A few weeks ago I happened to discover a blog by a former editorial assistant, now editor --Editorial Ass. It provides much entertainment and actually helped me conquer my anxiety about deadlines and revisions etc. And because we operate in slightly different areas of publishing, I do not share the same views on the necessity of agents. But I digress.
She happened to highlight a lovely essay on writing -- Annie Dillard and the Writing Life by Alexander Chee. It is well worth reading and will hopefully inspire people to write better or to think about how they write and why. It is about the possible rather than the impossible.
The bit about active verbs reminded me as ever of Strunk and White. But I would humbly suggest that there is a world difference between stroll, saunter and walk with painful slowness, measuring each step against the last. Sometimes adverbs are a necessary part of the English language. Precision in language can be a good thing when not taken to extremes and ten dollar words.
I am thus planning on putting in a few good hours on my revisions and truly thinking about them and the way they need to be handled. Do I really want to count verbs on the page though?
Showing posts with label craft. Show all posts
Showing posts with label craft. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Sunday, October 04, 2009
Conflict is more than good v evil
Last night before bed, I happened to be reading Robert McKee's Story and turned to the nature of conflict. It resonated with me.
In it he points out that a choice between good and evil is not really a choice and does not create sustainable interesting conflict. The audience will know which choice the protagonist will make and the story become predictable. True conflict comes when it is a choice between two goods that the protagonist wants or the lesser of two evils. So it is not a straight +/-
Equally, vacillating between two polar opposites becomes tiresome. Basically because the audience feels that all they have to do is wait a bit and it will be reversed.
Choices need to be irrevocable. Once an action is taken, the opportunity has gone. And will not return without a lot of heart ache and hard work, if the protagonist made the wrong choice to begin with.
So conflict happens when the protagonist is forced to make a choice. Protagonists have to be put under pressure. It is about more than simply yearning for something. When the black moment happens, the world must have changed so much that giving up and going back to the old life is not an option. You sometimes need to ask -- what are the consequences and why would my hero or heroine react in this manner? What are they giving up and what are they achieving? What do they think they will achieve and why is that different?
With writing, it is also about going back and polishing craft. You think you know something and then you discover in fact you have fallen back into old patterns as it is easier. And I do need consistently to think about the nature of conflict.
In it he points out that a choice between good and evil is not really a choice and does not create sustainable interesting conflict. The audience will know which choice the protagonist will make and the story become predictable. True conflict comes when it is a choice between two goods that the protagonist wants or the lesser of two evils. So it is not a straight +/-
Equally, vacillating between two polar opposites becomes tiresome. Basically because the audience feels that all they have to do is wait a bit and it will be reversed.
Choices need to be irrevocable. Once an action is taken, the opportunity has gone. And will not return without a lot of heart ache and hard work, if the protagonist made the wrong choice to begin with.
So conflict happens when the protagonist is forced to make a choice. Protagonists have to be put under pressure. It is about more than simply yearning for something. When the black moment happens, the world must have changed so much that giving up and going back to the old life is not an option. You sometimes need to ask -- what are the consequences and why would my hero or heroine react in this manner? What are they giving up and what are they achieving? What do they think they will achieve and why is that different?
With writing, it is also about going back and polishing craft. You think you know something and then you discover in fact you have fallen back into old patterns as it is easier. And I do need consistently to think about the nature of conflict.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
More books on writing
The first I blame Trish -- this is the Michael Hauge book on Selling Your Story in 60 Seconds. He sounded interesting and I thought it would be intriguing to learn. It does not matter -- a writer always has to be able to describe her story quickly.
I have purchased two new books on writing.
The other was because his other book was unavailable at Amazon.co.uk. So I finally broke down and bought Dwight Swain's Techniques of the Selling Writer. It was first published in 1965 and I believe I read it as a teenager. It is one of The Bibles of fiction writing. Dixon and Maass both mention it. I had a quick look at the opening chapter. he has wonderful reposites for people who think that stories are simply formulas and can be done by computer or people who think that craft needs no honing. To my amusement, he used the example of a fictional writer of love pulp --Mable Hope Harley -- who had been writing for thirty years and who declared to the young writer that as she had learnt everything by simply reading, there was no need for craft to be taught. Swain disagrees -- in order to be able to pick up things up from reading, one must first know what one is looking for. One also has to know why certain rules came into being in the first place. For example, the HEA comes because the vast majority of readers prefer it and therefore the potential market on average is much larger. With romance, the readers demand it. In other words, he believes as McKee does, as do so many writers and teachers of craft that it is the mastery of craft that is important. The understanding of the why.
Swain is big on scene and sequel, but the way he is using the term sequel, it is not exactly how some people define it.
Anyway, it shall be interesting.
I also have restarted my Regency Part 1 as my deadline is beginning to loom.
Monday, July 23, 2007
HEA -- a requirement
One of the periodic issues that raises its head is the Happily Ever After and why a romance has to have one.
It always amazes me. People don't want an emotionally satisfying ending? They don't want the major plot arc resolved?
If all that happens in your book is that the people take up the threads of their ordinary life at the end, it does not work. It is the sort of -- it was all a dream. Characters need to grow and change.
Because Romance belongs to the archplot category of genres, it does mean at the end of a story, all major threads should be tied up. In particular the spine of the story must be resolved. Time has shown that a greater percentage of the audience prefer a happy ever after.
Think of this another way -- would a crime novel be enjoyable if the killer was never caught, and the mystery went unsolved?
This is not a rule but a very important part of the form that has to be mastered. If a writer does not want to master this form, they are free to write in another genre. And there are other genres -- for example sagas where the romance is secondary and the spine of the book is held by the character's growth.
But if a writer DOES want to use the highly successful romance format, they do have to adhere to its most basic form.
The emotional satisfaction that readers get at the end is why people read romance. They want that buzz.
The real trick is to create a situation which gives the reader a white knuckle ride.She is positive until that last climatic scene that the principals won't get together. She wants that. And the writer should never cheat the reader. Well not if she wants her readers to come back for more.
For my part, I write historical ROMANCE and that means an emotionally satisfying ending with threads tied up.
It always amazes me. People don't want an emotionally satisfying ending? They don't want the major plot arc resolved?
If all that happens in your book is that the people take up the threads of their ordinary life at the end, it does not work. It is the sort of -- it was all a dream. Characters need to grow and change.
Because Romance belongs to the archplot category of genres, it does mean at the end of a story, all major threads should be tied up. In particular the spine of the story must be resolved. Time has shown that a greater percentage of the audience prefer a happy ever after.
Think of this another way -- would a crime novel be enjoyable if the killer was never caught, and the mystery went unsolved?
This is not a rule but a very important part of the form that has to be mastered. If a writer does not want to master this form, they are free to write in another genre. And there are other genres -- for example sagas where the romance is secondary and the spine of the book is held by the character's growth.
But if a writer DOES want to use the highly successful romance format, they do have to adhere to its most basic form.
The emotional satisfaction that readers get at the end is why people read romance. They want that buzz.
The real trick is to create a situation which gives the reader a white knuckle ride.She is positive until that last climatic scene that the principals won't get together. She wants that. And the writer should never cheat the reader. Well not if she wants her readers to come back for more.
For my part, I write historical ROMANCE and that means an emotionally satisfying ending with threads tied up.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Deciphering McKee's Story
Trish Wylie asked me very politely if I could tell her why McKee's Story was great or if I had some pointers. In other words - -why do I keep it on my bedside table? Why do I reccomend it? It is a large book and if it just overs the same goround....
So I am going to do a small series on some of the more important points in McKee's book. These may not be everyone's but they are mine. Hopefully it will convince some to pick uip this book or at least to ponder his ideas.
What i am talk about today is Powers and talents. It is a short but I think hugely important part of the book. It actually gets to the nub of the craft of Story.
According to McKee and I have no reason to doubt him, there are two types of talent in story writing.
First is Literary talent. This talent uses words and is the putting together of words to form images. It is a common talent. A lot of people can produce wonderfully descriptive writing. But literary talent does not necessarily lead any where. A description of a sunset stays a description of a sunset. There is no movement. The base material of literary talent is words.
Story telling talent is much rarer. It is the ability to hold an audience, to tell a story in such a fashion that the audience is transfixed. It is what causes the pages to be turned. WIth storytelling talent, even the most mundane can be exciting. The base material for story talent is life.
Commercial publishers buy story telling talent. They want page turning reads that people come back to time and again.
The desire to relate an incident in an intersting manner shows that you have some sort of story telling talent.
It is the combination of the two talents that results in a truly great writer.
Talent can not be taught, but it can be control by the learning and studying craft. You do not need to have studied craft to produce a publishable book, but if you want to stay published over the long term, you need to klearn how to control your talent. You need to learn the why behind the rules. You need to master forms and not formula. It also makes it much easier when editors come back and say -- this is wrong with your novel. With the knowledge of craft, you can see how to rewrite and make better, rater than flapping around in the dark and hoping. Craft is what allows the writer to control her environment, rather than having her environment control her.
Because I apt to have attacks of the crows of doubt. Or simply to forget. Rereading the passages where he says these things makes me feel better. It gives me the breathing space I need. It means that I don't have to get things right the first time, because I know I have learnt the craft tools to get it right when it dfoesn't work.
In other news: the Late Night Praty ducks have discovered the compost heap. where they hide. Then as I return from locking the other ducks in the duck house, one quacks, very loudly, making me jump. The LNPD then rush across the bridge. They consider this a good game. Particularly as we then play round and round the duck house and the other ducks come out and join in the fun. I find it less amusing.
Friday, April 20, 2007
Debra Dixon: Goal, Motivation Conflict
Almost since the time I started to get serious about my writing and read the e-harlequin boards, I have heard about Debra Dixon and how wonderful her book, Goal Motivation and Conflict is. HOWEVER, if you go on Amazon, it appears to be out of print and only available at an extortionate price. How could such a highly rated book be out of print I wondered? The truth is -- it isn't. You can order it from the publisher Gryphon Books for Writers for $19.95 plus postage and handling. It works out $26.30 or 13.15 British pounds if sent sea mail.
Is it worth it? Now, this is a hard question to answer. Dixon is certainly very good, and easy to follow. She made me think about my current wip. BUT most of what she is saying is not new. It is in most other books about writing. What is new is the way in which she presents the material.
I also wonder if many would be published authors get little bits of her work and read it as gospel. For example the bit about not having misunderstandings. Misunderstandings are fine, if you can see the motivation behind them. There are many reasons WHY people can not simply sit down and talk about things. Or if they tried to sit and talk, they would lie. Easily cleared up misunderstandings are not good, but misunderstandings that play to the heart of the internal conflicts are. Some people appear to go for the broad brush approach. The devil, however, I am pleased to say is in the detail. Dixon is describing what works for her. She does not say that it has to work for everyone. She talks a great deal about rules, but makes the point that understanding the motivation behind the rules is more important than the rules themselves.
Dixon makes the point about degrees of conflict. How heavy do you want to get in your motivation? If the conflict is too heavy, it can sink the story because the HEA is in doubt. One way around is to move out a degree. Dixon uses the example of heavy v light with a hero who wants a large family and a heroine who can't have children. A lighter conflict is a hero who wants a large family and a heroine is bringing up five boys on her own and wants her freedom from parenting. Depending on the sort of story, you may want to increase or decrease the level of conflict. But however you write it, the conflict should be clearly defined.
This book is not a beginner's book. I would call it more an intermediate book. It is best aimed at those writers who struggle with plot and structure. It is very good for those people who want to learn more about the WHY. There is much to like in the book and any book that makes me think is a good book. It addresses a very specific problem -- namely goal, motivation and conflict.
Will I use it? It is another tool in my toolkit for trying to create the best wip possible. What Dixon says is not new or revolutionary. But the way she says it, may appeal to some people. It is easy to understand. The examples are straight forward ( even if I don't agree with all of them). She uses film rather than books.
I would certainly not pay the crazy price on Amazon for it. Go directly to the publisher. If you like writing craft books, it probably worth reading, just to see what the fuss is about.
I had to laugh at the list of recommended books -- Linda Gooodman's Love Signs is there as a book that should be somewhere within your house. She also lists Vogler and Campbell. But I think the list incomplete and a bit facile. My list is somewhat different, but then that is fine. Different wirters work differently.
Is it worth it? Now, this is a hard question to answer. Dixon is certainly very good, and easy to follow. She made me think about my current wip. BUT most of what she is saying is not new. It is in most other books about writing. What is new is the way in which she presents the material.
I also wonder if many would be published authors get little bits of her work and read it as gospel. For example the bit about not having misunderstandings. Misunderstandings are fine, if you can see the motivation behind them. There are many reasons WHY people can not simply sit down and talk about things. Or if they tried to sit and talk, they would lie. Easily cleared up misunderstandings are not good, but misunderstandings that play to the heart of the internal conflicts are. Some people appear to go for the broad brush approach. The devil, however, I am pleased to say is in the detail. Dixon is describing what works for her. She does not say that it has to work for everyone. She talks a great deal about rules, but makes the point that understanding the motivation behind the rules is more important than the rules themselves.
Dixon makes the point about degrees of conflict. How heavy do you want to get in your motivation? If the conflict is too heavy, it can sink the story because the HEA is in doubt. One way around is to move out a degree. Dixon uses the example of heavy v light with a hero who wants a large family and a heroine who can't have children. A lighter conflict is a hero who wants a large family and a heroine is bringing up five boys on her own and wants her freedom from parenting. Depending on the sort of story, you may want to increase or decrease the level of conflict. But however you write it, the conflict should be clearly defined.
This book is not a beginner's book. I would call it more an intermediate book. It is best aimed at those writers who struggle with plot and structure. It is very good for those people who want to learn more about the WHY. There is much to like in the book and any book that makes me think is a good book. It addresses a very specific problem -- namely goal, motivation and conflict.
Will I use it? It is another tool in my toolkit for trying to create the best wip possible. What Dixon says is not new or revolutionary. But the way she says it, may appeal to some people. It is easy to understand. The examples are straight forward ( even if I don't agree with all of them). She uses film rather than books.
I would certainly not pay the crazy price on Amazon for it. Go directly to the publisher. If you like writing craft books, it probably worth reading, just to see what the fuss is about.
I had to laugh at the list of recommended books -- Linda Gooodman's Love Signs is there as a book that should be somewhere within your house. She also lists Vogler and Campbell. But I think the list incomplete and a bit facile. My list is somewhat different, but then that is fine. Different wirters work differently.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)