From: A_Tina_Hall@kruemel.org
wrote:
> A. Tina Hall wrote:
>> Nicky wrote:
>>> I do a diagram of my old chapters then plan a new arrangement,
>>> marking in changes of voice etc. Then I open the old file have a
>>> second file called offcuts and dump everything I don't think works
>>> in the offcuts file.
>>
>> That's exactly why I say I don't revise. I don't rip stories apart.
>> It's quite impossible too, because what happens later happens because
>> of what happened earlier, and if I change earlier or remove it,
>> something else would have happened.
>>
> Yes of course, or to get the same outcome something else has to
> change.
That would feel forced to me.
>> But of course like with history, it didn't.
> It is very hard to change the history in a story and it is one of the
> biggest difficulties I have with revising. I was asked to radically
> change a story I really liked into one that I liked a good deal less
> and which made significantly less sense ( to me) I worked really
> hard at it but it was dreadful. Probably because I couldn't make
> myself believe in the new story which used more or less the same
> characters who had to change too much to make the new story work. I
> regret my lack of professionalism.
That makes 'professionalism' sound like it means writing stories no
matter whether you like them. But would that not be more like working in
a factory at a conveyor belt always doing the same thing (a job I
imagine isn't much fun)? It would be empty stringing of words together.
I'm more for going by feeling, what feels right for the story. Maybe
you're just not the person to write the story that you were told to
change yours into.
Of course people who ask for such changes are looking at whether it
sells, but maybe they're too much in a rut trying to get what they think
will definitely sell and scared to try something new. Or too convinced
of their own 'professionalism'. They're just people too.
>> I write stories as they happen, following the characters around.
>> Outlines or 'plots' would just get in the way. I write solely for
>> the characters, in a setting I like, which I don't find in others'
>> books. That 'stuff happens' that others might call plot is just
>> something that happens while writing. I like re-reading my stories,
>> that's why I write them; having something to read that is the way I
>> want it.
>>
> I have written first drafts that way though I usually like to plan at
> some stage before a book is finished. For me it focuses my mind on
> what are likely to be the interesting parts of the story, the bits
> that will reveal character and it saves me from some ( though not
> all) aimless meandering in which nothing involving goes on.
Heh.
I admit I have bits that bore me when I read them, but that's more
because of the way it's written (my 'rambling'). I'd like to know how to
fix those bits; keeping the information but written better.
[snip]
>> An example:
>>
>> In book #1 A wants to do something that seems great to the
>> characters and myself. In book #2 it turns out to be a bad idea for
>> some side effects I didn't know while writing book #1.
>>
>> C should have known of the side-effects and warned about them. (That
>> comes from the kind of characters I want.)
>>
>> So I tweak things. C does warn A and D (who needs to know), B is
>> determined to evade the side-effect (he can't help it, which fits
>> the title and content of the first book). I actually don't remember
>> whether the test C does with A was always there or added. But in any
>> case, now A goes into it knowing of the possible side-effect and that
>> it won't turn out happy shiny. But right then she needs things to go
>> as they did.
>>
>> In book #2 (after the point where I initially found out while
>> writing) A gets a better alternative and B is fixed off the 'can't
>> help it'.
>>
>> So, thing that's a bad idea happens, but people are warned, know
>> what to expect, and get good solutions to it.
>>
>> And the whole thing is just one small thread happening alongside the
>> big events (which are just an excuse to show the people anyway).
> That example is pretty much what I do in revision. A lot of it has to
> do with bolstering the weak parts, excising the dull bits, and
> enriching the world/characters and motivation. Some of it has to do
> with the writing too, largely cutting out summary sections and making
> it more dynamic.
Didn't sound like it when you were talking about ripping chapters out
and thinking about replacing or removing them.
Also, I don't remove stuff, and the motivation is already there. The
enriching world/characters in this example happened with me writing the
surprising turn of events in book #2. I learned more about them. Along
with that and perhaps other bits and ends I also found out why C's
people live the way they do. (Which initially I'd just decided,... I'll
skip the essay of how and why and what my decisions and the character's
perception and whatnot all ties into something that turns out to make
sense in the end.)
>>> Any helpful hints beyond 'Get over yourself, Nicky ?'
>>
>> I guess not, sorry. I write my stories in a different way than you
>> do, and like returning to them.
> I hate returning to old work. If it's finished I have done with it
> and if it isn't, then I have usually done all the fun stuff leading
> me with the grind of making it work as a narrative. But as we all
> know, mileage always differs.
It baffles me how someone can not want to return to the great fun stuff
they themselves created. But then, I also like re-reading a book better
than first reading it, knowing what happens I can enjoy the good stuff
more.
Re-reading my own stuff, I just happen to come across one or the other
thing that needs polishing.
--
"Being raised by the secret order of not-being-very-informative
doesn't mean you can't tell us."
-- Ranes, Magic Earth 7/6
Excerpts at:
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
