FA+
Shop
1121
Views
Views
46
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Story / Tutorials
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 120 x 120
File Size 24.8 kB
Report this content
More from OokamKasumi
Listed in Folders
Story Writing for BEGINNERSOriginal Message
I want to write a story. I have a couple of ideas, but no idea what to do with them, or even how to begin! Help?!
-- Newbie Writer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So when you wanna write a story, where do you begin? With your PASSION!
Write what you KNOW & LOVE
~~~~~~~~~~~~~What do you KNOW, really? What do you love to Do, to Study, to Think About, to Talk About...? Whether it's cave-diving, model trains, skate-boarding, sewing, horses, mythology, ghost legends, or particle physics your passion is where you will find your most unique and powerful work.
Make a list of all the things you know well and all the things you've done -- seriously! Mythology, history, any retail jobs you might have had -- anything you might have seen, done, or studied.
Sticking with your passions and your personal experiences also keeps you from making the fewest MISTAKES.
Case in point, someone who has never kissed isn't going to be able to write a kissing scene as well as someone who Has. Worst of all, someone with experience will know IMMEDIATELY when the writer doesn't know what they're talking about. Once that happens, they're closing your story -- never to look at it again.
If you insist on writing about something outside of your personal experience, do your RESEARCH thoroughly. Google.com & Wikipedia.com are your friends!
Next?
KNOW your Characters and the World they live in THOROUGHLY
~~~~~~~~~~~~If you're writing fan-fiction, RESEARCH is your friend!
www.Google.com can be extremely helpful, but www.Wikipedia.com can be your best bet. Wiki has a listing for just about every manga, game, and anime you can think of complete with character lists and bios. If you need a map, that's where Google comes in. More often than not, you can find one of your particular world on somebody's website somewhere.
If you're writing an Original story, you have a LOT more work to do.
Character Creation 101
~~~~~~~~~~~~The easiest way to make an original character is by modeling your character on one you already know.
Out of all the movies you have seen, what fictional character is most like what you need for your story? You want a movie or animated character because you need to PICTURE your character as they move through your stories. This is ESSENTIAL for Active Writing.
Favorite characters I like to use:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
- Trinity from the Matrix
- Keiffer Sutherland from the Lost Boys & 24
- Robert Carlyle from Ravenous and Plunkett & McLean
- Wolverine from the X-Men
- Sandra Bullock from Miss Congeniality and Speed
- Johnnie Depp from Sleepy Hollow and Sweeny Todd
- Selene from Underworld
- Riddick from Pitch Black
The trick is to change their names and appearance enough to disguise them while leaving their base character traits -- and dialogue style -- intact!
"Wait! Isn't using someone else's characters' Plagiarism?"
-- Only if the character still has the Same Name and the Same Physical Description. Change those and it's not. Think! If no one ever borrowed characters, there'd only be ONE vampire novel in existence--and it wouldn't be "Dracula".
You should have THREE Main Characters to tell a whole story:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Proponent (Hero): The one trying to Keep things the way they are.
Antagonist (Villain): The one trying to Change things from the way they are.
Ally (buddy or lover): The one caught in the Middle, and usually telling the story.
Original Message
"But what if I only want to use two characters?"
Then use only Two:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Proponent (Hero): The one trying to Keep things the way they are.
Antagonist (Villain): The one trying to Change things from the way they are.
However, using only Two main characters will make it harder to tell the whole thing. Don't be surprised if a Third character sneaks their way in to help you!
WORLD BUILDING 101
~~~~~~~~~~~~Okay now that you have your Characters, you need to make a world to put them in.
The easiest place to put your characters is a place you already know. For all other places, there's RESEARCH. Google.com is invaluable for finding pictures of places you've never been and journals posted by people living there. Find them and READ them.
If you're building a fantasy world, a historical world, or a sci-fi world for your first story, CHEATING is your best option.
There are a million and one Gaming Books and Gaming Sites featuring all kinds of historical, fantastical, and scientific data it would take you YEARS to uncover. Just make sure you separate Fact from Fiction! And for God's sake, CHANGE what you Can! You don't need people screaming at you for copyright violation.
If you're determined to build your world from scratch, then here is the absolute best guide on world building there is:
Patricia C. Wrede's Worldbuilder Questions
http://www.larseighner.com/world_bu.....der/index.html
Making your story HAPPEN!
PLOTTING 101
~~~~~~~~~~~~Rather than make this complicated, let's go the simple route. Once you have all three (or two) characters, ask each one these Three Questions:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
• Who am I and what do I do?
• What do I want?
• What is the worst thing that could happen to me?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Once you know the answers to all of these questions, you pretty much have your whole story.
• "Who am I and what do I do?" is your introduction.
• "What do I want?" is what puts your characters in opposition. Your hero has a Goal. Your Villain doesn't want them to have it because it gets in the way of their Goal.
• Your main character's 'Worst Thing' is the REVERSAL to your story dead center in the Middle.
• The Villain's 'Worst Thing' is the main CLIMAX close to the end. It's the turning point that allows your Main Character to win. The End.
Simple, ne?
So where do you begin Writing?
~~~~~~~~~~~~NOT at the beginning!
Open the story within one page of Hero meets Villain, (or Lover meets Beloved) with the story already in progress. Action scenes and snappy dialogue are the best hooks for snaring your reader, but hints of Mysterious things yet to happen works well too. I also set the stage for the story about to begin with a few lines of Description so that the reader can SEE everything as it happens.
The trick to not boring them is: Don't Tell them ANYTHING! Give broad hints, but don't Info-dump. Use Dialogue to hint at clues to the secondary character’s back-story. This way you make the reader an eavesdropper who MUST read on to find out, "What the heck is going on?"
The easiest way to keep your reader from figuring out what's going on -- and how your story will end -- is by telling the whole story from One POV (point of view.) MAKE the reader discover from INSIDE your main character why this vampire hunted this particular guy down, and why he isn’t running in screaming terror. MAKE your readers put two and two together and try to come up with the right answer.
Tricks to keeping your story SHORT!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Keep the number of characters to a Minimum!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The larger the cast -- the longer the story.
This is because each and every character you use must have their story problem FIXED by the end of the story. If you don't, you create a PLOT HOLE that your readers WILL notice, and call you on.
Keep the Point of your story firmly in mind.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What are you trying to Show with your story?
Love Conquers All
Greed makes one Greedier
Love = Insanity
Love doesn't always mean Happiness
Love isn't always Nice
You Reap what you Sow
Destiny is a Bitch
You can't escape Yourself
A Snake will always be a Snake
Sometimes, Love means Letting Go
Sometimes, Love means Giving In
Appetites will find a way to be Filled
Revenge only brings Misery
In short, know what you want to say and how you intend to END the story before you begin!
Only put in what you intend to USE.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If it doesn't affect the Plot, the Characters or the Point of your story, you don't need it.
This includes Description.
In a short story, everything is pared down to the minimum, so you only need to describe the characters your character directly interacts with, and their immediate surroundings, no more, but no less either. You want to make sure that your Reader can SEE what's happening, but you don't need to go into detail about every babbling brook and tree.
Once you've finished your story, Read it OUT LOUD to yourself.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This will allow you to catch most of your mistakes before anyone else sees them.
• If you have to stop to take a breath before you finish a sentence -- the sentence is Too Long.
• If you have to read a line twice to figure out what you just said, so will your Readers. Any time you have to reread anything, something is WRONG.
• If you find your attention drifting from the story you are reading out loud -- so will your Readers.
• If you find yourself skipping parts to get to better parts -- so will your readers.
• If YOU don't find what you're reading interesting enough to keep reading, neither will your Readers.
In Conclusion...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Writing a story isn't all that hard or even complicated. It's what you put into your story that makes it complicated -- and uniquely yours.
Enjoy!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DISCLAIMER: As with all advice, take what you can use and throw out the rest. As a multi-published author, I have been taught some fairly rigid rules on what is publishable and what is not. If my rather straight-laced (and occasionally snotty,) advice does not suit your creative style, by all means, IGNORE IT.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ookami Kasumi
http://ookami-kasumi.livejournal.com/
Category Story / Tutorials
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 120 x 120px
File Size 24.8 kB
Listed in Folders
*Blink. Blinka blink.*
I wouldn't push formality onto people just beginning. Beginners need to explore and develop their methodology. And reccomending they lean on crutches like renaming established characters is just... irresponsible. And starting out on worldbuilding isn't that difficult or scary - you dream up a little piece as you need it, dream up the next little piece for the next little scene. Sure, it's not going to come out perfect, but you don't start out perfect.
I wouldn't push formality onto people just beginning. Beginners need to explore and develop their methodology. And reccomending they lean on crutches like renaming established characters is just... irresponsible. And starting out on worldbuilding isn't that difficult or scary - you dream up a little piece as you need it, dream up the next little piece for the next little scene. Sure, it's not going to come out perfect, but you don't start out perfect.
"I wouldn't push formality onto people just beginning."
I do because Bad writing habits are very difficult to break once they've become ingrained. One should KNOW the rules before one breaks them.
"...recommending they lean on crutches like renaming established characters is just... irresponsible."
ROFLMAO! Irresponsible in what way? Building from established characters, also known as ARCHETYPES, is a VERY common writing exercise used in just about every fiction-writing class I've attended -- those hosted by established Authors anyway.
"And starting out on worldbuilding isn't that difficult or scary - you dream up a little piece as you need it, dream up the next little piece for the next little scene."
And hope to God that no one knows your source material (medieval history or science and technology,) better than you do because if they do, you're begging for finger-pointing if not hate-mail.
Perhaps you should take a good look at THIS little article:
On Thud & Blunder by Poul Anderson
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&.....IAG7eEA&sig2=wnupAMOBd_gY5v74P-wl2w
"Sure, it's not going to come out perfect, but you don't start out perfect."
That doesn't mean you shouldn't at least TRY to do the best you can. Good Enough shouldn't be a goal -- it should be the bar you strive to Pass.
I do because Bad writing habits are very difficult to break once they've become ingrained. One should KNOW the rules before one breaks them.
"...recommending they lean on crutches like renaming established characters is just... irresponsible."
ROFLMAO! Irresponsible in what way? Building from established characters, also known as ARCHETYPES, is a VERY common writing exercise used in just about every fiction-writing class I've attended -- those hosted by established Authors anyway.
"And starting out on worldbuilding isn't that difficult or scary - you dream up a little piece as you need it, dream up the next little piece for the next little scene."
And hope to God that no one knows your source material (medieval history or science and technology,) better than you do because if they do, you're begging for finger-pointing if not hate-mail.
Perhaps you should take a good look at THIS little article:
On Thud & Blunder by Poul Anderson
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&.....IAG7eEA&si
"Sure, it's not going to come out perfect, but you don't start out perfect."
That doesn't mean you shouldn't at least TRY to do the best you can. Good Enough shouldn't be a goal -- it should be the bar you strive to Pass.
One should KNOW the rules before one breaks them.
These aren't the rules. The rules are in Strunk and White, in any good guide on grammar.
ROFLMAO! Irresponsible in what way? Building from established characters, also known as ARCHETYPES, is a VERY common writing exercise used in just about every fiction-writing class I've attended -- those hosted by established Authors anyway.
Irresponsible in the sense that this won't teach them the archetypes, it will teach them how to ape. Archetypes are part of a cultural classification on commonalities between characters, not some kind of mechanism to bootstrap people into writing more effectively. If you start with archetypes, you'll find they are easy to abuse, easy to fall into cliche with. They're to be applied after the fact, while trying to catagorize something written or planned, in my view. You start out with them, you get cookie cutter characters.
And hope to God that no one knows your source material (medieval history or science and technology,) better than you do because if they do, you're begging for finger-pointing if not hate-mail.
That's part of beginning. If you want write to a given source material, research it. If you screw it up, research it more. You don't start people out by saying 'Here's your Herodutus, get through this before writing your ancient Greek styled myth.' You get them to write their stories, find their flaws in their own work, teach them to improve their work by themselves. Mistakes are part of it.
That doesn't mean you shouldn't at least TRY to do the best you can. Good Enough shouldn't be a goal -- it should be the bar you strive to Pass.
This looks admirable on first blush. But that's part of the continuing personal development of a writer. To start with you need to learn how to start writing something, and even if you can see you're going wrong, you need to learn how to finish it. And I've never met anyone who won't abandon something that they feel is going wrong at every turn.
Ten thousand 'well I'm not working up to the best of my capacity' stories that go unfinished because it's not their best are not worth one 'I think I made some gigantic mistakes, but I finished' story. That gigantic mistakes story, that's actually finished? That's the important milestone.
Getting it perfect, or working at your best? That's fun. But you need to work when you're completely off kilter and finish up even when every word feels like a lead weight. I, personally, would not have been able to learn to do that if I took 'it must be great' as my prime objective. That comes later.
These aren't the rules. The rules are in Strunk and White, in any good guide on grammar.
ROFLMAO! Irresponsible in what way? Building from established characters, also known as ARCHETYPES, is a VERY common writing exercise used in just about every fiction-writing class I've attended -- those hosted by established Authors anyway.
Irresponsible in the sense that this won't teach them the archetypes, it will teach them how to ape. Archetypes are part of a cultural classification on commonalities between characters, not some kind of mechanism to bootstrap people into writing more effectively. If you start with archetypes, you'll find they are easy to abuse, easy to fall into cliche with. They're to be applied after the fact, while trying to catagorize something written or planned, in my view. You start out with them, you get cookie cutter characters.
And hope to God that no one knows your source material (medieval history or science and technology,) better than you do because if they do, you're begging for finger-pointing if not hate-mail.
That's part of beginning. If you want write to a given source material, research it. If you screw it up, research it more. You don't start people out by saying 'Here's your Herodutus, get through this before writing your ancient Greek styled myth.' You get them to write their stories, find their flaws in their own work, teach them to improve their work by themselves. Mistakes are part of it.
That doesn't mean you shouldn't at least TRY to do the best you can. Good Enough shouldn't be a goal -- it should be the bar you strive to Pass.
This looks admirable on first blush. But that's part of the continuing personal development of a writer. To start with you need to learn how to start writing something, and even if you can see you're going wrong, you need to learn how to finish it. And I've never met anyone who won't abandon something that they feel is going wrong at every turn.
Ten thousand 'well I'm not working up to the best of my capacity' stories that go unfinished because it's not their best are not worth one 'I think I made some gigantic mistakes, but I finished' story. That gigantic mistakes story, that's actually finished? That's the important milestone.
Getting it perfect, or working at your best? That's fun. But you need to work when you're completely off kilter and finish up even when every word feels like a lead weight. I, personally, would not have been able to learn to do that if I took 'it must be great' as my prime objective. That comes later.
Apparently you're one of those that thinks a writer should learn everything the hard way.
I'm not because I Didn't enjoy learning everything the hard way one little bit.
If you don't like my advice then IGNORE IT because I won't stop writing my little short-cuts and cheats for those who do want them. Whether you like them or not, they Work. I have the four publishers and over 25 published books to prove it.
How about you?
I'm not because I Didn't enjoy learning everything the hard way one little bit.
If you don't like my advice then IGNORE IT because I won't stop writing my little short-cuts and cheats for those who do want them. Whether you like them or not, they Work. I have the four publishers and over 25 published books to prove it.
How about you?
Apparently you're one of those that thinks a writer should learn everything the hard way.
I'm not because I Didn't enjoy learning everything the hard way one little bit.
I love my art, I bleed for it. Generations have done the same. There is no 'easy' way to get ahead in this game, and the sooner people learn that the better. One day you hit a wall and it is big and frightening because you never realized there would be one, frequently you run away.
If you don't like my advice then IGNORE IT because I won't stop writing my little short-cuts and cheats for those who do want them.
Okay, just so long as people don't assume it's all cheats and short-cuts and end up unable to write anything without a cheat or shortcut.
Whether you like them or not, they Work. I have the four publishers and over 25 published books to prove it.
... This is called the 'I am a serious author so RESPECT ME!' card. It is basically something I really, truly hate. Why can't I just judge you on the works I find here? Do I have to hear four publishers and over twenty-five published books and immediately agree that your opinions are correct? A lot of trash gets published these days, just go digging in the Licensed Fiction or Harlequins or Young Adults. Of course there are a lot of real gems of literature in these things too, but there is also a lot of garbage too. There's a lot of garbage everywhere.
How about you?
I prefer to be judged based on what I say, but my stuff sells if I try and sell it, sure.
I'm not because I Didn't enjoy learning everything the hard way one little bit.
I love my art, I bleed for it. Generations have done the same. There is no 'easy' way to get ahead in this game, and the sooner people learn that the better. One day you hit a wall and it is big and frightening because you never realized there would be one, frequently you run away.
If you don't like my advice then IGNORE IT because I won't stop writing my little short-cuts and cheats for those who do want them.
Okay, just so long as people don't assume it's all cheats and short-cuts and end up unable to write anything without a cheat or shortcut.
Whether you like them or not, they Work. I have the four publishers and over 25 published books to prove it.
... This is called the 'I am a serious author so RESPECT ME!' card. It is basically something I really, truly hate. Why can't I just judge you on the works I find here? Do I have to hear four publishers and over twenty-five published books and immediately agree that your opinions are correct? A lot of trash gets published these days, just go digging in the Licensed Fiction or Harlequins or Young Adults. Of course there are a lot of real gems of literature in these things too, but there is also a lot of garbage too. There's a lot of garbage everywhere.
How about you?
I prefer to be judged based on what I say, but my stuff sells if I try and sell it, sure.
"Why can't I just judge you on the works I find here?"
Because judging me by what is posted here will only lead you to Assumptions.
I will not post Everything I know or have written about writing here because it doesn't apply. These people are not trying to publish books, they just want a few tips to help their stories along.
By telling you that I'm an author, I'm trying to let you know that I am not a bullshit artist. I mean what I say and I have proof that it works. I'm not trying to hurt the writers here, I'm trying to help those who want it.
If you don't like the way I'm helping them, write your own writing articles.
"I prefer to be judged based on what I say, but my stuff sells if I try and sell it, sure."
I prefer to judge people by what they DO. Mouths lie -- actions & results don't.
Because judging me by what is posted here will only lead you to Assumptions.
I will not post Everything I know or have written about writing here because it doesn't apply. These people are not trying to publish books, they just want a few tips to help their stories along.
By telling you that I'm an author, I'm trying to let you know that I am not a bullshit artist. I mean what I say and I have proof that it works. I'm not trying to hurt the writers here, I'm trying to help those who want it.
If you don't like the way I'm helping them, write your own writing articles.
"I prefer to be judged based on what I say, but my stuff sells if I try and sell it, sure."
I prefer to judge people by what they DO. Mouths lie -- actions & results don't.
Because judging me by what is posted here will only lead you to Assumptions.
So what do I base my assessment of your person on?
These people are not trying to publish books, they just want a few tips to help their stories along.
Okay, but your tone is really, uhhh... authorative. Given that you're aiming to write for newbs, you do realize they're liable to take you - at least initially - as the One True Face Of God Whom Wrought The One True Word From The Firmament? Don't break their gentle minds by making them think there's only one way to do anything.
By telling you that I'm an author, I'm trying to let you know that I am not a bullshit artist. I mean what I say and I have proof that it works. I'm not trying to hurt the writers here, I'm trying to help those who want it.
If you don't like the way I'm helping them, write your own writing articles.
Of course you're not, but I think you are probably going to help them develop some bad habits. And, uhh. Yeah. I've been doing that for awhile now.
I prefer to judge people by what they DO. Mouths lie -- actions & results don't.
Good point and I stand corrected. I would however note that this is the internet - pretty much the only actions available to us are saying stuff.
So what do I base my assessment of your person on?
These people are not trying to publish books, they just want a few tips to help their stories along.
Okay, but your tone is really, uhhh... authorative. Given that you're aiming to write for newbs, you do realize they're liable to take you - at least initially - as the One True Face Of God Whom Wrought The One True Word From The Firmament? Don't break their gentle minds by making them think there's only one way to do anything.
By telling you that I'm an author, I'm trying to let you know that I am not a bullshit artist. I mean what I say and I have proof that it works. I'm not trying to hurt the writers here, I'm trying to help those who want it.
If you don't like the way I'm helping them, write your own writing articles.
Of course you're not, but I think you are probably going to help them develop some bad habits. And, uhh. Yeah. I've been doing that for awhile now.
I prefer to judge people by what they DO. Mouths lie -- actions & results don't.
Good point and I stand corrected. I would however note that this is the internet - pretty much the only actions available to us are saying stuff.
i dont think that's really much of a crutch at all, more of a scaffold. One of of the things beginner writers easily get wrong is they do not give the characters enough persoanlity. They sorta assume everyone would act like themselves in some way. Using already established characters is a good excersie writing about characters with personalities not like your own. It may seem kinda cheap, I agree, but only until you actually try to create characters from scratch and see yourself falling into the same cliched patterns as every other budding writer. Established characters have the advantage that they arent really stock characters, and not too chliched yet, yet they have something many people like.
Another idea is to use people you know as basis for characters, that works best for supporting characters, becaus,e while their personality might be realistic (almost per definition), they are prolly not particulary interesting as heroic character, unless of course your're trying to write a very realistic story.
The reason I like many of ookams tutorials is that she usually brings up things that most writers have to learn themselves, and that many tutorials usually avoid mentioning because it seems like "cheating", sometimes they can be a bit focused on getting a commerscial story over makinbg something genuinely funny and unique, thats why I liked the first tip in this tutorial very much...
Another idea is to use people you know as basis for characters, that works best for supporting characters, becaus,e while their personality might be realistic (almost per definition), they are prolly not particulary interesting as heroic character, unless of course your're trying to write a very realistic story.
The reason I like many of ookams tutorials is that she usually brings up things that most writers have to learn themselves, and that many tutorials usually avoid mentioning because it seems like "cheating", sometimes they can be a bit focused on getting a commerscial story over makinbg something genuinely funny and unique, thats why I liked the first tip in this tutorial very much...
"i dont think that's really much of a crutch at all, more of a scaffold."
That's EXACTLY what I was aiming at!
-- It's a lot tougher to disguise an established character than people think. You have to come up with good reasons why Your character acts the way That character does without using the same history.
"The reason I like many of ookami's tutorials is that she usually brings up things that most writers have to learn themselves..."
*Nod-nod* I had to learn most of this crap the hard way.
"...sometimes they can be a bit focused on getting a commercial story over making something genuinely funny and unique..."
Ouch, I apologize for that. I don't know all that much about Creative writing. I was educated by my publishing editors -- with large blunt objects.
"I liked the first tip in this tutorial very much..."
*Wince* Well, I'm glad you like something.
That's EXACTLY what I was aiming at!
-- It's a lot tougher to disguise an established character than people think. You have to come up with good reasons why Your character acts the way That character does without using the same history.
"The reason I like many of ookami's tutorials is that she usually brings up things that most writers have to learn themselves..."
*Nod-nod* I had to learn most of this crap the hard way.
"...sometimes they can be a bit focused on getting a commercial story over making something genuinely funny and unique..."
Ouch, I apologize for that. I don't know all that much about Creative writing. I was educated by my publishing editors -- with large blunt objects.
"I liked the first tip in this tutorial very much..."
*Wince* Well, I'm glad you like something.
You have to come up with good reasons why Your character acts the way That character does without using the same history.
Exactly why they should be coming up with fresh characters. Trying to wedge actions into some history is going to teach them bad habits, like trying to force their characters into doing X when what the character wants to do is Y. A writer needs to drop their preconceptions of what will and will not happen so they can be true to their work. It's easier to drop those misconceptions if they do not start with any.
Exactly why they should be coming up with fresh characters. Trying to wedge actions into some history is going to teach them bad habits, like trying to force their characters into doing X when what the character wants to do is Y. A writer needs to drop their preconceptions of what will and will not happen so they can be true to their work. It's easier to drop those misconceptions if they do not start with any.
"Exactly why they should be coming up with fresh characters. Trying to wedge actions into some history is going to teach them bad habits..."
Lemme guess, you're anti-fan-fiction, aren't you?
"A writer needs to drop their preconceptions of what will and will not happen so they can be true to their work."
That sounds to me like you're saying that a writer shouldn't even bother to Plot their story out, that they should write as the wind takes them and Hope it comes out right?
If my editor read this, she'd laugh her ass off.
-- In fact I think I will show her these. She could use a good laugh.
Lemme guess, you're anti-fan-fiction, aren't you?
"A writer needs to drop their preconceptions of what will and will not happen so they can be true to their work."
That sounds to me like you're saying that a writer shouldn't even bother to Plot their story out, that they should write as the wind takes them and Hope it comes out right?
If my editor read this, she'd laugh her ass off.
-- In fact I think I will show her these. She could use a good laugh.
Lemme guess, you're anti-fan-fiction, aren't you?
Can't stand the stuff. It's basically a cheap way of going 'HAY GUYS LOOK AT ME, I WROTE CHARACTERS YOU ALREADY LOVE! READ ME NAO!' as far as I'm concerned. Or, alternately, a sign they can't come up with their own material. The whole 'learning to write by another person's drum beat' is fine and a true virtue of fanfic, just not for me.
That sounds to me like you're saying that a writer shouldn't even bother to Plot their story out, that they should write as the wind takes them and Hope it comes out right?
That's how we all write. When you are working on your outline, your plan? You do not have the whole thing suddenly jump into your head out of nowhere, you have to work out what happens next. You need to do that based on what you want your story to be, not based on what a formula wants your story to be. You can write like that in small steps - using an outline - or really big intimidating steps where you will fall down and run into trouble - without using an outline. I like using a mix depending on what I'm working on, but I still make those small leaps into the unknown at some stage while working out what's going to happen.
If my editor read this, she'd laugh her ass off.
-- In fact I think I will show her these. She could use a good laugh.
Please do. Maybe she'll realize my incredible unmitigated genius descended directly from God on High and offer me a gigantic writing contract at five bucks a word! Or, maybe she'll laugh. Laughter's good for the soul. :3
Can't stand the stuff. It's basically a cheap way of going 'HAY GUYS LOOK AT ME, I WROTE CHARACTERS YOU ALREADY LOVE! READ ME NAO!' as far as I'm concerned. Or, alternately, a sign they can't come up with their own material. The whole 'learning to write by another person's drum beat' is fine and a true virtue of fanfic, just not for me.
That sounds to me like you're saying that a writer shouldn't even bother to Plot their story out, that they should write as the wind takes them and Hope it comes out right?
That's how we all write. When you are working on your outline, your plan? You do not have the whole thing suddenly jump into your head out of nowhere, you have to work out what happens next. You need to do that based on what you want your story to be, not based on what a formula wants your story to be. You can write like that in small steps - using an outline - or really big intimidating steps where you will fall down and run into trouble - without using an outline. I like using a mix depending on what I'm working on, but I still make those small leaps into the unknown at some stage while working out what's going to happen.
If my editor read this, she'd laugh her ass off.
-- In fact I think I will show her these. She could use a good laugh.
Please do. Maybe she'll realize my incredible unmitigated genius descended directly from God on High and offer me a gigantic writing contract at five bucks a word! Or, maybe she'll laugh. Laughter's good for the soul. :3
well, "creative" writing is usually not as creative as it might sound, personally I think having a good knowledge about storytelling conventions help, then you can freeky decde what tropes to use and which to ignore, insead of subcounsciously falling into tired ptterns. And the reason I liked the first tip, in spite of it being a bit cheesy and obvoius (first tips are usually that way, bringiing up the most basic rule or important detail) is that its kinda similar to my baseline tip when writing, "write the kind of story you yourself would like to read"
i dont think that's really much <Snipsnipsnip>chliched yet, yet they have something many people like.
Nope, crutch. You need to learn how characters work by digging into their minds and feelings and you cannot do this when you have a pattern to adhere to. You must not have a reference point that says 'oh, well character X will always do Y, because he/she is patterned off Luke Skywalker.' You need to work these things out in your own head. This is why I really, really dislike this 'make a fan-character' thing.
Another idea is to use people you know <snipsnipsnip> they are prolly not particulary interesting as heroic character, unless of course your're trying to write a very realistic story.
Write contemporary work, they'll fit in fine. The thing about using people you know is that it's, again, something with a reference point. So instead of trying to build up a complex picture of this person in their head, try and get a dialogue going with some part of their imagination, they lean. But. Neurologically you're going to learn how to do this more easily with other people. It's called 'theory of mind', and it's a whole other topic.
Nope, crutch. You need to learn how characters work by digging into their minds and feelings and you cannot do this when you have a pattern to adhere to. You must not have a reference point that says 'oh, well character X will always do Y, because he/she is patterned off Luke Skywalker.' You need to work these things out in your own head. This is why I really, really dislike this 'make a fan-character' thing.
Another idea is to use people you know <snipsnipsnip> they are prolly not particulary interesting as heroic character, unless of course your're trying to write a very realistic story.
Write contemporary work, they'll fit in fine. The thing about using people you know is that it's, again, something with a reference point. So instead of trying to build up a complex picture of this person in their head, try and get a dialogue going with some part of their imagination, they lean. But. Neurologically you're going to learn how to do this more easily with other people. It's called 'theory of mind', and it's a whole other topic.
Its not a patern, established characters are not just a pattern of "if X then Y" any more than normal people are. Think of it more like the first question, to ask "who thinks like this character?". I think you might notice similarities between our own way of thinking and an established character if you look hard enough. as Ookam said, you cant just take a characters personality into a different setting and a different backstory.
I usually make them from scratch myself, but if I'm feeling uninspired , I usually look for pictures and art. A lot of times you stumble upon a person in a picture or artwork and you get inspired to make up a personality around him/her.
but "should come up with new characters?", last time I checked, the main purpose of writing fiction was to tell a story, and make it entertaining. For many people, its easier to relate to a story when they recognize the personalities involved. That's why there are several "stock personalities" that are common enough in both fiction and real life to be recognizable. Find your favorite book and I'll bet you that among the supporting characters you'll find several stock personalities, and a few totally original. Like in real life, some people are just eccentrics, and those usually becomes the friends that makes our life interesting.
Point is, personalities similar to established characters are one step above stock personalitis and archetypes, you havent seen them a thousand times before, but yet you still recognize them a bit. If you shun that part, you'll miss a lot of oppertunities to make your story interesting.
Consider this for example, you write a character that acts very much like Batman, except for one trait. That can be used to suprise theaduience since they subconsciously or not excpect the character to act like Batman. With a little skill, you can make the whole plot go i a weird surprising turn the audience wouldnt be able to predict, simply because the behaviour of a character where different from what you'd expect.
Creativity, after all, is less about creating things in a total vacuum, but more combining already recognizable things into weird and unusual combination. Like cooking, you take ingrediences and combine it to make a good story.
but "should come up with new characters?", last time I checked, the main purpose of writing fiction was to tell a story, and make it entertaining. For many people, its easier to relate to a story when they recognize the personalities involved. That's why there are several "stock personalities" that are common enough in both fiction and real life to be recognizable. Find your favorite book and I'll bet you that among the supporting characters you'll find several stock personalities, and a few totally original. Like in real life, some people are just eccentrics, and those usually becomes the friends that makes our life interesting.
Point is, personalities similar to established characters are one step above stock personalitis and archetypes, you havent seen them a thousand times before, but yet you still recognize them a bit. If you shun that part, you'll miss a lot of oppertunities to make your story interesting.
Consider this for example, you write a character that acts very much like Batman, except for one trait. That can be used to suprise theaduience since they subconsciously or not excpect the character to act like Batman. With a little skill, you can make the whole plot go i a weird surprising turn the audience wouldnt be able to predict, simply because the behaviour of a character where different from what you'd expect.
Creativity, after all, is less about creating things in a total vacuum, but more combining already recognizable things into weird and unusual combination. Like cooking, you take ingrediences and combine it to make a good story.
"Creativity, after all, is less about creating things in a total vacuum, but more combining already recognizable things into weird and unusual combination. Like cooking, you take ingredients and combine it to make a good story."
I couldn't have said it better myself. *smooch*
I couldn't have said it better myself. *smooch*
Why thank you! Though I have to admit I'm not familiar with some of them, the ones I am familiar with are characters I admire. Something that might give you a good laugh is TV Tropes I always go there to get ideas and it's good for a lark if you've got time on your hands.
It's interesting to me how you classify the classes of characters because I was taught something rather different. (Protagonist, Antagonist, Love Interest) Maybe it works differently in film writing, though.
The Protagonist as I learned it is the character who is out of place in the world at the beginning of the story and to succeed at the end, must change. They are the main character who strives for the most.
The Antagonist is a lot like the Protagonist in that they are trying to change the world, but often in the wrong way, like trying to destroy it.
By changing during the story, the Protagonist learns how to best the Antagonist; how to either change the world or be satisfied with it; and, usually anyway, how to win the Love Interest's heart or repair their relationship. The Love Interest can be a platonic one too, which would include an ally or best friend character.
Another way to look at it is this: The first half of the story is the inside world, where the protagonist lives, but is not satisfied. The middle of the story is the transition between the inside world and the outside world brought on by a catalyst which makes the protagonist decide to leave. The second half is the outside world, which is effectively the inverse of the inside world and where the protagonist must change and gain the knowledge to succeed. And the end of the story is the showdown/main conflict/epic battle whatever followed by the combining of the inside and outside worlds brought on by the protagonist's efforts. The worlds don't have to be actual worlds, mind you, they can be cities, countries, buildings, vehicles, or even states of mind.
At least that's generally how films work.
The Protagonist as I learned it is the character who is out of place in the world at the beginning of the story and to succeed at the end, must change. They are the main character who strives for the most.
The Antagonist is a lot like the Protagonist in that they are trying to change the world, but often in the wrong way, like trying to destroy it.
By changing during the story, the Protagonist learns how to best the Antagonist; how to either change the world or be satisfied with it; and, usually anyway, how to win the Love Interest's heart or repair their relationship. The Love Interest can be a platonic one too, which would include an ally or best friend character.
Another way to look at it is this: The first half of the story is the inside world, where the protagonist lives, but is not satisfied. The middle of the story is the transition between the inside world and the outside world brought on by a catalyst which makes the protagonist decide to leave. The second half is the outside world, which is effectively the inverse of the inside world and where the protagonist must change and gain the knowledge to succeed. And the end of the story is the showdown/main conflict/epic battle whatever followed by the combining of the inside and outside worlds brought on by the protagonist's efforts. The worlds don't have to be actual worlds, mind you, they can be cities, countries, buildings, vehicles, or even states of mind.
At least that's generally how films work.
"The Protagonist as I learned it is the character who is out of place in the world at the beginning of the story and to succeed at the end, must change. They are the main character who strives for the most.
The Antagonist is a lot like the Protagonist in that they are trying to change the world, but often in the wrong way, like trying to destroy it.
...a catalyst which makes the protagonist decide to leave"
It's BECAUSE those definitions are the ones most commonly known for those characters that I use different ones -- with different definitions.
Proponent: One who strives to Maintain.
Adversary: One who strives to strives to Change.
Ally: The one allied with one or the other yet is caught between the two.
Traditionally they're known as: Hero - Villain - Victim.
Classically, as in Aristotle, the original definitions of the words are:
Protagonist: One who strives for.
Antagonist: One who strives against.
Catalyst: One who pays the price for the Protagonist's mistake and starts the Protagonist's downfall, and/or lives to tell the tale.
The reason I use different words and simpler definitions is for Accuracy when explaining what I mean when I talk about the positions the three main characters fulfill in a given scene.
Case in point...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The modern Anti-Hero doesn't fit the current model of Protagonist because the anti-hero is striving Against, and the one they're striving against is usually a representative For the established order.
Anti-hero movies:
~~~~~~~~~~
The Crow
Watchmen
Ghost-Rider
Equilibrium
The Matrix
According to the definition you know, the anti-hero is considered a protagonist despite the fact that he is not fight for (Pro-) he's fighting against (Anti-).
Using those definitions causes a great deal of confusion when I go into the fact that the three main characters can change positions (and character drives) when other characters become part of the Acting triad. In other words, depending on who is part of the acting triad of characters in a given scene, the main character could be acting For the establishment, Against the establishment, or as an Ally to one or the other.
Ahem... The different character definitions, and how character drives work are something I haven't mentioned in any of my articles posted here because it's rather complicated. These folks aren't trying to get books published, they just want a few tricks to help their stories along.
The Antagonist is a lot like the Protagonist in that they are trying to change the world, but often in the wrong way, like trying to destroy it.
...a catalyst which makes the protagonist decide to leave"
It's BECAUSE those definitions are the ones most commonly known for those characters that I use different ones -- with different definitions.
Proponent: One who strives to Maintain.
Adversary: One who strives to strives to Change.
Ally: The one allied with one or the other yet is caught between the two.
Traditionally they're known as: Hero - Villain - Victim.
Classically, as in Aristotle, the original definitions of the words are:
Protagonist: One who strives for.
Antagonist: One who strives against.
Catalyst: One who pays the price for the Protagonist's mistake and starts the Protagonist's downfall, and/or lives to tell the tale.
The reason I use different words and simpler definitions is for Accuracy when explaining what I mean when I talk about the positions the three main characters fulfill in a given scene.
Case in point...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The modern Anti-Hero doesn't fit the current model of Protagonist because the anti-hero is striving Against, and the one they're striving against is usually a representative For the established order.
Anti-hero movies:
~~~~~~~~~~
The Crow
Watchmen
Ghost-Rider
Equilibrium
The Matrix
According to the definition you know, the anti-hero is considered a protagonist despite the fact that he is not fight for (Pro-) he's fighting against (Anti-).
Using those definitions causes a great deal of confusion when I go into the fact that the three main characters can change positions (and character drives) when other characters become part of the Acting triad. In other words, depending on who is part of the acting triad of characters in a given scene, the main character could be acting For the establishment, Against the establishment, or as an Ally to one or the other.
Ahem... The different character definitions, and how character drives work are something I haven't mentioned in any of my articles posted here because it's rather complicated. These folks aren't trying to get books published, they just want a few tricks to help their stories along.
Ok that makes sense.
I've always found it fascinating how thin the line usually is between hero and villain in most well written stories. And how, with an anti-hero, the villain has to be super evil to counter the hero's villainy as in "The Punisher." But what you're saying isn't new by any means. In Shakespeare's "Merchant of Venice" for example, the protagonist is actually Shylock, the perceived villain because he strives the most, which makes the play a tragedy instead of a comedy even though there's no death and people get married in the end. So I guess my point is, you're right and there can always be exceptions to any rule.
I can also appreciate your desire to not confuse beginners. I was just explaining how I was taught in film writing classes, that's all.
I've always found it fascinating how thin the line usually is between hero and villain in most well written stories. And how, with an anti-hero, the villain has to be super evil to counter the hero's villainy as in "The Punisher." But what you're saying isn't new by any means. In Shakespeare's "Merchant of Venice" for example, the protagonist is actually Shylock, the perceived villain because he strives the most, which makes the play a tragedy instead of a comedy even though there's no death and people get married in the end. So I guess my point is, you're right and there can always be exceptions to any rule.
I can also appreciate your desire to not confuse beginners. I was just explaining how I was taught in film writing classes, that's all.
Which is that Shylock is anything other than a villain.
Sorry, he's a villain. Yes, he's a sympathetic one. Yes, Shakespeare captures a great deal of the tragedy in Christian-Jewish relations with Shylock. But that is, I've come to believe, more the genius of Shakespeare in capturing human reality that any intent to make Shylock anything OTHER than an interesting villain. At the time, Jews were villains. They killed God (in the person of His Son). They needed the blood of Christian babies for their own rites (the infamous blood libel). Please understand that these two things were believed piously by 90%+ of Europeans!
Modern revisionism, fueled by the worst excesses of postmodernist literary theory, have whitewashed Shakespeare's Shylock, and even many English professors and teachers who, IMHO, should know better adopt this politically correct view. I'm not sure why; the text does not support this reading. Perhaps it makes them feel better about their favorite poet/playwright. Perhaps it makes them feel better about discussing the play. But it is clearly something they bring to the text and discover there - it is not present either in Shakespeare's writing or in his world. (Please note that I do not discuss The Bard himself. I do not know what he thought. He may have been sympathetic, or not. His writings, fictional and intended for a deeply antisemitic audience, neither incriminate nor exculpate him).
As to the rules - and the apparent differences between what you were taught and what our excellent OokamKasumi has propounded ...
There are certainly different frameworks for understanding the structure and construction of stories, short or otherwise. And in small points they differ. Great masses of doctoral work on literary theory have been written on these tedious* points. But it's not really the details that matter as having an overall structure for the story. As our host suggests, use what works.
Cheers,
Onyx Tao
*Did you spot the pun? No? Don't worry about it. Western civilization isn't about to collapse just yet.
Sorry, he's a villain. Yes, he's a sympathetic one. Yes, Shakespeare captures a great deal of the tragedy in Christian-Jewish relations with Shylock. But that is, I've come to believe, more the genius of Shakespeare in capturing human reality that any intent to make Shylock anything OTHER than an interesting villain. At the time, Jews were villains. They killed God (in the person of His Son). They needed the blood of Christian babies for their own rites (the infamous blood libel). Please understand that these two things were believed piously by 90%+ of Europeans!
Modern revisionism, fueled by the worst excesses of postmodernist literary theory, have whitewashed Shakespeare's Shylock, and even many English professors and teachers who, IMHO, should know better adopt this politically correct view. I'm not sure why; the text does not support this reading. Perhaps it makes them feel better about their favorite poet/playwright. Perhaps it makes them feel better about discussing the play. But it is clearly something they bring to the text and discover there - it is not present either in Shakespeare's writing or in his world. (Please note that I do not discuss The Bard himself. I do not know what he thought. He may have been sympathetic, or not. His writings, fictional and intended for a deeply antisemitic audience, neither incriminate nor exculpate him).
As to the rules - and the apparent differences between what you were taught and what our excellent OokamKasumi has propounded ...
There are certainly different frameworks for understanding the structure and construction of stories, short or otherwise. And in small points they differ. Great masses of doctoral work on literary theory have been written on these tedious* points. But it's not really the details that matter as having an overall structure for the story. As our host suggests, use what works.
Cheers,
Onyx Tao
*Did you spot the pun? No? Don't worry about it. Western civilization isn't about to collapse just yet.
I went to UC Santa Cruz. It's not quite Oberlin, but it's pretty liberal nevertheless.
I might be wrong. Do consider that most of those professors have spent far more time thinking about the text and the words and existing criticism and ... and ... and ... yeah, I still think they're wrong. Such is my opinion. The arguments I've seen have not convinced me, and my predilection is to weight the text and the context very highly. But I still might be wrong.
Cheers,
OT
I might be wrong. Do consider that most of those professors have spent far more time thinking about the text and the words and existing criticism and ... and ... and ... yeah, I still think they're wrong. Such is my opinion. The arguments I've seen have not convinced me, and my predilection is to weight the text and the context very highly. But I still might be wrong.
Cheers,
OT
"As our host suggests, use what works."
Exactly.
-- Since writing styles, techniques, and intent varies from writer to writer, I try to offer a slightly different view than the norm to give the writer Options to play with.
I tend to be highly structured and focused on the end result rather than the experience, so my articles tend reflect that. However, I know good and well that these methods won't work for every piece of writing -- such as when one is writing something just for fun or trying for something purely literary.
I'm merely trying to point out that how one is taught in school to write a story isn't the only way.
Exactly.
-- Since writing styles, techniques, and intent varies from writer to writer, I try to offer a slightly different view than the norm to give the writer Options to play with.
I tend to be highly structured and focused on the end result rather than the experience, so my articles tend reflect that. However, I know good and well that these methods won't work for every piece of writing -- such as when one is writing something just for fun or trying for something purely literary.
I'm merely trying to point out that how one is taught in school to write a story isn't the only way.
"I can also appreciate your desire to not confuse beginners. I was just explaining how I was taught in film writing classes, that's all."
I understand, no offense taken.
-- I've made it a personal study of mine to delve deep into the whys & wherefores of plot verses character interaction. Much of the stuff I've learned is through personal experience and experimentation not from classes, so it's perfectly understandable that you haven't run across it. However, if you take my notes and extrapolate, I'm sure you'll see what I see. You might even find it useful. *wink*
I understand, no offense taken.
-- I've made it a personal study of mine to delve deep into the whys & wherefores of plot verses character interaction. Much of the stuff I've learned is through personal experience and experimentation not from classes, so it's perfectly understandable that you haven't run across it. However, if you take my notes and extrapolate, I'm sure you'll see what I see. You might even find it useful. *wink*
Wow, this was informative, comments and all.
Just about using the "favorite characters" and "archetypes": your favorite character is an archetype of some sort, fashioned for the role he/she is in.
Now if you take that favorite character e.g. Riddick; you can warp his character frame to your own needs while keeping his basic traits (bad-assness, coldness, superior fighting skill...). Lets say you give him an apprentice (kinda like Jack), but he treats his apprentice like garbage, but deep down cares for hm/her, He treats him/her like garbage cause the only way he knows how to get stronger is through adversity. Maybe he starts to show a soft side to his apprentice or pushes them away because he fears for their life.
Or you could go in a different direction: Lets say he gets in a situation that he wants to cease killing or repent for his murders. He will have bounty hunters coming after him because of all of his wrongdoings, so the killing won't end until he disappears or his pursuers do. Maybe he decides to kill his pursuers in one last wrong act to free himself, or maybe he decides to live in hiding, or maybe he decides to commit suicide.
My point is that you can take a preformed character and alter their character model to fit your purposes.
I think this is the first time I've ever typed so much in a comment ^,^
Just about using the "favorite characters" and "archetypes": your favorite character is an archetype of some sort, fashioned for the role he/she is in.
Now if you take that favorite character e.g. Riddick; you can warp his character frame to your own needs while keeping his basic traits (bad-assness, coldness, superior fighting skill...). Lets say you give him an apprentice (kinda like Jack), but he treats his apprentice like garbage, but deep down cares for hm/her, He treats him/her like garbage cause the only way he knows how to get stronger is through adversity. Maybe he starts to show a soft side to his apprentice or pushes them away because he fears for their life.
Or you could go in a different direction: Lets say he gets in a situation that he wants to cease killing or repent for his murders. He will have bounty hunters coming after him because of all of his wrongdoings, so the killing won't end until he disappears or his pursuers do. Maybe he decides to kill his pursuers in one last wrong act to free himself, or maybe he decides to live in hiding, or maybe he decides to commit suicide.
My point is that you can take a preformed character and alter their character model to fit your purposes.
I think this is the first time I've ever typed so much in a comment ^,^
Go Nypp Go!
"My point is that you can take a preformed character and alter their character model to fit your purposes."
Exactly!
-- ANY changes you make to any established character, no matter how small, is going to alter them in a million different directions until they cease being the original and become their own character.
"My point is that you can take a preformed character and alter their character model to fit your purposes."
Exactly!
-- ANY changes you make to any established character, no matter how small, is going to alter them in a million different directions until they cease being the original and become their own character.
Thank you sweety!
-- Most of the stuff I've come up with has been extracted from what I felt worked. Basically, what I do when I'm trying to figure a story out is work backwards - reverse engineer. I break it down to it's smallest components. Once I have those bits mapped out, I see if it applies to other stories too. If it DOES, then I keep it and use it later. If it REALLY works, I share it. *wink*
-- Most of the stuff I've come up with has been extracted from what I felt worked. Basically, what I do when I'm trying to figure a story out is work backwards - reverse engineer. I break it down to it's smallest components. Once I have those bits mapped out, I see if it applies to other stories too. If it DOES, then I keep it and use it later. If it REALLY works, I share it. *wink*
Oh, my.
Do you know, I can't do this? It just feels like plagiarism of the worst sort to me. Is it? Of course not. And I will happily appropriate plot, ideas, and practically anything else (after filing off the serial numbers, naturally) ... but characters?
Oh, my. I don't know, I just can't ...
So I create characters rather differently, and it depends on whether they're a major character, or a minor character. A minor character gets a myers-briggs designation. A major character gets an enneagram workup, complete with one or two wings and a level.
Of course, both of those systems are simply archetypal systems for the classification (and understanding) of personality. So ... they work. OokamKasumi's characters are archetypes, and so they will work, too.
Cheers,
Onyx Tao
Do you know, I can't do this? It just feels like plagiarism of the worst sort to me. Is it? Of course not. And I will happily appropriate plot, ideas, and practically anything else (after filing off the serial numbers, naturally) ... but characters?
Oh, my. I don't know, I just can't ...
So I create characters rather differently, and it depends on whether they're a major character, or a minor character. A minor character gets a myers-briggs designation. A major character gets an enneagram workup, complete with one or two wings and a level.
Of course, both of those systems are simply archetypal systems for the classification (and understanding) of personality. So ... they work. OokamKasumi's characters are archetypes, and so they will work, too.
Cheers,
Onyx Tao
"Do you know, I can't do this?"
Then don't, silly! LOL!
-- This is just one method among many. You're method works too, though it's a bit more complicated. By the way, I occasionally use the Zodiac to map out personality quirks AND I track down the books, movies, and music that came out while a given character is in high school (if I'm using a contemporary setting.)
I've found it amazing how many people form their entire personalities and careers around what they considered important to them in their Sophomore and Junior years of high school. Not everyone does this, but a lot more people do than I expected.
Then don't, silly! LOL!
-- This is just one method among many. You're method works too, though it's a bit more complicated. By the way, I occasionally use the Zodiac to map out personality quirks AND I track down the books, movies, and music that came out while a given character is in high school (if I'm using a contemporary setting.)
I've found it amazing how many people form their entire personalities and careers around what they considered important to them in their Sophomore and Junior years of high school. Not everyone does this, but a lot more people do than I expected.
This raises an interesting point. As a gay man who knew[\b] he was gay in a fairly homophobic high school and environment, it wasn't formative, not for me. I was spending too much energy on not being there. College, when I could finally start coming out a little, that was formative.
I'm delighted - beyond delighted - [b]ecstatic - that when I talk with young gay high school students today, they don't have that experience at all. They're out in high school, and so high school is, again, that kind of formative experience. I'm sure that's not true everywhere (but then I live in a remarkably liberal enclave).
And this isn't entirely relevant ... tangential. But interesting, I hope.
Cheers,
OT
I'm delighted - beyond delighted - [b]ecstatic - that when I talk with young gay high school students today, they don't have that experience at all. They're out in high school, and so high school is, again, that kind of formative experience. I'm sure that's not true everywhere (but then I live in a remarkably liberal enclave).
And this isn't entirely relevant ... tangential. But interesting, I hope.
Cheers,
OT
This may be a differance of opinion, but I prefer making my own characters for stories. Any similarities that are present between the new character and one from an established franchise is pure coincidence. Though admittedly I may snip a bit of stuff from established franchises for referance material. But I like the tip on starting a story, though out of the three I have attempted writing thus far I started two of them with either a poem or some lore/folk story based on the setting (and world settings aren't nearly as hard as you say it is), respectively. Though the way I want to start a story (and the way I have the most difficulty with) is the same way that almost every story I have ever read has started, we are introduced to character A (protaganist) and, maybe, character B (victim/love interest/friend/etc). We are then told what has happened prior to the introduction and what is happening now and what the character(s) plan to do next. After a quick bit we are then given a tragedy, and are, maybe (though eventually), introduced to character C (antagonist). Story continues from their to completion.
As I said this is just a differance of opinion, so I don't care if this is how you get 25 books published, I want to first learn how to be unlazy and write for fun before I write professionly (maybe). And when I start writting for money I'll find my own way to get published. You can go ahead and say it's crazy to go your own way and that it's comparable to navagating a labrinth blind folded with you head down, but you have to bump into a few walls before you take off the blind fold and look up. :)
As I said this is just a differance of opinion, so I don't care if this is how you get 25 books published, I want to first learn how to be unlazy and write for fun before I write professionly (maybe). And when I start writting for money I'll find my own way to get published. You can go ahead and say it's crazy to go your own way and that it's comparable to navagating a labrinth blind folded with you head down, but you have to bump into a few walls before you take off the blind fold and look up. :)
Experimentation is fun, that's why science and writing are awesome.
And I do have to ask...have you ever experianced something along the lines of you getting an idea, and then more ideas branch off of that, and the next thing you know your shittin' gold nuggets as you come up with a series/world setting? And what genre(s) do you write? Have you ever read Tangle Wreck?
And I do have to ask...have you ever experianced something along the lines of you getting an idea, and then more ideas branch off of that, and the next thing you know your shittin' gold nuggets as you come up with a series/world setting? And what genre(s) do you write? Have you ever read Tangle Wreck?
"...have you ever experienced something along the lines of you getting an idea, and then more ideas branch off of that, and the next thing you know your shittin' gold nuggets as you come up with a series/world setting?"
Absolutely!
-- I did an experimental story that was a paranormal Sci-fi. The next thing I know I had a whole series set in the sci-fi world spinning off my keyboard. At the moment, the two whole novels and another novella that came from that first novella are paying my rent! *grin*
No, I haven't read Tangle Wreck. Where can I find it?
I write sci-fi, (NOT Futuristic! I do know the difference!) erotica, erotic romance, gothic erotic romance, paranormal erotic romance, sci-fi erotic romance, hentai erotic romance, and yaoi.
Absolutely!
-- I did an experimental story that was a paranormal Sci-fi. The next thing I know I had a whole series set in the sci-fi world spinning off my keyboard. At the moment, the two whole novels and another novella that came from that first novella are paying my rent! *grin*
No, I haven't read Tangle Wreck. Where can I find it?
I write sci-fi, (NOT Futuristic! I do know the difference!) erotica, erotic romance, gothic erotic romance, paranormal erotic romance, sci-fi erotic romance, hentai erotic romance, and yaoi.
If I didn't know better I would assume that you write porn, lol. Title of best seller plz.
Tanglewreck (lol spelled it wrong the first time) was written by Jeanette Winterson and can be found in most book stores (I got my copy at Books-a-Million). I dunno if it'll be your cup of tea though, my mom described it as wierd after she read it. I personally like it, if not just because of the mushy gushy love stuff that slips it's way in early then smacks you in the face half way through to remind you that it's there. Also space-time shenanagins=FTW. Lol I'll stop giving away the book now, don't wanna accidently spoil it!
Tanglewreck (lol spelled it wrong the first time) was written by Jeanette Winterson and can be found in most book stores (I got my copy at Books-a-Million). I dunno if it'll be your cup of tea though, my mom described it as wierd after she read it. I personally like it, if not just because of the mushy gushy love stuff that slips it's way in early then smacks you in the face half way through to remind you that it's there. Also space-time shenanagins=FTW. Lol I'll stop giving away the book now, don't wanna accidently spoil it!
"If I didn't know better I would assume that you write porn, lol."
The only difference between porn and Erotic Romance is the skill of the writing and the fact that there's a WHOLE story wrapped around it -- not just a sketch of one to hold the scenes together. So technically, I DO write porn. *grin*
I'll give Tanglewreck a try! I love good sci-fi.
The only difference between porn and Erotic Romance is the skill of the writing and the fact that there's a WHOLE story wrapped around it -- not just a sketch of one to hold the scenes together. So technically, I DO write porn. *grin*
I'll give Tanglewreck a try! I love good sci-fi.
"For some reason when you base a story around sex it works better in the written format then with those oh so arousing, yet oh so bland porn vids on the net."
I think it has to do with the fact that Writing tends to connect on an emotional and visceral level rather than strictly visual. Basically,rather than watching the characters from the outside (video), you're submerging yourself in the characters and participating to some degree.
I think it has to do with the fact that Writing tends to connect on an emotional and visceral level rather than strictly visual. Basically,rather than watching the characters from the outside (video), you're submerging yourself in the characters and participating to some degree.
An interesting note is that with Neil Gaiman's "The Graveyard Book" He had the idea in the past but thought, "This idea is too good for me to write now. Let me wait a while longer before I try writing it." So he wrote a couple of books in the meantime and let the idea simmer in his brain until he felt he was ready to write it.
At least that's what he said :P
At least that's what he said :P
"Niel Gaimen...let the idea simmer in his brain until he felt he was ready to write it."
That's the best way to do it!
-- For years I had this IDEA, but I was convinced I couldn't write sci-fi because I just didn't know enough. Then one day I did an experimental story about a cyborg that had gone completely mechanical through nano-technology. His biological body was completely gone, but he was still there. Basically, he'd become a machine haunted by the ghost of the mortal man he used to be.
Because I was using a space station as a setting, I ended up dredging a LOT of science to make it plausible -- quantum consciousness space-flight, folding space jump gates, life support, nano-technology, projectile weapons, sentient computers & ships, anti-grav... more science than I realized I even knew.
I finally wrote my idea and now it's paying my rent. *grin*
That's the best way to do it!
-- For years I had this IDEA, but I was convinced I couldn't write sci-fi because I just didn't know enough. Then one day I did an experimental story about a cyborg that had gone completely mechanical through nano-technology. His biological body was completely gone, but he was still there. Basically, he'd become a machine haunted by the ghost of the mortal man he used to be.
Because I was using a space station as a setting, I ended up dredging a LOT of science to make it plausible -- quantum consciousness space-flight, folding space jump gates, life support, nano-technology, projectile weapons, sentient computers & ships, anti-grav... more science than I realized I even knew.
I finally wrote my idea and now it's paying my rent. *grin*
On top of how experience helps draw out what you know, just the general idea that the more you write, the better your style becomes. So that if you're wanting to get a story down right away, maybe table it (But write down the ideas/plot/outline) if you're unsure of your current talents and see when the story calls you back. How does that fly?
"If you're unsure of your current talents, write down the ideas/plot/outline and table it until the story calls you back. How does that fly?"
Very nicely.
-- I have hundreds of story bits and pieces in my files that will ether grow up to become books or end up as whole scenes for another story. Waste not -- want not.
Writing on other things in the meantime does improve your skills, but it can also reinforce uncorrected bad habits such as head-hopping. If you do take the time to fix your mistakes in your writing, by the time you go back to what you've left behind, the story is very likely to come out far better than your original conception.
Very nicely.
-- I have hundreds of story bits and pieces in my files that will ether grow up to become books or end up as whole scenes for another story. Waste not -- want not.
Writing on other things in the meantime does improve your skills, but it can also reinforce uncorrected bad habits such as head-hopping. If you do take the time to fix your mistakes in your writing, by the time you go back to what you've left behind, the story is very likely to come out far better than your original conception.
Best comment section of any post I've seen! Tons of information down there. I thank you for making this and I will follow some of your tips. I believe it will be fun to experiment and find out what works best for me!
I have had tons of troubles actually building the world, going through around 4-5 rewrites of the world (maybe more). It has mostly been me losing interest. But always I look up tips, and those tips (which I hardly remember) make me want to write again. And so you have again started the "Cycle of Torture" for me, and I thank you for that!
If you do respond to this comment magically, don't smooch me... I am underage and it will be highly illegal for you...
Thank you again!
I have had tons of troubles actually building the world, going through around 4-5 rewrites of the world (maybe more). It has mostly been me losing interest. But always I look up tips, and those tips (which I hardly remember) make me want to write again. And so you have again started the "Cycle of Torture" for me, and I thank you for that!
If you do respond to this comment magically, don't smooch me... I am underage and it will be highly illegal for you...
Thank you again!
Comments