Hello there!
This week's (second! Bonus-ish?) post will be about short stories and their advantage over novels/why they're good writing practice.
Here we go!
I recently planned an epic fantasy story/novel. It was good enough in the planning: cool characters, an intricate plot, a cool setting somewhere between fantasy and sci-fi... etc. But when it came to writing it I got to 40k words... and then realized it didn't work. 9/10 of the characters were zzzZzZz and the plot was tedious in itself. I deleted a lot of words (~34k)... and turned it into a short story instead. It works much better now though it still isn't done yet. The point is: the idea I was trying to convey didn't need three main characters and 5 supporting characters each. It didn't need three main plot threads (which were extremely annoying and tedious to come up with and way too intricate to ever make sense) and a million locations all over the map.
This leads me to my next point:
Do you know the main reason why short stories are so beautiful? (which is also why most people - especially authors - don't take them as seriously?)
* they're short.
This means you can focus on one (or max two) ideas to develop and you don't have to derp around endlessly trying to decide what the best scene for every of your plot thread (say: redemption or revenge or... any of these pesky 'themes' you hear so much about) would be. You can focus on one issue...
*and in many ways this is harder.
Writing good short stories is really hard. I'll give you my own as an example. I write about a short story a week... but not all of them are good and I don't have the patience to edit most of them. This means they're kind of... forgotten easily. The real good ones are usually shorts from one or other 'big project' I'm working on.
So why are short stories so hard?
a) they're short (yes. I've said this already. Let's go back to that first * for a bit.)
*You don't have as much space to develop an idea.
*You don't have any second chances to re-introduce characters and their motivations if they don't entirely work in the first scene scene. The introduction must be done neatly and can't contradict itself as much as a novel protagonist's personality and goals might.
*You have to be precise - very precise... and did I mention coherent? Everything you say and everything cool detail of worldbuilding or character-building or... otherwise needs to be relevant to the story.
b) they're not taken as seriously as longer works -such as novels (but this is only relevant if you care about making money/publishing them)
Why are they not taken as seriously as novels? I think - and this is purely my opinion without much research behind it - this is because they are HARD. They are hard to write and they're (often) difficult to understand (though if the author has ANY idea at all what they're doing they should be clearer than a novel.). They're hard to write because they're so condensed. There's no space to make a mistake as in a 90k novel. They're a lot like film scripts in that way.
Then why are short stories so great?
*they force you to focus
*they're great practice (whether it's about character development, setting, motivation, or goals in general). They're the singlemost great medium in which you can really learn how to write a great book and to make your writing excellent. They force you to sharpen your prose and your style and (most importantly) your thoughts. You can't waste a single word when you're writing a short story. And you'll learn what every scene's purpose is in detail.
*they're easy and quick to read whenever (whether you're traveling to work or getting bored of playing video games...)
*they contain a single important thought that can be absorbed in a very short time and (if the story is well-written) will subconsciously tell you something about humanity (pesky theme cropping up yet again!) or some other issue (also theme) that you didn't know before.
*they're perfect if you don't have a lot of time to read (which makes them highly accessible to many many people... if only they gave it a chance)
Does this make sense? I hope you know more about why short stories are so great now!
However... there is a caveat. I have to give you a little warning about short stories: while they're great to learn the craft (you can learn ANY aspect through writing short stories... except perhaps how to write long projects) they're not as desirable as novels. This has many reasons (which are listed on many other websites) and I'm not going to go into it. Bottom line? Novels are easier to sell than short stories if you're in it for the money/the publishability of your projects.
I hope this helped and you learned something from this post! Have a relaxing second half of the week!
J.M.
Wednesday, August 17, 2016
Sunday, August 14, 2016
Milk it for all it's worth (or: The Folly of Sequels)
Ahoi
1st: I'll likely soon change blogging day to the weekend. There's been developments in my life that might make it difficult to post reliably every Wednesday.
To the post. It'll deal with the necessity and craft-problems of sequels... and also contain a lot of gushing about Stranger Things and Dragonflight (Pern 1 by Anne McCaffrey).
It'll contain major spoilers for:
Stranger Things
Dragonflight (Pern 1)
I've recently finished watching Stranger Things (I know, I know, I'm late to the party). I'm not sure if I want a sequel to it.
Why?
Stranger Things was technically (story-telling technically) brilliant - a self-contained story clearly and concisely written. There are no loose ends (except the slug at the end and where El went with the Demogorgon). Everything is explained. Nothing is wasted. How Will communicates via the lights... How the gate works and why it is there (this was a great moment! I was thinking it wouldn't be explained... and that it just popped up and El can interact with it because... plot!). Even the cliff Hopper warns his colleagues off in one of the first few episodes becomes relevant later on when Troy and whatshisname try to get Mike to jump off of it and El saves him. The radios the kids use, likewise, turns out to be IMPORTANT when Lucas needs to warn Mike et al that the Water and Light maintenance guys are actually bad. In this series, nothing is wasted. Truly, nothing.
It's so tight... so concise... it's brilliant. And that makes me wary of the sequel. How will they top such a great tight plot? What do they intend to do? Ok... there are some loose ends, such as, why the hell Nancy would celebrate Christmas with Steve?! Why did Hopper get into the CIA/FBI (whatever it is) car? What was it he actually promised White-haired-creeper dude whose name I don't remember (Papa)? And why the hell did the writers have to break Mike's heart? Oh and then the slug-thing Will spits out? I can live with all of these things unanswered (except perhaps the Mike-thing because it was gut-wrenching... closely followed by the Nancy-problem of Nancy's insanity! It would be easier to live with had she sworn off both boys and taken some time to develop herself... instead she goes right back to the dude the series's established she doesn't love? What?).
Then there's the fact that sequels rarely work. Take a look at (I don't even want to name it) the Cursed Child. I haven't seen it but I've read the wikipedia page... and it tells me: nor do I want to. In fact, it doesn't just tell me, it yells at me not to do this to myself. I've never read this much bull in my whole life. It doesn't even feel like a real part of the franchise... because come on, it breaks all the rules ever made in the books.
Take a look at the Pern series too. I loved the first book (Dragonflight). It was great. It was exactly how fantasy should be. There were two great main characters, there was a world-wide problem, there were people with their own interests in mind (the Lord Holders) who weren't 'the dark overlord'. The characters acted true to themselves all the time... and in the end audacity won against the terrible non-human threat (who also has a reason to exist, and that's survival, which is probably the most pressing issue to any non-sentient organism). This was brilliant! I loved it! I want to read it again and read it to everyone at home.
Then comes the 'sequel'. I'm ok. It's not terrible... but it doesn't quite hold my attention as much as Dragonflight. Do you know why? Dragonflight was entirely self-contained (as Stranger Things season one would be without the stupid slug Will spits out as a 'teaser'). It solved a world-wide problem with a great climax. Then suddenly... in the second book we're taken back to mundane concerns of the Lord Holders and some bla bla about Oldtimers not being happy and Benden Weyr being difficult and some girl I don't care about being all angsty about some guy I don't care about. There's no world-wide stakes and what little stakes there are should be easy for the main characters to deal with after what they've gone through in Dragonflight. Because come on, you can time travel 400 years into the past... but when there's trouble with Lords Holders (who have no pressure on you at all except your 'honor') they can't decide what to do? What? I then read Dragonsong and Dragonsinger... which were more enjoyable since new characters and it didn't pretend to be a part of the world-shattering 'main series' which goes from bad to worst in The White Dragon (which is a sulky teenage boy turning into a man, the classical coming of age story).
I'm equally as wary about what might happen to Stranger Things... although they have one advantage. They started with a 'minor problem' (Will's disappearance) and it was brilliant. They can build up on this (and I have more faith in the Duffer Brothers et al to manage it than most other writers/producers). They can make the problem more societal the next time (say the whole town of Hawkins is threatened to be sucked into the Upside Down... or the world will end if they can't close/stabilize the portal). This is something they can build up upon. Dragonflight was not. Too many other stories were not. You've already saved the world. What else could be pressing enough/difficult enough to justify the characters' incapability of handling it?
I can guess why there'd be a sequel. Stranger Things had about 8.6 million viewers in the first two weeks (translation: money! Money! Spend all your money!). They'd want to milk this - right? Just like every other writer (hello! I'm talking about most long-running series here) try to squeeze out every last drop of what used to be a perfectly fine one-series/one-movie plot... and in the end destroy it. I'm not saying I'm against the sequel/or against sequels in general (though once the main story is done it SHOULD end). I'm more saying: it's difficult to pull off. Very difficult.
What do you think? Are sequels necessary? Do you actually like them? Leave a comment!
J.M.
1st: I'll likely soon change blogging day to the weekend. There's been developments in my life that might make it difficult to post reliably every Wednesday.
To the post. It'll deal with the necessity and craft-problems of sequels... and also contain a lot of gushing about Stranger Things and Dragonflight (Pern 1 by Anne McCaffrey).
It'll contain major spoilers for:
Stranger Things
Dragonflight (Pern 1)
I've recently finished watching Stranger Things (I know, I know, I'm late to the party). I'm not sure if I want a sequel to it.
Why?
Stranger Things was technically (story-telling technically) brilliant - a self-contained story clearly and concisely written. There are no loose ends (except the slug at the end and where El went with the Demogorgon). Everything is explained. Nothing is wasted. How Will communicates via the lights... How the gate works and why it is there (this was a great moment! I was thinking it wouldn't be explained... and that it just popped up and El can interact with it because... plot!). Even the cliff Hopper warns his colleagues off in one of the first few episodes becomes relevant later on when Troy and whatshisname try to get Mike to jump off of it and El saves him. The radios the kids use, likewise, turns out to be IMPORTANT when Lucas needs to warn Mike et al that the Water and Light maintenance guys are actually bad. In this series, nothing is wasted. Truly, nothing.
It's so tight... so concise... it's brilliant. And that makes me wary of the sequel. How will they top such a great tight plot? What do they intend to do? Ok... there are some loose ends, such as, why the hell Nancy would celebrate Christmas with Steve?! Why did Hopper get into the CIA/FBI (whatever it is) car? What was it he actually promised White-haired-creeper dude whose name I don't remember (Papa)? And why the hell did the writers have to break Mike's heart? Oh and then the slug-thing Will spits out? I can live with all of these things unanswered (except perhaps the Mike-thing because it was gut-wrenching... closely followed by the Nancy-problem of Nancy's insanity! It would be easier to live with had she sworn off both boys and taken some time to develop herself... instead she goes right back to the dude the series's established she doesn't love? What?).
Then there's the fact that sequels rarely work. Take a look at (I don't even want to name it) the Cursed Child. I haven't seen it but I've read the wikipedia page... and it tells me: nor do I want to. In fact, it doesn't just tell me, it yells at me not to do this to myself. I've never read this much bull in my whole life. It doesn't even feel like a real part of the franchise... because come on, it breaks all the rules ever made in the books.
Take a look at the Pern series too. I loved the first book (Dragonflight). It was great. It was exactly how fantasy should be. There were two great main characters, there was a world-wide problem, there were people with their own interests in mind (the Lord Holders) who weren't 'the dark overlord'. The characters acted true to themselves all the time... and in the end audacity won against the terrible non-human threat (who also has a reason to exist, and that's survival, which is probably the most pressing issue to any non-sentient organism). This was brilliant! I loved it! I want to read it again and read it to everyone at home.
Then comes the 'sequel'. I'm ok. It's not terrible... but it doesn't quite hold my attention as much as Dragonflight. Do you know why? Dragonflight was entirely self-contained (as Stranger Things season one would be without the stupid slug Will spits out as a 'teaser'). It solved a world-wide problem with a great climax. Then suddenly... in the second book we're taken back to mundane concerns of the Lord Holders and some bla bla about Oldtimers not being happy and Benden Weyr being difficult and some girl I don't care about being all angsty about some guy I don't care about. There's no world-wide stakes and what little stakes there are should be easy for the main characters to deal with after what they've gone through in Dragonflight. Because come on, you can time travel 400 years into the past... but when there's trouble with Lords Holders (who have no pressure on you at all except your 'honor') they can't decide what to do? What? I then read Dragonsong and Dragonsinger... which were more enjoyable since new characters and it didn't pretend to be a part of the world-shattering 'main series' which goes from bad to worst in The White Dragon (which is a sulky teenage boy turning into a man, the classical coming of age story).
I'm equally as wary about what might happen to Stranger Things... although they have one advantage. They started with a 'minor problem' (Will's disappearance) and it was brilliant. They can build up on this (and I have more faith in the Duffer Brothers et al to manage it than most other writers/producers). They can make the problem more societal the next time (say the whole town of Hawkins is threatened to be sucked into the Upside Down... or the world will end if they can't close/stabilize the portal). This is something they can build up upon. Dragonflight was not. Too many other stories were not. You've already saved the world. What else could be pressing enough/difficult enough to justify the characters' incapability of handling it?
I can guess why there'd be a sequel. Stranger Things had about 8.6 million viewers in the first two weeks (translation: money! Money! Spend all your money!). They'd want to milk this - right? Just like every other writer (hello! I'm talking about most long-running series here) try to squeeze out every last drop of what used to be a perfectly fine one-series/one-movie plot... and in the end destroy it. I'm not saying I'm against the sequel/or against sequels in general (though once the main story is done it SHOULD end). I'm more saying: it's difficult to pull off. Very difficult.
What do you think? Are sequels necessary? Do you actually like them? Leave a comment!
J.M.
Wednesday, August 10, 2016
Why editing is superior to writing (highly subjective of course)
Hi people (and otherwise!)
I want to explain why editing is so much better than writing itself. (Warning: this might not be as useful to plotters, but it certainly is to pantsers who don't have much patience to think every plot detail through.)
What????!?!?!!? will be the reaction of most of the people reading this. I don't blame you. But consider this:
1. you write... a first draft. It goes all right (at least if you're a pantser, you're normally not as concerned with what-on-earth is going on in your ms. At first.) You have a finished product, and if it's anything like mine, then it'll be the bare bones of the actual book. It'll be so minimalistic no one else would ever want to read it. The characters are great, they're actually life-like, and each has their own personality, but their emotions, and the reasons they do things (which they do!) might be lacking clarity. The plot, too, could be refined, just so on page one-hundred Max isn't a guy, when he was a girl before. (Unless that's the sort of story you're writing!)
Congratulations! You now have a skeleton (in your drawer!). It might have 60-100k words (or a looot more) and you can put it aside happily.
It's time to wait.
Wait...
Wait...
Ok. Let's pretend a month has passed. (A month is a good time to get over your initial furious writing draft and start to see things more objectively.)
This is when editing comes around.
What's next?
If you're at all sensitive to story structure/characters/plot you can now tell what the manuscript needs. I don't normally read through any of my drafts in detail. I just skim over them and usually edit as I go. This works for me. It might not work for you.
There might be a lot of things to do... such as:
reordering scenes
writing more scenes you forgot/didn't know at the time but which need to be in the manuscript
clarify text
tighten prose (or on the opposite side/the thing I have to do often: add meat to the bones)
strengthen your rambled adjectives into some more descriptive nouns
cut characters that serve no purpose
cut scenes that serve no purpose
cut mercilessly
add description of places/emotions (or perhaps cut them if they're too much or too fluffy!)
In short: you finally get to edit. You have the bones of a story you find brilliant, and now you have to flesh them out, so other people will be able to get a glimpse of the grand picture in your mind. This is FUN! I don't understand why people seem to hate it. It is the best thing of the whole writing process, when you finally have a framework, and can start doing what you set out to do in the first place.
I do however know why it might turn people off: because the first draft might not be good enough to love editing as much as you should. Do you ever run into problems such as 'the whole plot doesn't make any sense because it's based on something stupid?'. I'll give you an example: say you have an artefact which someone has and someone else needs. The two characters meet very early in the story... and the one in the position of 'more' power (who is also the one who needs the artefact) fails to realize it's next to her - and not because the other character is actively trying to hide it... but because... PLOT. The whole plot would have crumbled if she got the artefact when all intelligence implied she should have. (Yeah this was one of my early drafts.. actually my first finished book... and it was broken beyond repair. Don't worry. It's since been shelved.).
How can you love editing then, if your plot is not a plot, and if you're so close to the manuscript nothing ever works? I tell you what: Trust your instinct. Put the manuscript aside for at least a month, then look at it again. There will be things you hate/which don't feel right. You can cut them (though I do advise keeping them in a separate document in case you change your mind later - which I usually don't, but it doesn't hurt to have backup) immediately. There will be things you will want to expand. That's great. That's lovely. You'll know more now than you did when you first wrote it (unless you're an outliner, and I don't know how useful this essay will be to you!), and you can now put this all into motion.
Here's a quick tip: I don't normally use notes. I make a lot of notes in the month between first and second draft, but I rarely look at them while editing. The important details stick - as all good ideas do. The rest... can be dismissed if it wasn't important/exciting enough to remember in the first place. Plus: your notes might be conflicting (say one note says character A must do X to comply with the plot... but another say character A can't do X or the plot will break) ... and they'll just confuse you to no end.
This editing gives you so much freedom! You finally know what your story is about. You can finally put it the way you wanted it. And don't worry, if even after the edit the story still doesn't make sense. There's always the option to improve on the next draft. And you'll write other stories Your current manuscript is not the only thing you'll ever write! And the more you practise the better your next manuscript will be!
Does this help? I hope it does and I hope you'll have a great week! As usual I'd be excited to have some comments (or sales! Ahahah). Cheers!
J.M.
I want to explain why editing is so much better than writing itself. (Warning: this might not be as useful to plotters, but it certainly is to pantsers who don't have much patience to think every plot detail through.)
What????!?!?!!? will be the reaction of most of the people reading this. I don't blame you. But consider this:
1. you write... a first draft. It goes all right (at least if you're a pantser, you're normally not as concerned with what-on-earth is going on in your ms. At first.) You have a finished product, and if it's anything like mine, then it'll be the bare bones of the actual book. It'll be so minimalistic no one else would ever want to read it. The characters are great, they're actually life-like, and each has their own personality, but their emotions, and the reasons they do things (which they do!) might be lacking clarity. The plot, too, could be refined, just so on page one-hundred Max isn't a guy, when he was a girl before. (Unless that's the sort of story you're writing!)
Congratulations! You now have a skeleton (in your drawer!). It might have 60-100k words (or a looot more) and you can put it aside happily.
It's time to wait.
Wait...
Wait...
Ok. Let's pretend a month has passed. (A month is a good time to get over your initial furious writing draft and start to see things more objectively.)
This is when editing comes around.
What's next?
If you're at all sensitive to story structure/characters/plot you can now tell what the manuscript needs. I don't normally read through any of my drafts in detail. I just skim over them and usually edit as I go. This works for me. It might not work for you.
There might be a lot of things to do... such as:
reordering scenes
writing more scenes you forgot/didn't know at the time but which need to be in the manuscript
clarify text
tighten prose (or on the opposite side/the thing I have to do often: add meat to the bones)
strengthen your rambled adjectives into some more descriptive nouns
cut characters that serve no purpose
cut scenes that serve no purpose
cut mercilessly
add description of places/emotions (or perhaps cut them if they're too much or too fluffy!)
In short: you finally get to edit. You have the bones of a story you find brilliant, and now you have to flesh them out, so other people will be able to get a glimpse of the grand picture in your mind. This is FUN! I don't understand why people seem to hate it. It is the best thing of the whole writing process, when you finally have a framework, and can start doing what you set out to do in the first place.
I do however know why it might turn people off: because the first draft might not be good enough to love editing as much as you should. Do you ever run into problems such as 'the whole plot doesn't make any sense because it's based on something stupid?'. I'll give you an example: say you have an artefact which someone has and someone else needs. The two characters meet very early in the story... and the one in the position of 'more' power (who is also the one who needs the artefact) fails to realize it's next to her - and not because the other character is actively trying to hide it... but because... PLOT. The whole plot would have crumbled if she got the artefact when all intelligence implied she should have. (Yeah this was one of my early drafts.. actually my first finished book... and it was broken beyond repair. Don't worry. It's since been shelved.).
How can you love editing then, if your plot is not a plot, and if you're so close to the manuscript nothing ever works? I tell you what: Trust your instinct. Put the manuscript aside for at least a month, then look at it again. There will be things you hate/which don't feel right. You can cut them (though I do advise keeping them in a separate document in case you change your mind later - which I usually don't, but it doesn't hurt to have backup) immediately. There will be things you will want to expand. That's great. That's lovely. You'll know more now than you did when you first wrote it (unless you're an outliner, and I don't know how useful this essay will be to you!), and you can now put this all into motion.
Here's a quick tip: I don't normally use notes. I make a lot of notes in the month between first and second draft, but I rarely look at them while editing. The important details stick - as all good ideas do. The rest... can be dismissed if it wasn't important/exciting enough to remember in the first place. Plus: your notes might be conflicting (say one note says character A must do X to comply with the plot... but another say character A can't do X or the plot will break) ... and they'll just confuse you to no end.
This editing gives you so much freedom! You finally know what your story is about. You can finally put it the way you wanted it. And don't worry, if even after the edit the story still doesn't make sense. There's always the option to improve on the next draft. And you'll write other stories Your current manuscript is not the only thing you'll ever write! And the more you practise the better your next manuscript will be!
Does this help? I hope it does and I hope you'll have a great week! As usual I'd be excited to have some comments (or sales! Ahahah). Cheers!
J.M.
Wednesday, August 3, 2016
How About Cutting?
Hi people!
This will be a post about the craft - specifically about what I've learned in the years I've been writing and how to cut/how to know what to cut.
1.) The most important thing about writing is to cut. Less is more. Much more. You need to learn to weed out shiny-sparkly 'darlings' and cut your manuscript down to the roots. This doesn't mean to axe all the things you like about your work. It means to axe these shiny sparkly parts which have nothing to do with the story.
I know it's difficult. It's difficult to know what to cut. It's difficult to know precisely what you want to say. And I'll give you a fair warning before you read on: You'll need a lot of courage to cut. And you might need a lot of TIME too.
It's even more difficult to say exactly what you want in fewer words. But it's also much more effective and will make your manuscript much more powerful. (Note: this is why short stories are often more powerful than a full novel. They have one - at max two or three - condensed idea and the whole 5-10k deals with only this one concept. This gives the writer lots of space to deal with one or two issues they want to address.)
You set out to write a story about a young man who's trying to solve the disappearance of children in an advanced future... and you end up with an amnesiac constructed human trying to understand why he loves another person more than himself when - in his point of view - they've never met. And even then, after you're done with your first draft, it's still difficult. There's lots of words, sentences, annotations (yes, I annotate in the middle of the text!), that just don't... belong. But then you delete something... and suddenly you have no idea any more why it needed to disappear, why you wrote the story in the first place, and everything simply collapses.
But how? Where do you even start? How do you find the roots of the manuscript? What are the roots of a manuscript? I think of it this way. The roots are like an orchid. They're visible at the top of the soil... but not overly so. You see, there's this pesky thing called 'Theme' (I'll post about this too at some point). Theme is the 'message' of the story, which should be many things, excluding a sermon about what you believe is true/right in the world. Theme, to a good writer, an experienced person, comes naturally, and if it doesn't, there's plenty of pointers on what it is. (Note II: I plan to compile a 'Resources' post with links and book recommendations that helped me learn more about craft in the hopes you'll also find them useful.)
2.) Why do you even want to cut? Isn't your manuscript good as it is? Probably. But you want it to be shiny, right? You want it to sparkle.
a.) You want to be clear and concise.
This is important. You want to tell the story as you envisioned it - nothing more and nothing less. I've been thinking about this for a while now, and I've been playing around with format. The latest short story I finished is complete at ~17,000 words. Why? Because this is the story. I could fluff it up, sure, just add another subplot, or two, but really, these 17,000 words (knowing me, it'll be 20,000 by the end), are enough. They tell the story as it is supposed to be told. And remember: you can always flesh it out/add more detail afterward.
I know. There is a lot of things you want to say and you don't have to be as sparse as me of course. But too much clutter can lead to problems (of boredome of fatigue or just such confusion you don't even know any more what story you wanted to tell or where you wanted to begin it). This could be because:
b.) 1.) You're trying to put too much into the novel. I used to have a problem with this and I developed a question to ask myself after it happened: Is this your last novel? Will you never write anything again? Most of these things, these shiny scenes, these cool characters who have nothing to do with the plot/any of the plots, but you still want them there, are a 'darling', and the opposite of the 'root'.
b.) 2.) You have a great character you love and you want him in the story? Desperately? But somehow you can't squeeze him in there without seriously breaking some other part of the plot? Drop him like he's the sun! He's shiny. He's sparkly. He's brilliant? He also doesn't have anything to do with your story! - Let him go. He'll come back to you when the time is right. Perhaps in your next story?
I had to drop a few characters (including an antagonist) when re-writing The Descendant of Ra. It was just too much... and I couldn't even follow the story any more myself. But after cutting him... nothing really changed about the story, and it's actually better.
You have a cool scene/setting you absolutely must have? Yes. You must. But perhaps not in the story you're currently working on.
This also applies to plot twists, plot points, cool objects, mysterious symbols, et cetera.
Don't worry, though. It isn't as bad as it seems.
At some point, when you've done enough stories, and scenes, and characters, you'll get a feel for it. How many, do you say, are enough? Well, I've finished 7 books, plenty of short stories (a great medium to learn about clear/concise/coherent plots and enticing characters and also to polish your prose), and hundreds of scenes/scene starts, ends, middles, about too many characters to count.
I've discovered it's better to write too little (though perhaps there's also a limit to what is way too little) than too much. You can always add information later if it's necessary (if you're interested check my process on TDR). However, if you have a 190k behemoth of a manuscript, then it'll be very painful to cut.
I hope this helped! Next week's post will be about critique and why it's important! In the meantime... check out my short stories and see if they're overly populated. Is there too much fluff? Too little fluff (in the way that it starts to feel clinical)? Have a good week!
J.M.
This will be a post about the craft - specifically about what I've learned in the years I've been writing and how to cut/how to know what to cut.
1.) The most important thing about writing is to cut. Less is more. Much more. You need to learn to weed out shiny-sparkly 'darlings' and cut your manuscript down to the roots. This doesn't mean to axe all the things you like about your work. It means to axe these shiny sparkly parts which have nothing to do with the story.
I know it's difficult. It's difficult to know what to cut. It's difficult to know precisely what you want to say. And I'll give you a fair warning before you read on: You'll need a lot of courage to cut. And you might need a lot of TIME too.
It's even more difficult to say exactly what you want in fewer words. But it's also much more effective and will make your manuscript much more powerful. (Note: this is why short stories are often more powerful than a full novel. They have one - at max two or three - condensed idea and the whole 5-10k deals with only this one concept. This gives the writer lots of space to deal with one or two issues they want to address.)
You set out to write a story about a young man who's trying to solve the disappearance of children in an advanced future... and you end up with an amnesiac constructed human trying to understand why he loves another person more than himself when - in his point of view - they've never met. And even then, after you're done with your first draft, it's still difficult. There's lots of words, sentences, annotations (yes, I annotate in the middle of the text!), that just don't... belong. But then you delete something... and suddenly you have no idea any more why it needed to disappear, why you wrote the story in the first place, and everything simply collapses.
But how? Where do you even start? How do you find the roots of the manuscript? What are the roots of a manuscript? I think of it this way. The roots are like an orchid. They're visible at the top of the soil... but not overly so. You see, there's this pesky thing called 'Theme' (I'll post about this too at some point). Theme is the 'message' of the story, which should be many things, excluding a sermon about what you believe is true/right in the world. Theme, to a good writer, an experienced person, comes naturally, and if it doesn't, there's plenty of pointers on what it is. (Note II: I plan to compile a 'Resources' post with links and book recommendations that helped me learn more about craft in the hopes you'll also find them useful.)
2.) Why do you even want to cut? Isn't your manuscript good as it is? Probably. But you want it to be shiny, right? You want it to sparkle.
a.) You want to be clear and concise.
This is important. You want to tell the story as you envisioned it - nothing more and nothing less. I've been thinking about this for a while now, and I've been playing around with format. The latest short story I finished is complete at ~17,000 words. Why? Because this is the story. I could fluff it up, sure, just add another subplot, or two, but really, these 17,000 words (knowing me, it'll be 20,000 by the end), are enough. They tell the story as it is supposed to be told. And remember: you can always flesh it out/add more detail afterward.
I know. There is a lot of things you want to say and you don't have to be as sparse as me of course. But too much clutter can lead to problems (of boredome of fatigue or just such confusion you don't even know any more what story you wanted to tell or where you wanted to begin it). This could be because:
b.) 1.) You're trying to put too much into the novel. I used to have a problem with this and I developed a question to ask myself after it happened: Is this your last novel? Will you never write anything again? Most of these things, these shiny scenes, these cool characters who have nothing to do with the plot/any of the plots, but you still want them there, are a 'darling', and the opposite of the 'root'.
b.) 2.) You have a great character you love and you want him in the story? Desperately? But somehow you can't squeeze him in there without seriously breaking some other part of the plot? Drop him like he's the sun! He's shiny. He's sparkly. He's brilliant? He also doesn't have anything to do with your story! - Let him go. He'll come back to you when the time is right. Perhaps in your next story?
I had to drop a few characters (including an antagonist) when re-writing The Descendant of Ra. It was just too much... and I couldn't even follow the story any more myself. But after cutting him... nothing really changed about the story, and it's actually better.
You have a cool scene/setting you absolutely must have? Yes. You must. But perhaps not in the story you're currently working on.
This also applies to plot twists, plot points, cool objects, mysterious symbols, et cetera.
Don't worry, though. It isn't as bad as it seems.
At some point, when you've done enough stories, and scenes, and characters, you'll get a feel for it. How many, do you say, are enough? Well, I've finished 7 books, plenty of short stories (a great medium to learn about clear/concise/coherent plots and enticing characters and also to polish your prose), and hundreds of scenes/scene starts, ends, middles, about too many characters to count.
I've discovered it's better to write too little (though perhaps there's also a limit to what is way too little) than too much. You can always add information later if it's necessary (if you're interested check my process on TDR). However, if you have a 190k behemoth of a manuscript, then it'll be very painful to cut.
I hope this helped! Next week's post will be about critique and why it's important! In the meantime... check out my short stories and see if they're overly populated. Is there too much fluff? Too little fluff (in the way that it starts to feel clinical)? Have a good week!
J.M.
Tuesday, August 2, 2016
Bonus Post! What is: The Descedant of Ra
Hi people!
This post will be a bit more about my process writing 'The Descendant of Ra' - and also its content.
Do you remember those 72k words I said I had between the third and fourth draft? Turns out the fourth draft, which is now done, has 27k words in total (Also turns out it took me three - or was it four? - years to muster the courage to ruthlessly cut.). The fifth draft, which I think will be the last draft before the final polish, will likely have around 50-60k words.
I'm extremely hyped about the project and I want to take this opportunity to tell you a bit more about The Descendant of Ra. I've done a bit of this on twitter (#TDR) already, but this will be a bit more plot-focused/detailed than the sporadic info you can pack into 140 characters.
In short: you (or your kids! Especially your kids!) will like this book if you/they like:
*ancient Egypt
*mystery
*adventure
*action
*magic
*and strong female as well as male characters
Here's the blurb as it stands (not the final version).
15-year old Zimon Walker is about to become the world's most celebrated archaeologist by discovering a secret ancient Egyptian tomb, but when he enters the tomb's heart, he finds himself in ancient Egypt instead. There, nothing is as it should be. The Pharaoh has been killed, and his sole heir, the princess Nefertari, struggles to survive against the pretender Zeti's magic. Her plan is to find the god Ra, the only one who can defeat Zeit, and Zimon can't go home unless the father of all gods is found. Zimon and his allies are forced to seek help, but not all who offer it are friendly, and the darkness is closing in on them.
I hope this gives a bit of an overview and you're as hyped as me about it! Please ask questions in the comments if you have any! :)
J.M.
This post will be a bit more about my process writing 'The Descendant of Ra' - and also its content.
Do you remember those 72k words I said I had between the third and fourth draft? Turns out the fourth draft, which is now done, has 27k words in total (Also turns out it took me three - or was it four? - years to muster the courage to ruthlessly cut.). The fifth draft, which I think will be the last draft before the final polish, will likely have around 50-60k words.
I'm extremely hyped about the project and I want to take this opportunity to tell you a bit more about The Descendant of Ra. I've done a bit of this on twitter (#TDR) already, but this will be a bit more plot-focused/detailed than the sporadic info you can pack into 140 characters.
In short: you (or your kids! Especially your kids!) will like this book if you/they like:
*ancient Egypt
*mystery
*adventure
*action
*magic
*and strong female as well as male characters
Here's the blurb as it stands (not the final version).
15-year old Zimon Walker is about to become the world's most celebrated archaeologist by discovering a secret ancient Egyptian tomb, but when he enters the tomb's heart, he finds himself in ancient Egypt instead. There, nothing is as it should be. The Pharaoh has been killed, and his sole heir, the princess Nefertari, struggles to survive against the pretender Zeti's magic. Her plan is to find the god Ra, the only one who can defeat Zeit, and Zimon can't go home unless the father of all gods is found. Zimon and his allies are forced to seek help, but not all who offer it are friendly, and the darkness is closing in on them.
I hope this gives a bit of an overview and you're as hyped as me about it! Please ask questions in the comments if you have any! :)
J.M.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)