What are you Writing?

[MikeKardec]

That's not a tough schedule. I don't have any extracurricular activities with my daughter (she isn't into sports, and would rather read and write like me) and my volunteer position with our local veterans garden board is quite minimal. I rarely go out of town, (health doesn't permit it) and honestly, am home more than anything else. That's where I like to be.

No, for a writer, that's a tough schedule! So many different things to concentrate on, it would blow my mind and the same with many writers I know. Many have done that sort of thing once or twice as they try to get started but to keep going with it is a lot. I think it's amazing and admirable. Many known pros write many more hours and punish themselves to complete manuscripts but so much of it is just writing, writing, writing.

My real breakthrough in understanding what goes on, besides experiencing it myself (which was oddly uninformative), was studying acting and dealing with people studying improv comedy. The most important thing in improv was learning to open your unconscious to do the funny, fast, creative, stuff. Get out of practice, you have to go through a painful retraining, reopening, process. My father, without understanding it intellectually, wrote every day and was determined not to stop for fear he'd find it hard to restart. I finally got a clue, not from writing but from self hypnosis and training myself to go into a very deep trance; like LSD trip deep. I could do it but only after a LOT of painful and frustrating practice. If I stopped for any length of time the ability had to be rebuilt again with that painful and frustrating process often taking weeks or months.

Writers have different rituals to put them in the mind set to open their subconscious, sharpening pencils, rewriting the previous day's work, Steven Pressfield rewrites a prayer to The Muse ... I don't think it matters. Many of us were given an unrealized hypnotic induction by our parents at bedtime; our prayers. It's the ritual combined with what always comes after. A writer's ritual, or just the decision to write should ALWAYS be followed by WRITING, even if it's bad work or on an alternative project. Your subconscious needs the discipline of the ritual being followed by creativity of some sort ... if we don't teach it the rules it won't obey them.

I struggle with all of this as much as anyone. Distractions, different types of work, laziness, lack of discipline plague me. But I do know what works (at least for me and a few others) and I can return to those patterns if I have to and when things aren't getting written. I sometimes wish for a shock collar to maintain discipline but I torture myself with the knowledge that I can do it if I need to. The difference between myself and too many others is that my time is totally my own. In that way I've got it really, really, really, easy!

 

[AmateisGal]

No, for a writer, that's a tough schedule! So many different things to concentrate on, it would blow my mind and the same with many writers I know. Many have done that sort of thing once or twice as they try to get started but to keep going with it is a lot. I think it's amazing and admirable. Many known pros write many more hours and punish themselves to complete manuscripts but so much of it is just writing, writing, writing.

My real breakthrough in understanding what goes on, besides experiencing it myself (which was oddly uninformative), was studying acting and dealing with people studying improv comedy. The most important thing in improv was learning to open your unconscious to do the funny, fast, creative, stuff. Get out of practice, you have to go through a painful retraining, reopening, process. My father, without understanding it intellectually, wrote every day and was determined not to stop for fear he'd find it hard to restart. I finally got a clue, not from writing but from self hypnosis and training myself to go into a very deep trance; like LSD trip deep. I could do it but only after a LOT of painful and frustrating practice. If I stopped for any length of time the ability had to be rebuilt again with that painful and frustrating process often taking weeks or months.

Writers have different rituals to put them in the mind set to open their subconscious, sharpening pencils, rewriting the previous day's work, Steven Pressfield rewrites a prayer to The Muse ... I don't think it matters. Many of us were given an unrealized hypnotic induction by our parents at bedtime; our prayers. It's the ritual combined with what always comes after. A writer's ritual, or just the decision to write should ALWAYS be followed by WRITING, even if it's bad work or on an alternative project. Your subconscious needs the discipline of the ritual being followed by creativity of some sort ... if we don't teach it the rules it won't obey them.

I struggle with all of this as much as anyone. Distractions, different types of work, laziness, lack of discipline plague me. But I do know what works (at least for me and a few others) and I can return to those patterns if I have to and when things aren't getting written. I sometimes wish for a shock collar to maintain discipline but I torture myself with the knowledge that I can do it if I need to. The difference between myself and too many others is that my time is totally my own. In that way I've got it really, really, really, easy!

I think the importance of a ritual before we write can't be overstated. I started doing a freewriting session before working on my novel about a month ago and it got the gunk out and got me ready to write. Of course, after not writing for a few days, I forgot about the ritual and tried to dive into the writing cold - i.e. without a warm-up. Why I *forget* what works and try to reinvent the wheel, so to speak, is beyond me. But now that I'm back on the right track, I'm not going to forget again! (I hope!).

 

[Benzadmiral]

AmateisGal, perhaps try shifting the writing to *before* work? My mind is usually at its best when I first wake up, and I hear that's true of most people whether they know it or not. My routine now is to exercise before breakfast, eat, head to work early, write a page or so at my work computer every day, then shift to "work" mode. I've rarely been able to work on anything after getting home from my office.

 

[AmateisGal]

AmateisGal, perhaps try shifting the writing to *before* work? My mind is usually at its best when I first wake up, and I hear that's true of most people whether they know it or not. My routine now is to exercise before breakfast, eat, head to work early, write a page or so at my work computer every day, then shift to "work" mode. I've rarely been able to work on anything after getting home from my office.

I wish I could do that - but through long experience, I am a night owl. I can easily stay up until midnight working on stuff - that's usually when I hit my stride. But I sleep as long as possible in the morning before I have to get up to go to work. I have never been a morning person. I wish I could be! I know myself too well - there's no way I would be able to do it.

 

[Benzadmiral]

I wish I could do that - but through long experience, I am a night owl. I can easily stay up until midnight working on stuff - that's usually when I hit my stride. But I sleep as long as possible in the morning before I have to get up to go to work. I have never been a morning person. I wish I could be! I know myself too well - there's no way I would be able to do it.

I used to believe I was an evening creature too, back during my days as a theatre major. My opinion was, "If God had intended for us to be up in the morning, He would have had it happen after 12 noon." This made sense, as nearly all rehearsals and performances were in the afternoon or evening. (Also I was drinking then --)

Then I went to work, doing all sorts of shifts, early morning and night. And somehow my system shifted. I'm much livelier in the morning.

Well, then, maybe you should alternate: evenings with exercise Tue-Thurs., and writing time MWF?

 

[Fading Fast]

Knowing yourself is key. I could move the earth off its axis in the morning but find lifting a feather an effort late at night.

I write in the morning - sometimes before the sun is up - as I can spit words out easily then.

That said, I write in my head all day long. Sometimes - for example, if I have a financial market piece to write - I'll be writing it in my head for days (might or might not write down a few notes), so that by the time I'm at the keyboard, I'm just "copying" it out of my head.

But while I can mentally write at anytime, the physical writing is best in the morning for me.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I got used to morning writing in radio -- I had to have my quota of stories done in time for air at 530 am. Get up at 3, take a caffeine pill, arrive at the office at 3:15, and hit the typewriter cold with a pile of semi-legible notes to work from, and on the air ready or not at half past five. First drafts? Never heard of 'em.

 

[AmateisGal]

I have nothing planned for today but to read and write. I've got to figure out the tangle that is my novel's climax, and then WRITE the darn thing!

 

[MikeKardec]

I've been most successful when I started planning my story from the "what is the climax?" question. I don't always do it but I know it eventually makes things easier. I'm going to try and be more focused on that in the future because it helps. Interestingly, writing non-fiction, as I've been doing the last couple of years, you tend to really focus on "The Climax" because that's what the piece is about, that's the whole reason you are saying what you are saying. However, being aware of that and sculpting it into a more dramatic climax-y climax is something I have to work on too.

 

[AmateisGal]

I am beginning to accept that my writing process is incredibly messy. Things just start to really come into focus as I near the end - which means I need to go back and add things to the beginning and middle to make it all work. Not all my novels have been like this - but the latest sure has.

 

[MikeKardec]

I am beginning to accept that my writing process is incredibly messy. Things just start to really come into focus as I near the end - which means I need to go back and add things to the beginning and middle to make it all work. Not all my novels have been like this - but the latest sure has.

That could be healthy ... though frustrating. I find that the more I have to revisit something, the more perspectives I see it from, the more it develops it's own voice and thus the better it gets. As long as you can keep track of or work to discover (they may be two different things) all those loose ends the messiness might be a good thing!

I'm going through this old novel I'm now writing "with" my Dad and adding more connectivity to tangential stuff and cleaning up more semi loose ends. It's amazing how much you catch when you put a project away for six months, amazing how many new ideas you get. At the same time I'm really hesitant to second guess myself too much, I'm now finding it hard to keep track of every element like I could when I was working on it full time. I don't want to do some damage out of ignorance. But this is a REALLY complicated book, full of nuance and connectivity that is suggested rather than laid out clearly. A first for both of us.

 

[Tiki Tom]

I am beginning to accept that my writing process is incredibly messy. Things just start to really come into focus as I near the end - which means I need to go back and add things to the beginning and middle to make it all work. Not all my novels have been like this - but the latest sure has.

That is pretty much how I write too. Sometimes I start with almost nothing --a mood, a certain ambiance, a character-- and everything else builds from there. My tales invariably have a lot of "scaffolding" ...after the first draft is done I go back and take down the no longer needed scaffolding; the no longer necessary back-stories; the side plots that don't really go anywhere; and I tighten the main plot and characters. It is not really the most efficient way to write, I guess. But that's how I usually work.

I'm not working on anything right now, which is odd for me. Through a strange transaction that occurred as I was preparing to self-publish, that book is now in the hands of an actual NY literary agent for review. Knock on wood and spit three times. I know better than to have any expectations at all (truly), but still, it's kind of cool. It is certainly unusual. So I am sitting tight til I hear back.

After 6 months of not having looked at it, I am starting to edit my second/other book, which is a murder mystery. But I have this nagging feeling that I should be starting something NEW. I have a vague plot in my head (more of an alluring scene than a plot) but I'm not sure it's got the oomph required to put the first few pages onto paper.

All of the above plus several dollars might buy you a cup of coffee.

 

[MikeKardec]

Just a few days ago I discovered a scene taking a very interesting, lifelike, turn because it had been sort of an odd stub that wasn't going anywhere and I decided to 1) keep it and, 2) make it work and thus go somewhere. Now it has that chemical verisimilitude that fiction sometimes lacks but it's no longer extraneous. It's also not a polished and predictable "formula scene" like the one it might have been replaced with. It's the upside to reacting to your story and it's developments rather than sanding it flat. I doubt anyone else will ever notice and it is easy to make something along these lines work in this novel because it contains a number of slowly aligning thematic elements rather than the tight plot of a mystery or some such. I pray that is not a liability (well, actually I know it is a liability) but such is the nature of this piece ... I can improve it but it's against my rules to try to turn it into something else entirely.

 

[AmateisGal]

That is pretty much how I write too. Sometimes I start with almost nothing --a mood, a certain ambiance, a character-- and everything else builds from there. My tales invariably have a lot of "scaffolding" ...after the first draft is done I go back and take down the no longer needed scaffolding; the no longer necessary back-stories; the side plots that don't really go anywhere; and I tighten the main plot and characters. It is not really the most efficient way to write, I guess. But that's how I usually work.

I'm not working on anything right now, which is odd for me. Through a strange transaction that occurred as I was preparing to self-publish, that book is now in the hands of an actual NY literary agent for review. Knock on wood and spit three times. I know better than to have any expectations at all (truly), but still, it's kind of cool. It is certainly unusual. So I am sitting tight til I hear back.

After 6 months of not having looked at it, I am starting to edit my second/other book, which is a murder mystery. But I have this nagging feeling that I should be starting something NEW. I have a vague plot in my head (more of an alluring scene than a plot) but I'm not sure it's got the oomph required to put the first few pages onto paper.

All of the above plus several dollars might buy you a cup of coffee.

Ooh, that's fantastic about the literary agent! I hope you get an offer of representation!

 

[Benzadmiral]

About 2/3 of the way through a short story that is morphing into a shortish novelette. Normally I try to keep short stories at or under 5000 words. But this is science fiction, about a future America ca. 2065, and a certain amount of explanation and showing how this society is different from our own is necessary. I think. I'll try running the first 8 pages or so past my writing group people next week and see what they say.

The background would actually appeal to FL people, I believe, as it's more like '30s-'50s America than the "the dirty, overcrowded, shrieking" period the narrator has heard of, the early 21st Century. . . .

 

[MikeKardec]

I've moved on to an essay about the making of one of the first truly modern "Independent" feature films. An insane juggling act of theater commitments, casting, weather, banks, scripts and such. It's no wonder you usually hear of film makers only doing this sort of thing once in their lives before they give in and work with the studios. This was the 1960s. The REAL independents were the film makers who escaped to California to get away from the oppressive control of the Edison Combine.

 

[Benzadmiral]

About 2/3 of the way through a short story that is morphing into a shortish novelette. Normally I try to keep short stories at or under 5000 words. But this is science fiction, about a future America ca. 2065, and a certain amount of explanation and showing how this society is different from our own is necessary. I think. I'll try running the first 8 pages or so past my writing group people next week and see what they say.

The background would actually appeal to FL people, I believe, as it's more like '30s-'50s America than the "the dirty, overcrowded, shrieking" period the narrator has heard of, the early 21st Century. . . .

Completed 2/5/17, approx. 7000 words.

 

[MikeKardec]

Having some difficulty wrapping up the Independent Film essay, I just have to get serious and wrap up the description of the final premiere and ultimate outcome of the film. I think some of it is that it wasn't a particularly good movie but I don't want to get critical. The "prefect" story is when the innovative and hard won goal is really worth it and, in this case, it wasn't. The process and the dramatic story of the financing, casting, and attempts to play off governments like those of Yugoslavia and Iran in attempts to get production support was interesting. The shoot was uneventful. The roll out into the theaters was impressive, BUT the film was considered so-so at the time and watching it from today's perspective, it's a dog. I have to find some way of ending the piece that doesn't need to cover it's faults yet doesn't seem to be praising it for being something it wasn't. Kind of a tightrope act and I have to withhold a good deal of my own opinion or the thing will end up being WAY too long. Just the facts!

Time to rewrite until I can just barge through to the end.

 

[Benzadmiral]

Is there any real problem with occasionally beginning a scene in medias res? Let's say we start with a line or two of dialogue, then back up briefly to show the setting (especially if the setting is ordinary like a bar or office), and then continue with the scene. If you don't do it too often, is it really disturbing? I think it jump starts the scene, gets the reader right into the flow and shows that people are present. As long as the establishing paragraph is short or to the point, I see no problem with it. People like Lawrence Block use the technique even in novels.

Here's my example. Be aware that this is not the first page of the story, so the reader knows the setup (a future society, orcas communicate with humans, etc.) and who most of these people are. Martha is the only new character.
*
*
“An adolescent male?” My boss Martha Humboldt chuckled. “Introduce him to a cute girl orca. That’ll fix him right up.”

We were in her office at Humboldt Investigations. Afternoon sun slanted in through her windows. In contrast to Dr. Schneider’s, Martha’s office is all Super-Modern, blond synthwood and chrome, with no antiques to be seen.

“Not likely.” I lit a non-carcino cigarette. “To us he seems just eccentric, but Caesar isn’t sane."
*
*
And the dialogue continues from there. Problems?

 

[MikeKardec]

Is there any real problem with occasionally beginning a scene in medias res? Let's say we start with a line or two of dialogue, then back up briefly to show the setting (especially if the setting is ordinary like a bar or office), and then continue with the scene. If you don't do it too often, is it really disturbing? I think it jump starts the scene, gets the reader right into the flow and shows that people are present. As long as the establishing paragraph is short or to the point, I see no problem with it. People like Lawrence Block use the technique even in novels.

Not theoretically. Most novels slip forward and backward in time as you suggest. I'd recommend that you get to something that the audience cares about, like a person (even if we barely know them) seeing that a problem needs solving, feeling a threat, etc., as quickly as is reasonable. That locks the reader in to the new situation. They ONLY want to know what happens next. Make them care what happens next (how would I deal with that!?) and they will buy in and accept the dislocation. It can be subtle but it's useful to fulfill this requirement.

"Jump cuts" add energy as long as they aren't too big or require too much of an adjustment. Changing lead characters too many times or after the audience has become comfortable "inside" an earlier protagonist can be dicey ... just be alert to the cost/benefit aspect. There was a genre of "International Thrillers" where the lead character was always an EX COP! or DISGRACED CIA AGENT! involved in some sort of CRISIS EVENT first at home and then one the far side of the world. The perspective in the first act always shifted from a STRANGE EVENT to THE GIRL to OUR HERO and possibly THE VILLAINS. These books always lived or died on making the shifts either before you invested too heavily in one set of characters or one situation or in carefully moving you from one to another so that while there was dislocation, you didn't get lost. Put me too far into THE GIRL IN DISTRESS' story then rip me out after I decided she was the protagonist and hand me off to the cliched EX COP! and try to sell me his alcoholism or divorce or whatever before getting back to what the writer made me care about and I'll throw the book out the window.

Dislocate > build context > explain if necessary ... but don't forget to connect to everything else too. If you've built solid connections over a significant number of pages be sure to build a good transition into the new situation even if you start it in the midst of action and flash back to explain. It's all just timing. The pace of the story tells you how quickly or slowly to move back and forth. In the early stages I always do it too fast, better than too slowly and after people have invested too heavily but it makes things feel thin. A good way to finesse the transition is an old Roman Noir trick where THE DETECTIVE investigates the MISSING GIRL and slightly falls in love with her from what he learns about her ... the the writer cuts to THE GIRL herself in the midst of trouble or something.

The entire genre of modern Science Fiction makes a point of dropping you down in medias res and letting you figure out when and where you are. All the explanations would bog a story down and kill it otherwise. It's tried and true in both the macro sense and the micro (just a couple of lines to start a scene) sense.