fascinating characters in literature.
I guess they want to see the best .
Well, I think I figured out endings. So, make your endings as clear and complete as possible, but don't moralize and shove your interpretation of the story on your readers. Ambigous endings are a big no-no, but let your readers draw their own conclusions.
Your story ultimately is half yours half theirs. Don't take their part away at the end and leave them with a bitter taste.
Clear endings but let the reader do their part.
Could someone explain that to me please .:?:
Now... to further display my ignorance... and perhaps complete my understanding... Is it ok to tell the reader's your character's inner thoughts, or let them get the idea by them selves.?
And still many question need answers :lol: ... But again it never too late to learn
Once again Thanks for your insight !
NEVER name the character in a video game after a character in a story you are writing. Doing so will drain all the life and personality out of the character in your story.
It's like creating a voodoo doll of your character and sticking a bunch of pins in it. Ignore this advice at your peril.
addendum: You can get away with this deal if you use like, asterisks at the end of something and explain it later in footnotes. I don't know if it adds anything, but it's a funny idea.
oh yeah, and writing advice is often conflicting.
However, sometimes you need to use a sense phrase because it sounds better to the ear and adds variety. Use your judgment. But I suggest using them sparingly.
“Violent and visceral…beautiful and eroticâ€--David Moody
Ex
Chekhov (JOY)
IT was twelve o'clock at night.
[Mitya Kuldarov,with excited face and ruffled hair, flew into his parents' flat..... ]
Now, I have no problem with writing a novel, but in asking some readers their oppinions (5 between the ages of 20 and 45) I recieved one continual comment which was at times extremely positive, and at other times devastatingly negative. It consisted of the following:
"you use big words".
I can't help but wonder whether it is a good or bad thing to use longer words. My spoken vocabulary is uncannily similar to my writing vocabulary, and I have recieved like comments about the way I speak, verifying that it may be confusing at times. So please, tell me:
Is it a bad thing to use lengthy words?
My advice would be to write it in the same style that you have been writing it in. In revision, using a more distanced eye, you can decide whether or not to rephrase it.
Surely what you really mean here is, "It is pretty long, and I still have a lot left to write." Talking about "mass proportions" is just silly and confusing. If that's the sort of thing you do a lot in the story, you're going to want to stop.
The purpose of building a larger vocabulary is not so you know long words with which to dazzle your readers, but so you always know what words to use to create the image clearly, crisply and with the minimum of wank.