What are you Writing?

[MikeKardec]

Good God ... get going! We're all lending our reality entangles, distant spooky action, help and best wishes.

 

[Benzadmiral]

Working an another Weird West story, because I ran across another anthology for the genre with a deadline of 9/30. I think I'll make it.

 

[Benzadmiral]

This may be controversial but ... A great example of avoiding the "So what?" reaction is Raiders of the Lost Ark. There's a lot of running around but little meaning, little resonance. Basically, it says nothing about anything (my opinion only ... and I love the film) but it is absolutely SAVED by it's final shot. The ark being lost yet again as the "top men" order it stowed away deep in the stasis field of a government inefficiency and incompetence storage location. The theme of the film is: All that crazy adventure and action and it is "lost again." Or, if you really want to give it the benefit of the doubt: The ark has true mystical powers, the most important of which is to disappear ...

It's not much of a message but it is astoundingly effective, simply because it was such a wild ride. The contract was fulfilled.

A joke, provided it is the least bit funny, is always an example of perfect story structure. It has no choice, it cannot be funny without it. The "Lost Ark" at the end of the film (especially one lost by "top men") is a great punchline.

Agreed -- but I've always seen it as in part a story of Prof. Indiana Jones's commitment to preserving the artifacts of the past. He has the chance, not long before the end, to destroy the Ark with the bazooka, to keep the Germans from having and opening it, and doesn't take it; because (as the French guy says, I think) he can't bear to destroy the past, or let it be destroyed.

 

[MikeKardec]

Agreed -- but I've always seen it as in part a story of Prof. Indiana Jones's commitment to preserving the artifacts of the past. He has the chance, not long before the end, to destroy the Ark with the bazooka, to keep the Germans from having and opening it, and doesn't take it; because (as the French guy says, I think) he can't bear to destroy the past, or let it be destroyed.

Yeah, I agree. That's a complicated moment because Marion is there too and, ultimately, Indy doesn't really decide not to shoot, he just agonizes long enough for the Germans to get behind him ... then he has to give up.

BUT ... it is completely clear to me that you are right about the intention of the scene. Structurally, it comes at the exact moment that is supposed to reflect that particular theme as it is played out between Jones and Belloch. As I mentioned above, a lot of "story structure" is discussed as it relates to Act Breaks and things of that sort. Of greater power, because it reinforces characterization and theme, is a system of resonant points that runs through stories in literature and film.

The Hero is Called to Adventure but Refuses or Debates the Call then Crosses the Threshold ... all straight up superficial Hero's Journey stuff. But the inner detail of WHY he refuses or debates and then what gets him to finally commit to Crossing the Threshold when he initially debated the Call is actually MORE important. That Call, Refusal, Crossing, dynamic is revisited after he has the whole middle of the story to evolve when he reaches the crushing moment of defeat (the All is Lost or "Death" moment), there's a Dark Night of the Soul or Reflection stage and then he pulls himself together and forges on. A good story shows you, in the difference between these these resonant earlier and later sections, that the Hero has evolved. I can go into it in more specifics if you ever want me to.

The Film business, where most of the study of structure has taken place, has corrupted the science of it even as it has pushed the discussion forward. Film people are obsessed with forming a cookie cutter template that a writer can simply follow and supposedly be a success. To their discredit they often miss the more fundamental underlying patterns, ones that lend depth and meaning.

 

[Benzadmiral]

And a further point about "Raiders has no plot/no matter what Indiana Jones does, the outcome is the same": Yes . . . but Indy and Marion don't know that! They don't know as they go along (any more than the first-time viewer does) that when the Germans open the Ark, it'll destroy them. For all they know, once Hitler & Co. grab the Ark -- take mere possession of it, not opening it -- the artifact will make the Wehrmacht invincible. So the story could be read as their struggle to stop what they think is the disastrous outcome, not the actual outcome. If they'd known what would occur when Bellocq opened the Ark, they'd have let him have it a lot earlier, and we'd have had no adventure at all.

 

[MikeKardec]

And a further point about "Raiders has no plot/no matter what Indiana Jones does, the outcome is the same": Yes . . . but Indy and Marion don't know that! They don't know as they go along (any more than the first-time viewer does) that when the Germans open the Ark, it'll destroy them. For all they know, once Hitler & Co. grab the Ark -- take mere possession of it, not opening it -- the artifact will make the Wehrmacht invincible. So the story could be read as their struggle to stop what they think is the disastrous outcome, not the actual outcome. If they'd known what would occur when Bellocq opened the Ark, they'd have let him have it a lot earlier, and we'd have had no adventure at all.

... which might make the last shot all the more ironic! It's a great film and, like a lot of Spielberg movies it violates a lot of "rules" even as it obeys others to a cliched degree. Interestingly, it's also the polar opposite of Jaws when it comes to camera technique. Raiders is very haphazard and illogical in the way the coverage is designed (or thrown together), done without much obvious planning or continuity. Sometimes that is done because, like shakey cam, if it's done right it can increase (for short periods) the tension. In this case, in my opinion, it does not help in that arena ... it doesn't hurt but it doesn't help. Jaws, on the other hand, is SOOO elegant. A compilation of perfectly interlocking master shots that would have made John Ford proud. Of course there are vastly fewer people to cover and much of the action is on a 40' boat. But, coverage wise, it's just beautiful, beautiful, beautiful.

 

[MikeKardec]

I was just watching Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee -- http://comediansincarsgettingcoffee.com/

Great line from Jerry Seinfeld: Something like, "This is how comedians think, it's not funny but this is how the creative process works -- 'When you take your clothes to the dry cleaner you can go to any dry cleaner you want. But when you pick them up you can only go to ONE dry cleaner.'"

He's right. It's not funny. BUT that helps you focus on the thought process and you can see how a stand up could spin that sort of odd conundrum into something funny. It's that twist that leads to stand up humor.

I really wish I was good at this kind of thing in the world of stories but I have a long way to go. I see Steven King doing it all the time: Q) "How can I even the odds to that a man and a pigeon are equally in a battle to the death? He probably got dive bombed earlier in the day. A) Put the man on the window ledge of a skyscraper. Q) How do you escape writing about a character the public loves? B) Have it come to life and try to kill the author."

A favorite among a number of authors is: Q) What happens when a con man gets caught in his own con? This is always good because for a con man to be effective he must accept his "mark's" humanity but once he does he risks empathizing with them and just might create something of worth that he can't back out of rather than taking the money and running. A) The Music Man, in sci fi; The Postman, in real life; Schindler's List, in Westerns my Dad's novel Fallon.

If I could just get the right questions to come out of me it might lead to a lot more efficient idea machine.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I really wish I was good at this kind of thing in the world of stories but I have a long way to go. I see Steven King doing it all the time: Q) "How can I even the odds to that a man and a pigeon are equally in a battle to the death? He probably got dive bombed earlier in the day. A) Put the man on the window ledge of a skyscraper.

Harold Lloyd did exactly this bit in 1923.

 

[MikeKardec]

Harold Lloyd did exactly this bit in 1923.

Maybe it was an interest in old movies then!

 

[MikeKardec]

In the midst of my story structure research and update project. I'm very impressed with the significance of having a good Mid Point/Tipping Point/Hinge Point to shift the story into "we're not fooling around anymore mode. It's also interesting to me how many times I followed that model before I ever knew about it.

Instead of the more common (and possibly better) intense action or drama scene that often fits into this spot in my own work have often been to Hinge on a Dilemma:

In Unguarded Moment (audio production) -- the (anti) Hero kills the man who has been blackmailing him for stealing a business associate's wallet but then discovers that the blackmailer's wife is onto him and is FAR worse than her petty criminal husband.

Merrano of the Dry Country (audio production) -- sensing some hypocrisy in her father's position the Heroine goes to visit the ranch of Miguel Merrano, the Mexican all the Anglo ranchers think is stealing their cattle. She discovers he a lot more than he seems and no thief.

Son of a Wanted Man (screenplay and audio production) -- Mike Santos is sent by his adopted father, a notorious outlaw, to scout the bank in the town that was his childhood home for a bank robbery. Mike has a series of adventures in town that set him to wondering if he really wants to be like his adoptive father.

Law of the Desert Born (audio production, screenplay, comic book) -- The foreman of a struggling cattle ranch has to choose between loyalty to his boss, who is like a father to him, and a new found friend. Everybody's survival is on the line and his "solution" to blame the friend solely for a crime isn't going to last long.

The Diamond of Jeru (TV Movie, audio production) -- Heading up a Borneo river to save a vacationing couple from their dishonest guides the Hero finally catches up to the people he is chasing but discovers that he can't simply announce his presence because the immediate attraction he has felt for the wife was both reciprocated and is suspected by the husband.

The Californios (TV Mini Series Proposal) -- Two friends/brothers in law, one Mexican the other Yankee are split apart by the creation of a Mexican Resistance movement intended to fight against the invading US soldiers after the surrender of Alta California in the Mexican War.

All of the stories were adaptations but these Mid Point moments were not all obvious based on the source material. Unguarded Moment was a slam dunk based on the original even though the timing wasn't exact. The others were vastly less clear ... until you look at the story from an emotional perspective.

Now, in hindsight, it's pretty obvious these were the emotional "hooks" over which the entire narrative was draped. I really had no idea I was doing this or that it was such a critical moment when I first wrote this stuff. In the years since writing the first draft of all of these most of my writing (as opposed to general work in publishing) has been, so far unsuccessful, TV Series proposals like the Californios. The vastly larger scale and more nebulous structure of an 8 to 22 episode season has put me WAY out of touch with the structure of a single "all in one" story. I definitely have to retrain myself!

 

[Benzadmiral]

Finished the Weird West story, 3500 words. Not sure I like it as it stands. Oh, I *like* it all right; it's finished and it says, I believe, what I hoped it would say. But I'm not sure if I *love* it. Usually I'm crazy about a piece right after I type "The End." It's later that I look at it and say, "When did this turn into rotten fruit?"

With this one, I'm not in love. That might mean I failed, or it might mean that the stuff I love is the rotten fruit and this is a proper steak. We'll see what my writing group has to say.

 

[AmateisGal]

Still plugging away on the novel. Now that we're back on a regular schedule - i.e. school has started - maybe life will settle down some so I can devote more time to it. I doubt I'll make my self-imposed deadline of having the draft done by the end of August; but things are pretty solid so it might not take me as long to edit (a month) as I thought.

 

[MikeKardec]

Finished the Weird West story, 3500 words. Not sure I like it as it stands. Oh, I *like* it all right; it's finished and it says, I believe, what I hoped it would say. But I'm not sure if I *love* it. Usually I'm crazy about a piece right after I type "The End." It's later that I look at it and say, "When did this turn into rotten fruit?"

With this one, I'm not in love. That might mean I failed, or it might mean that the stuff I love is the rotten fruit and this is a proper steak. We'll see what my writing group has to say.

Don't worry about it until you've put it away for awhile and never under estimate what revisiting something can do. We ALL labor under the sword of "Is It Sh*t", and sometimes it is ... but rarely is a piece utterly useless, though you may have to wait a few years to see what sprouts from that seed.

Still plugging away on the novel. Now that we're back on a regular schedule - i.e. school has started - maybe life will settle down some so I can devote more time to it. I doubt I'll make my self-imposed deadline of having the draft done by the end of August; but things are pretty solid so it might not take me as long to edit (a month) as I thought.

That's Amazing. My work comes to me so slowly and you have all those family distractions to top it all off. It's good to know that someone is banging it out on a truly professional schedule!

 

[AmateisGal]

That's Amazing. My work comes to me so slowly and you have all those family distractions to top it all off. It's good to know that someone is banging it out on a truly professional schedule!

Ha! I don't know about a professional schedule! I'm trying to write as much as I can every day, but it depends on my health. I skip some days and feel bad about doing so. But we are our own worst taskmasters, are we not?

 

[Tiki Tom]

Ha! I don't know about a professional schedule! I'm trying to write as much as I can every day, but it depends on my health. I skip some days and feel bad about doing so. But we are our own worst taskmasters, are we not?

I tip my hat to your sense of mission. Since I last visited this illustrious thread, I too have been plugging away in the face of a day job and family obligations. So I get the difficulty of getting started writing every day (or in my case, a day or two per week.) Once I'm started it is fine. It is getting started that is like pulling teeth. Usually I have to clean up all the clutter in sight and clean the kitchen before I can force my rear into a chair and apply fingers to keypad. That having been said, I am now on the final Chapter of my murder mystery set in Hawai'i. Currently it is at 65,000 words. I may try to shave it down a bit in the editing process. (It is actually more than a simple "murder mystery" and ---although set in "today"--- contains many golden era flourishes near and dear to the hearts of loungers.) I'm dreading being done with it. That will mean I'll have to attempt to do something with it; aka Query letters, rejection, etc. Not like I've never been through that before. Such is life. Best of luck to you all.

 

[Benzadmiral]

On July 19, I wrote, "submitted a query for a mystery novel . . . to Random House Alibi, RH's digital imprint." They wrote back with the same old boilerplate -- this time it's "I liked the setup and the Colorado setting, but I didn't connect with the narrative voice the way I'd hoped." Not sure what they mean. If they only like authors who write in present tense and second person (I've seen it done -- Jay McInerney's Bright Lights, Big City), I guess I would disappoint them. Ah, well.

 

[AmateisGal]

On July 19, I wrote, "submitted a query for a mystery novel . . . to Random House Alibi, RH's digital imprint." They wrote back with the same old boilerplate -- this time it's "I liked the setup and the Colorado setting, but I didn't connect with the narrative voice the way I'd hoped." Not sure what they mean. If they only like authors who write in present tense and second person (I've seen it done -- Jay McInerney's Bright Lights, Big City), I guess I would disappoint them. Ah, well.

The important thing is you tried and put your work out there. It took me several years just to get an agent and I'm still piling up rejections for my novel. Publishing is definitely not for the faint of heart!

 

[Benzadmiral]

The important thing is you tried and put your work out there. It took me several years just to get an agent and I'm still piling up rejections for my novel. Publishing is definitely not for the faint of heart!

Thanks, AmateisGal,

I have another mystery ms. I can query them about. Probably it'll get the same reaction, since it's also a first-person amateur detective tale (male narrator this time) -- but as the California guy said to the Florida girl, "Nothing Ventura, nothing Gainesville."

 

[MikeKardec]

On July 19, I wrote, "submitted a query for a mystery novel . . . to Random House Alibi, RH's digital imprint." They wrote back with the same old boilerplate -- this time it's "I liked the setup and the Colorado setting, but I didn't connect with the narrative voice the way I'd hoped." Not sure what they mean. If they only like authors who write in present tense and second person (I've seen it done -- Jay McInerney's Bright Lights, Big City), I guess I would disappoint them. Ah, well.

They are just letting you know they read it. Personally, I think that the, "the way I'd hoped." is a bit obnoxious but they probably think they are being nice, so how do you fault that? I REALLY doubt that they LITERALLY meant the "narrative voice," like whether it was first person present or not, was a problem for them. I think that it just means that the story in general didn't connect with that editor. For the record: RH is HUGE and grossly understaffed, everyone is over worked and I'm skeptical that the editor at Alibi is only working for Alibi. He or she (usually she) probably has a ton of other responsibilities elsewhere in the company as well.

In my opinion (and this is ONLY my opinion) Alibi exists so that RH can say that they are doing something to react to the digital market. They do want material that can compete with KDP one on one at the low digital price points (I believe not publishing in paper allows Alibi to charge prices in digital below what the bookstore agreements allow if you are publishing in paper ... bookstores hate to be dramatically undersold by digital) but in the end they probably still have the mentality of a big publisher; they are looking for blockbusters. Even in digital.

As you probably read sometime back I do work with (not for) RH on occasion. I virtually never try to sell them new material (except my own under very specific circumstances), that's not my area and I try stay out of it completely. Basically, I need them to trust me, so I keep my mouth shut. Except once. A friend of mine's father wrote an absolutely fantastic novel about the Vietnam War. It was called "Matterhorn" I took it to several editors at RH. I said. "I've NEVER asked you to read anything because I never want to waste your time but this is SERIOUS. This is a great book and it's going to kick a**!" No one wanted it or even took it very seriously, "Blah, blah, blah ... no one wants a book about Vietnam post 9/11. It needs work." etc. It did need work but ...

After several other publishers turned it down, an editor at Grove decided she liked it. It has sold brilliantly (NYT and other Bestseller lists) and was wonderfully reviewed. A highly successful book.

The only thing they say that has any meaning is "This is how much we are offering." Keep plugging, they are a pebble in the path of you blitzkrieg!

 

[Tiki Tom]

On July 19, I wrote, "submitted a query for a mystery novel . . . to Random House Alibi, RH's digital imprint." They wrote back with the same old boilerplate -- this time it's "I liked the setup and the Colorado setting, but I didn't connect with the narrative voice the way I'd hoped." Not sure what they mean. If they only like authors who write in present tense and second person (I've seen it done -- Jay McInerney's Bright Lights, Big City), I guess I would disappoint them. Ah, well.

Congrats! At least you have people reading your material. I have a hard time even getting that far. "Many are called, few are chosen" and all that. In my normal day job I am considered an excellent letter writer, but apparently writing a good query letter is a whole ' other skill set.