Writing Processes

KatG said:
This Twitter thread where author Delilah S. Dawson is talking about writing first drafts was funny. You'll notice that it's in contrast to Lansdale above. That's the interesting bit -- they tackle it differently. Dawson's way is a bit more common, but whatever works, works.

https://twitter.com/DelilahSDawson/status/888031626361491456
Click to expand...

Interesting thoughts, but I agree with Kenny that Twitter is an absolutely terrible platform to present them!

My own method of writing means that the bulk of my work is done on the first draft, which makes my writing very slow, but final editing something of a breeze.
 
Just to demonstrate that there are no rules - yeah, I did my three-draft thing with the last book. Second draft was for major plot points, right? Right? Heh. Was still shifting the plot (for the better) in the *third* draft. Sometimes, as you build the characters and story, things you thought would work out, won't.

There are no rules. Only Zuul
 
hscope said:
Interesting thoughts, but I agree with Kenny that Twitter is an absolutely terrible platform to present them!

My own method of writing means that the bulk of my work is done on the first draft, which makes my writing very slow, but final editing something of a breeze.
Click to expand...

So far I've found myself doing that for about the first third, then having to do what Delilah says for large portions of the rest of it.

Then I look back at the first third and realise I've become a far better writer and didn't understand the story well enough and have to hack at it again so not a great example. I do think the two processes can be mixed though.
 
Maybe I should've said trad rules! But it's great fun breaking them anyway.
There was a great radio documentary yesterday about Joni Mitchell: "An artist is either original or nothing."
 
Only things I don't like are logic gaps. like in a comic when a door opens outwards in a panel outside the room and then inwards or on the opposite hinge when the view gets reversed. In writing the thing seems (or is said to be) as if it is one way. ... then without change of circumstance or explanation, the thing is suddenly another way. Doesn't happen often in published novels but it does happen and I feel like I've been gut-punched whenever I see it.
 
Last edited:
Stephen Palmer said:
Maybe I should've said trad rules! But it's great fun breaking them anyway.
Click to expand...


Most of the supposedly "traditional" rule claims have only been around since the 1980's, when the style preference that was touted as trendy was to write your novel as close to a screenplay as possible. Some people write in that style and others write in quite different styles and they are all published and a small percentage of them are bestsellers. If you don't write with one type of style effect and choose another, it's not rebellious because the one you chose is just as common as the one you are supposedly defying or breaking. You are not taking the road less traveled. In short, it's a con. :)

SFF fans, some of them, tend to know more about writing techniques than a lot of other types of fans and have more opinions on them because they've been in near constant communication with SFF authors long before the WWW. The SFF category media, the conventions, the e-zines, etc., all meant a lot of interaction and talking about writing. So SFF authors get more of this "how you should write" stuff coming at them than other areas of the field. However, that complaint about the word dystopia in the article will not get met, since dystopia is part of sub-genres in SFF as a descriptor.
 
I don't think it's limited to SFF any more (if it ever was), as I see the word 'rules' cropping up more and more across all the online writing venues I frequent. It's as though fearless writing is a thing of the past and new writers are timidly seeking permission and reassurance instead of testing all the boundaries for themselves. I blame the writing 'advice' industry.

The only important element of writing for a specific audience and/or genre, in my opinion, is knowing what your readers are willing to accept and realising they will always accept more than they think. This is a heady prospect for a writer.
 
Lots and lots of writing advice on the Net certainly has something to do with it, though the rules stuff was going on across the board long before it was firmly established in so many households. People want reassurance that there are guarantees or partial guarantees of techniques (styles) that will at least lead to publication if not sales success. And they tend to fall back into grade school mode, where there were clear cut requirements and if you followed procedures, you would do well. Of course, they all pick slightly different sets of rules/stylistic choices that are supposed to be the "right way to write." If there are writers they admire and/or are successful who don't follow that set of procedures (have a different style,) it gets waved away as "talent" that wins over "craft." People confuse the components of story (the actual craft) with style -- how the elements can be put together and in what language choices (creative choice.) And they have preferred style ideas and they pick those as the "right" style ideas.

The authors complaining in the article are dealing with platitudes about how they are supposedly supposed to write versus how they actually do write. It's something that writers will run into a lot, which is why I thought it might be useful.
 
The Big Peat said:
https://www.tor.com/2017/12/11/other-story-ingredients-beyond-world-characters-and-plot/#more-320753

I like how Ada Palmer focuses as much on Structure and Voice as the traditional things people think about when they talk about stories - it feels someone revealing something I already knew but couldn't vocalise. And it gives me the objection I thought I had to Philip Pullman's tips here - sometimes, Structure *is* Tone.
Click to expand...

Thanks Pete! Great stuff!

What I find fascinating, almost astounding in what Palmer says there is that the core idea of the story - the inspiration - struck her in an instant like lightning when she heard that line of Shakespeare dialog.

“Too like the lightning which doth cease to be/ Ere one can say ‘It lightens’.”

And it took her three books to get to that point (and I suspect three more to deal with the 'ceasing of the lightning').

I understand it, but to me that's a bit crazy.....I want the reader to experience that lightning striking and that realization in the same manner as it strikes me (her) the writer.

I guess that's what I prefer poetry and short stories.
 
kennychaffin said:
And it took her three books to get to that point (and I suspect three more to deal with the 'ceasing of the lightning').
Click to expand...
I don't remember the precise contents of that piece on Tor, but the point you speak about was reached at the end of book 2, Seven Surrenders, Kenny, and book 1 and 2 are actually one long novel published in two parts, publisher's decision, as is structurally quite evident to the reader. The 'ceasing of the lightning' is dealt with in books 3 and 4, which according to Ada Palmer are more separate entities.
 
Av Demeisen said:
I don't remember the precise contents of that piece on Tor, but the point you speak about was reached at the end of book 2, Seven Surrenders, Kenny, and book 1 and 2 are actually one long novel published in two parts, publisher's decision, as is structurally quite evident to the reader. The 'ceasing of the lightning' is dealt with in books 3 and 4, which according to Ada Palmer are more separate entities.
Click to expand...

per the article:
"...the pivot moment of the structure, when we’ve lost that precious thing that was “Too like the lightning” and have to face a world without it. It’s the moment when other people can finally experience that sequence feeling that I felt years ago, so intense and complicated that I couldn’t communicate it to another human being without years of planning and three whole books to begin it, four to see it to its end."
 
It's kind of hard to discuss this without going into major spoilers, but the reader feels the loss at the very end of book 2, but only now with book 3 gets to experience the transformation, the sequence the author felt years ago when the idea struck her.

Ada speaks about these thing regularly in interviews, podcasts, and blog posts, and often a little more is revealed each time, and it is hard to remember what was said where.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Sponsors


We try to keep the forum as free of ads as possible, please consider supporting SFFWorld on Patreon


Your ad here.

Latest posts

Back
Top