***THIS CONTEST IS NOW CLOSED***
Thanks to the ladies at the YA Contemps blog for declaring June as YA Contemp Month! This is my most favorite thing to read and write (although sf/f is a very close second), so I'd like to hold a contest for all of my fellow contemp YA writers.
Write a blog post entitled: Why I Write YA Contemp. You may include your favorite novels in this category somewhere in the post.
Keep the post at or under 800 words.
Email me your final draft (pasted in the body of the email), including a bio and any necessary links, between Wednesday, June 1 and Saturday, June 18. Anything received before or after those dates will be deleted unread. My email address is on the "about & contact" page.
One entry per person, one time. Please make sure the draft you send is the correct one.
If you entered the first 500 words of your contemp YA novel for the contest here this past January, you are still eligible to receive a critique of that same work.
Prizes:
The winning article will be posted on this blog on Wednesday, June 22. I would highly encourage those of you who do NOT win here to post your article on your own blog sometime during the month of June, after this contest has closed. And if you have a twitter account, tweet the link to your article with an @ mention to @YAContemps and @lydia_sharp.
The winner will receive a full critique (from Lydia) of the first chapter of their unpublished contemp YA novel. Full critique includes thoughts on story concept, effective characterization, use of prose, pacing, technical edits (such as punctuation and format), grammar issues, etc.
The winner will also receive a critique of their query letter. But you do not have to have a query letter to enter. If the winner does not have a query letter they wish to be critiqued, this part of the prize is void.
If there is enough interest in this contest, the winner will also receive a free copy of the YA contemp novel of their choice. Novel must have already been released; no preorders. If this prize is an option, winner will be notified at the time of their winning.
To clarify, YA contemp is "real teens in the real world in present time." This includes, but is not limited to, mystery/thriller/suspense, coming of age, romance, dramedy, issue books, etc. No paranormal elements. No sci-fi elements. No fantasy elements. No futuristic or historical fiction. With the exception of something with slight speculative elements (for example: BEFORE I FALL by Lauren Oliver, or THE LIAR SOCIETY by Lisa & Laura Roecker). If you're not sure if your novel qualifies, feel free to email me with any questions at any time.
I reserve the right to change any part of this contest, rules and prizes, at any time. But likely will not.
Please spread the word on your blogs, twitter, etc., and show your love of YA contemp!
In related news, I will be reading and reviewing only contemp YA novels during the month of June. I will also be linking all my reviews here on this blog as I write and post them at The Book Book. So there will be more blog posts this month than there were in May. Whether or not that's a good thing, I'll let you decide. ;-)
Here is my first review-- Invincible Summer by Hannah Moskowitz. Technically not posted in June, but close enough. And it's a good book to kickstart the month.
Happy reading and writing,
~Lydia
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
The Plight of the Shit Shoveler; or, Every Writer Needs a Cheerleader Who Is Also a Drill Sergeant
Sometimes you have to go on when you don't feel like it, and sometimes you're doing good work when it feels like all you're managing is to shovel shit from a sitting position.
~Stephen King, On Writing, p.78
The above quote pretty much sums up my current work in progress, which is going into its sixth month since I started it. This is the longest I've ever worked on a first draft. It is also the most frustrating, the most emotionally draining, the most exciting, the most... everything, of anything I've ever written.
More often than not, I feel like I'm a shit shoveler, day in and day out. All I do is fling poo at the screen and hope some of it makes sense. Hope that at some point it will become a story....
No, actually, that's not exactly true. Because part of my frustration stems from the fact that I'm such a stickler for story structure (say that ten times fast). Part of the problem is that I have the ability to recognize what I'm writing is, indeed, just a form of crap in one way or another. It might be generic prose one day and an irrelevant subplot the next. And I'm NOT okay with that.
Somewhere in the last six months I became one of those writers who canNOT write a crappy first draft and be okay with it, even though I know that the real writing is in the REwriting.
When you write a story, you're telling yourself the story. When you rewrite, your main job is taking out all the things that are not the story.
~John Gould quoted by Stephen King, On Writing, p.57
I used to write like that. I would blow through a first draft in joyful bliss and then roll up my sleeves and do the hard work. Then along came this beautiful monster who refuses, in every possible way, absolutely refuses to be typical.
I started with nothing but a unique character and her lovely voice, and a small semblance of what the main plot would be. I had a clear inciting incident--so clear, in fact, that it's one of the few things that hasn't changed since day one. I've changed the storyline (mostly from midpoint to ending) so many times I lost count. At one point I deleted 150 pages of the 200 I'd written and started everything over from scratch at the catalyst and trudged forward again. This happened again when I reached the midpoint, although not as drastically. Then, nearing the "all is lost" moment for the third time, I had (yet another!) epic epiphany.
It was brilliant. I still think so. But it also required moving backward. Again. It required weaving in new scenes that would then require rewriting the old ones so everything moved along smoothly. Coherent.
In the meantime my brain is utterly confused. It believes that I shouldn't be in "first draft mode" anymore, and has automatically switched gears into "rewrite mode." For those of you who have yet to experience the joys of revising a novel (insert sarcastic tongue-y face here), these things require two very different approaches, as you can somewhat gather from the above quote.
So now, as I'm still working toward that ever-elusive goal of typing THE END for the first time with this project, I find myself constantly flopping back and forth between scenes, between beginning and end, between writing the new and fixing the old, aka, revising. When I darn well shouldn't even be thinking about it yet.
And when I revise, things in my head can get ugly. I'm not just tweaking structure and shifting scenes, but I'm also analyzing characters--even the minor ones--adding layers and subtlety, clarifying motivation, foreshadowing, and oh for the love of Pete I'm even rewriting sentences. Minutiae. Which is something I usually don't even care to consider until a final-final draft.
Something has gone seriously wrong here. My process has become too chaotic, and at the same time, too structured. Everything feels backwards and out of order. I'm so close to finishing this but it's still way out of reach.
Recently, I became so befuddled with it all that I turned to my main beta reader for a much-needed bitch session. About myself. I didn't even think my novel was YA anymore, that's how off-kilter my brain had gotten. The thing is, even for me as an adult, this story is intense... but that's part of why I refuse to give up on it. The thing just needs to be written, needs to be told, or I'll never forgive myself for not trying.
My beta reader, bless her heart, has read everything I've written since we first partnered, and also some of what I'd written before that, including my short fiction. And she has always been honest--telling me what still needs work, and why, and also what is perfect don't you dare change it. She's amazing like that, and if not for her, I can honestly say this novel I'm working on now wouldn't stand a chance.
For example, my latest epiphany required me to take a huge risk, both in story content and story structure, and knowing this nearly broke me. I nearly gave up on the whole thing, because I couldn't imagine it being any good without making this change, but making this change could very well, in the opinions of some critics, highly decrease my chances of getting it published.
My beta has kept it alive just by keeping me sane. When I feel like all I'm doing is "shoveling shit from a sitting position", she reminds me that it's actually "good work" and gives me specific examples of why she feels that way. She has brought me to tears on more than one occasion....
Which finally brings me to my point--every writer needs a cheerleader who is also a drill sergeant. No matter how long you've been doing this, no matter how smoothly your current project may be developing, you still need someone who you know is going to be completely honest with you at all times. Someone who will push you, while they are also holding you up.
Someone who will remind you of this, whenever necessary:
Stopping a piece of work just because it's hard, either emotionally or imaginatively, is a bad idea.
~Stephen King, On Writing, p. 77
~Lydia
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Make Every Character Count
As writers, we often hear the phrase "you must make every word count", which is very true. But after reading some really outstanding novels, I'm convinced there is another phrase that is just as true and just as important--you must make every character count.
Characters, to me, are the single-most important part of any story, and they must be so tightly interwoven with the plot so as to be inseparable. Meaning, if you remove any of the characters, even minor ones, the story would fall apart. In my experience as a reader, the best stories hold to this.
Here are a few things I've learned from studying novels that really wowed me with their characters:
Every character worth naming is worth developing.
"Naming" doesn't necessarily mean a real, birth-given (or otherwise) name. The character could very well just be referred to as Street Kid in the story. But the point is, he's been singled out. So by "naming" I mean that character has been individualized in some way by the viewpoint character.
If you introduce a character that is not just part of some faceless crowd or simply part of the setting as background, that character is worth something to the reader. To make that character as real as possible, you have to put forth effort in developing him/her. No matter how minor their role may seem in the broad scheme of the story, in your writerly mind, treat that character as if they are the main character until you figure out the best way to present their most notable traits in each of the scenes they are in.
You wouldn't use a main character that does not have a backstory, needs/desires, a passion for something, a want, a motivation, likes and dislikes, personality quirks, friends and enemies, etc., etc. So why would you deny your supporting characters that basic human right?
Those are the things that set people apart as individuals. By developing each character as a unique individual you can find the best way to make them memorable and real to the reader.
Every character should have a specific role in the plot.
The first thing I think of when I see the above statement is Law & Order. I never see a character introduced on that show (or any of its spin-offs) who does not help or hinder the solving of the mystery in some way. Am I right? Wouldn't it just peeve you to no end if they spent twenty minutes of the show following a useless character? Or even just three minutes? Say we're shown an "interesting" character going about their day, doing "interesting" things... but it has nothing whatsoever to do with anything or anyone else. That would give the term "what's the point?" a whole new level of annoyance.
It doesn't matter how "interesting" your character is if they are not also relevant. To me, a character who doesn't pull his/her own weight in the story, even in a small way, is a waste. You may not discern how to use this character in the story to the best of their individual ability until long after you've completed the first draft. But when you do, I guarantee that you'll file the idea under EPIC EPIPHANIES.
And this does not just apply to the external elements of the plot. In fact, the emotional-oriented internal aspects of the story arc/main character arc afford you a gasquillion more opportunities to make characters relevant than the external aspects do. You don't meet a person, interact with a person (even just for a moment), develop a history with a person, etc. without forming an opinion and some kind of relationship. Which then becomes expectation. Or regret. Or desire. Or [fill in the blank].
Every person you encounter in real life means *something* to you, so the same is true of every character your MC encounters in their story.
Every character must stay the same and every character must change.
This whole section may seem contradictory, so bear with me as I navigate the explanation.
First, let's look at main characters--the protagonist, the antagonist, and the main supporting characters on both sides. And especially the viewpoint character/s.
The character should "stay the same" in terms of voice (for the most part), and in terms of their base personality. I say "for the most part" because sometimes a character's voice will slightly change as they grow through the story. But it still belongs to that character and no one else.
The character should "change" in terms of their individual character arc. Their base personality doesn't change--you still want the reader to recognize the character--but some other huge part of them will undergo change from start to finish. For the main-main character/viewpoint character/s, this change should be gradual as your reading the story, but when you compare the beginning to the end, the change should be stark in at least one big way. The MC's character arc is interwoven with the story arc. Arc signifies change. There is a clear starting point and a clear ending point--the change happens along the way.
Regarding minor characters, the "staying the same" part is pretty easy. They only get so much page time. Focus on one or two outstanding traits, both physical and personality, every time they step into a scene (or in their only scene), and the reader will use this as their grounding point. If you present a minor character as "chatty" from the get-go, keep them "chatty" throughout. Don't deny your reader that familiar trait--they will look for it every time that character appears, and if it's missing, you better have a good reason for it not to be there or the character feels wrong.
The "change" part for minor characters can be a bit misleading. Minor characters are certainly welcome to undergo a dramatic change, but only if it serves the story. Don't change them hugely just for the sake of saying "this character has his/her own arc." Not every single character needs an arc, only the main characters and main supporting characters do.
So how, then, is it accurate to say that "every character must change"? The majority of minor characters/non-viewpoint characters will change in the sense that the main character/viewpoint character will undergo a change in their personal view of him/her.
For example, let's say you're writing a YA novel told in first person. Everything the reader sees is through the main character's eyes. In the beginning of the story, this teenager has a very obvious opinion of... her mother (yeah, like you didn't see that coming). As the story moves along, every encounter the MC has with her mother is a small step toward a differing viewpoint. Before story's end, the MC will have clearly shown the reader she now views her mother in a new light, even if her mother hasn't outwardly changed in any way. The best way to make this clear is to change the MC's viewpoint on a specific aspect of the other character.
It is your job, as the writer, to force her to confront this head-on before the story ends. It can be as simple as hearing her mother say something she'd never thought of before and BAM! she looks at her differently from that point on. Or it can be more dramatic. It all depends on what serves the story best.
Every character must earn the reader's emotions.
This is probably the most basic point of them all, but it is easily overlooked. Whatever reason your character has for being in a scene, a specific mood or emotion is also attached to that person. Is your reader able to discern that?
This closely ties in with the mantra of "showing vs telling." Not all telling is bad, but if your POV character is constantly telling the reader how they personally feel about the other characters in a scene instead of allowing the characters to show it themselves, it makes for a very one-dimensional read. The same rules apply to non-viewpoint characters as they do viewpoint characters--use dialogue, actions, and little details to evoke the specific emotions of each character in every scene.
Here are some novels I've read recently that I personally feel are worth studying to learn how to make every character count:
The Berlin Boxing Club by Robert Sharenow
The Preacher's Bride by Jody Hedlund
Anna and the French Kiss by Stephanie Perkins
The Shifter by Janice Hardy
Before I Fall by Lauren Oliver
The Last Will of Moira Leahy by Therese Walsh
Can you suggest any others?
Happy writing,
~Lydia
Characters, to me, are the single-most important part of any story, and they must be so tightly interwoven with the plot so as to be inseparable. Meaning, if you remove any of the characters, even minor ones, the story would fall apart. In my experience as a reader, the best stories hold to this.
Here are a few things I've learned from studying novels that really wowed me with their characters:
Every character worth naming is worth developing.
"Naming" doesn't necessarily mean a real, birth-given (or otherwise) name. The character could very well just be referred to as Street Kid in the story. But the point is, he's been singled out. So by "naming" I mean that character has been individualized in some way by the viewpoint character.
If you introduce a character that is not just part of some faceless crowd or simply part of the setting as background, that character is worth something to the reader. To make that character as real as possible, you have to put forth effort in developing him/her. No matter how minor their role may seem in the broad scheme of the story, in your writerly mind, treat that character as if they are the main character until you figure out the best way to present their most notable traits in each of the scenes they are in.
You wouldn't use a main character that does not have a backstory, needs/desires, a passion for something, a want, a motivation, likes and dislikes, personality quirks, friends and enemies, etc., etc. So why would you deny your supporting characters that basic human right?
Those are the things that set people apart as individuals. By developing each character as a unique individual you can find the best way to make them memorable and real to the reader.
Every character should have a specific role in the plot.
The first thing I think of when I see the above statement is Law & Order. I never see a character introduced on that show (or any of its spin-offs) who does not help or hinder the solving of the mystery in some way. Am I right? Wouldn't it just peeve you to no end if they spent twenty minutes of the show following a useless character? Or even just three minutes? Say we're shown an "interesting" character going about their day, doing "interesting" things... but it has nothing whatsoever to do with anything or anyone else. That would give the term "what's the point?" a whole new level of annoyance.
It doesn't matter how "interesting" your character is if they are not also relevant. To me, a character who doesn't pull his/her own weight in the story, even in a small way, is a waste. You may not discern how to use this character in the story to the best of their individual ability until long after you've completed the first draft. But when you do, I guarantee that you'll file the idea under EPIC EPIPHANIES.
And this does not just apply to the external elements of the plot. In fact, the emotional-oriented internal aspects of the story arc/main character arc afford you a gasquillion more opportunities to make characters relevant than the external aspects do. You don't meet a person, interact with a person (even just for a moment), develop a history with a person, etc. without forming an opinion and some kind of relationship. Which then becomes expectation. Or regret. Or desire. Or [fill in the blank].
Every person you encounter in real life means *something* to you, so the same is true of every character your MC encounters in their story.
Every character must stay the same and every character must change.
This whole section may seem contradictory, so bear with me as I navigate the explanation.
First, let's look at main characters--the protagonist, the antagonist, and the main supporting characters on both sides. And especially the viewpoint character/s.
The character should "stay the same" in terms of voice (for the most part), and in terms of their base personality. I say "for the most part" because sometimes a character's voice will slightly change as they grow through the story. But it still belongs to that character and no one else.
The character should "change" in terms of their individual character arc. Their base personality doesn't change--you still want the reader to recognize the character--but some other huge part of them will undergo change from start to finish. For the main-main character/viewpoint character/s, this change should be gradual as your reading the story, but when you compare the beginning to the end, the change should be stark in at least one big way. The MC's character arc is interwoven with the story arc. Arc signifies change. There is a clear starting point and a clear ending point--the change happens along the way.
Regarding minor characters, the "staying the same" part is pretty easy. They only get so much page time. Focus on one or two outstanding traits, both physical and personality, every time they step into a scene (or in their only scene), and the reader will use this as their grounding point. If you present a minor character as "chatty" from the get-go, keep them "chatty" throughout. Don't deny your reader that familiar trait--they will look for it every time that character appears, and if it's missing, you better have a good reason for it not to be there or the character feels wrong.
The "change" part for minor characters can be a bit misleading. Minor characters are certainly welcome to undergo a dramatic change, but only if it serves the story. Don't change them hugely just for the sake of saying "this character has his/her own arc." Not every single character needs an arc, only the main characters and main supporting characters do.
So how, then, is it accurate to say that "every character must change"? The majority of minor characters/non-viewpoint characters will change in the sense that the main character/viewpoint character will undergo a change in their personal view of him/her.
For example, let's say you're writing a YA novel told in first person. Everything the reader sees is through the main character's eyes. In the beginning of the story, this teenager has a very obvious opinion of... her mother (yeah, like you didn't see that coming). As the story moves along, every encounter the MC has with her mother is a small step toward a differing viewpoint. Before story's end, the MC will have clearly shown the reader she now views her mother in a new light, even if her mother hasn't outwardly changed in any way. The best way to make this clear is to change the MC's viewpoint on a specific aspect of the other character.
It is your job, as the writer, to force her to confront this head-on before the story ends. It can be as simple as hearing her mother say something she'd never thought of before and BAM! she looks at her differently from that point on. Or it can be more dramatic. It all depends on what serves the story best.
Every character must earn the reader's emotions.
This is probably the most basic point of them all, but it is easily overlooked. Whatever reason your character has for being in a scene, a specific mood or emotion is also attached to that person. Is your reader able to discern that?
This closely ties in with the mantra of "showing vs telling." Not all telling is bad, but if your POV character is constantly telling the reader how they personally feel about the other characters in a scene instead of allowing the characters to show it themselves, it makes for a very one-dimensional read. The same rules apply to non-viewpoint characters as they do viewpoint characters--use dialogue, actions, and little details to evoke the specific emotions of each character in every scene.
Here are some novels I've read recently that I personally feel are worth studying to learn how to make every character count:
The Berlin Boxing Club by Robert Sharenow
The Preacher's Bride by Jody Hedlund
Anna and the French Kiss by Stephanie Perkins
The Shifter by Janice Hardy
Before I Fall by Lauren Oliver
The Last Will of Moira Leahy by Therese Walsh
Can you suggest any others?
Happy writing,
~Lydia
Monday, May 16, 2011
Bonus Guest Post: Battling the Stigma of the YA Writer
I'm over at kid lit and YA author Anna Staniszewski's blog today, talking about my battle with the stigma of the YA writer, and busting some YA writer myths.
Check it out HERE. Thanks!
~Lydia
Check it out HERE. Thanks!
~Lydia
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Back To Basics: What Makes a Story a Story?
There is a difference between writing and storytelling. You can have an excellent handle on the mechanics of prose, but it doesn't mean squat if those lovely words don't string together into an interesting tale. So what makes a story a story, and not just a good piece of writing or an interesting concept?
Stories Have Beginnings, Middles, and Ends
I know this may sound offensively simple, but your story has to have a clear opening incident that sparks the fire of the plot, a middle that constantly drives the reader toward the resolution at the climax, and a satisfying ending. If any one of those are missing, it feels wrong.
A beginning is not just any opening. It is where THIS STORY starts. Every protagonist is going to have backstory, a history that occurred before the start of this particular story, but you can't start the story just anywhere. The opening event must serve a purpose to the whole. You have to have a reason for starting the story THERE and nowhere else. I discussed this in more detail HERE.
The middle is where many writers fall by the wayside. Their middles lack direction and focus. They lose their main plot under a mess of irrelevant subplots, and their premise does not live up to its potential. On any given page in the middle of a story, the reader should be able to look back at the main idea of the story (what is reiterated in the blurb) and say, "Yes, I can see how this relates."
Then the ending must somehow come back to the beginning. I discussed this point in detail HERE. As a reader, if an ending does not have circularity, I get that "what's the point?" feeling. Not surprisingly, it makes the beginning feel irrelevant, and thus, the ending does not fully satisfy. Everything must work together. That's why I emphasize story structure so much. It's not just, "this guy did this and that, some other stuff happened, there was a big showdown, the end."
NO. Not nearly. Just as the story has to start at a specific place, the story has to end at a specific place. The characters' lives will of course go on from there, but to be satisfying to your reader, who has spent hours or days in the world you created, your ending must have a purpose that serves THAT particular story.
For more tips on story structure, read Save the Cat! by Blake Snyder, or the StoryFix blog, or my recent blog series on the subject (which D.B. Smyth has so kindly linked HERE.)
Stories Are Driven by a Specific Character (or Group of Characters)
Call it your protagonist, your MC, your hero... it's mostly all the same. Any good plot is driven by a proactive character. He/she is ultimately in charge of the decision-making that creates the events and conflicts of the plot. This isn't to say the MC cannot react to things, or question things, but these reactions and questionings should not appear weak in relation to the story concept. Keep the MC in control of his/her own destiny (even if they don't feel like they are) and your reader will be rooting for their success from page one.
Again, this all comes back to the need of a satisfying ending. If your MC is simply reacting to a situation instead of taking proactive steps to change things for the better (for the betterment of his- or herself, for the betterment of a group, for the betterment of the world in general, etc.), they are not going to resolve anything at the end. They are not strong, they are weak, no matter how edgy, gruff, brutish, etc. you make the other parts of their personality.
A strong, proactive character makes decisions, and those decisions drive the plot. This also emphasizes the point that, in good storytelling, you cannot separate character from plot. If the reader feels they could replace your MC with any old Joe Shmoe, because everyone around him is deciding what happens while he just follows along, it's time to reconsider his goals and motivations in connection with the main premise of your story.
The MC must be in control of the important decisions, even if he/she feels out of control at the time a decision must be made.
Stories Have Opposing Forces
This is most often forgotten by speculative fiction writers (sci-fi, fantasy, and all the sub-genres that fall under those), who mistakenly rely on a unique concept to keep their readers engaged rather than a good story.
So I'm going to use one of the most well-known spec fic concepts to prove my point. The Jedi. On its own, this organization of protectors is complex and intriguing... to a certain point. Without the Dark Side and the corrupt Empire, the Jedi are really kind of boring. The full potential of this unique concept isn't seen without opposing forces putting it into action.
And this brings us back to the basic fact that a story has to be ABOUT something. It must have conflict and resolution. It cannot just be a presentation of a concept, no matter how unique. The same holds true for literary fiction, historical fiction, ANY fiction. The opposing forces come through different channels -- some exterior, some interior (the best stories have both, in my opinion) -- but whatever they are and wherever the source, they must be there, or what you have is NOT a story. It is just... notes.
Also, without an opposing force, something for the protagonist to overcome, there is little to no reader satisfaction. Again, you get that "what's the point?" feeling. Which is fine for essays and editorials, I suppose, but not for fiction. If you want to be a fiction writer, you must learn the art of storytelling.
Put your words to good use. Take your reader on a journey they will never forget.
Happy writing,
~Lydia
Stories Have Beginnings, Middles, and Ends
I know this may sound offensively simple, but your story has to have a clear opening incident that sparks the fire of the plot, a middle that constantly drives the reader toward the resolution at the climax, and a satisfying ending. If any one of those are missing, it feels wrong.
A beginning is not just any opening. It is where THIS STORY starts. Every protagonist is going to have backstory, a history that occurred before the start of this particular story, but you can't start the story just anywhere. The opening event must serve a purpose to the whole. You have to have a reason for starting the story THERE and nowhere else. I discussed this in more detail HERE.
The middle is where many writers fall by the wayside. Their middles lack direction and focus. They lose their main plot under a mess of irrelevant subplots, and their premise does not live up to its potential. On any given page in the middle of a story, the reader should be able to look back at the main idea of the story (what is reiterated in the blurb) and say, "Yes, I can see how this relates."
Then the ending must somehow come back to the beginning. I discussed this point in detail HERE. As a reader, if an ending does not have circularity, I get that "what's the point?" feeling. Not surprisingly, it makes the beginning feel irrelevant, and thus, the ending does not fully satisfy. Everything must work together. That's why I emphasize story structure so much. It's not just, "this guy did this and that, some other stuff happened, there was a big showdown, the end."
NO. Not nearly. Just as the story has to start at a specific place, the story has to end at a specific place. The characters' lives will of course go on from there, but to be satisfying to your reader, who has spent hours or days in the world you created, your ending must have a purpose that serves THAT particular story.
For more tips on story structure, read Save the Cat! by Blake Snyder, or the StoryFix blog, or my recent blog series on the subject (which D.B. Smyth has so kindly linked HERE.)
Stories Are Driven by a Specific Character (or Group of Characters)
Call it your protagonist, your MC, your hero... it's mostly all the same. Any good plot is driven by a proactive character. He/she is ultimately in charge of the decision-making that creates the events and conflicts of the plot. This isn't to say the MC cannot react to things, or question things, but these reactions and questionings should not appear weak in relation to the story concept. Keep the MC in control of his/her own destiny (even if they don't feel like they are) and your reader will be rooting for their success from page one.
Again, this all comes back to the need of a satisfying ending. If your MC is simply reacting to a situation instead of taking proactive steps to change things for the better (for the betterment of his- or herself, for the betterment of a group, for the betterment of the world in general, etc.), they are not going to resolve anything at the end. They are not strong, they are weak, no matter how edgy, gruff, brutish, etc. you make the other parts of their personality.
A strong, proactive character makes decisions, and those decisions drive the plot. This also emphasizes the point that, in good storytelling, you cannot separate character from plot. If the reader feels they could replace your MC with any old Joe Shmoe, because everyone around him is deciding what happens while he just follows along, it's time to reconsider his goals and motivations in connection with the main premise of your story.
The MC must be in control of the important decisions, even if he/she feels out of control at the time a decision must be made.
Stories Have Opposing Forces
This is most often forgotten by speculative fiction writers (sci-fi, fantasy, and all the sub-genres that fall under those), who mistakenly rely on a unique concept to keep their readers engaged rather than a good story.
So I'm going to use one of the most well-known spec fic concepts to prove my point. The Jedi. On its own, this organization of protectors is complex and intriguing... to a certain point. Without the Dark Side and the corrupt Empire, the Jedi are really kind of boring. The full potential of this unique concept isn't seen without opposing forces putting it into action.
And this brings us back to the basic fact that a story has to be ABOUT something. It must have conflict and resolution. It cannot just be a presentation of a concept, no matter how unique. The same holds true for literary fiction, historical fiction, ANY fiction. The opposing forces come through different channels -- some exterior, some interior (the best stories have both, in my opinion) -- but whatever they are and wherever the source, they must be there, or what you have is NOT a story. It is just... notes.
Also, without an opposing force, something for the protagonist to overcome, there is little to no reader satisfaction. Again, you get that "what's the point?" feeling. Which is fine for essays and editorials, I suppose, but not for fiction. If you want to be a fiction writer, you must learn the art of storytelling.
Put your words to good use. Take your reader on a journey they will never forget.
Happy writing,
~Lydia
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
A Writer's Freedom
"The freedom to make mistakes provides the best environment for creativity."
~anonymous
The main reason for our recent blog break was that I had to take care of some things at home that had been sorely neglected, and with family visiting on top of it, there were only so many hours to get things done. Anti-blogging freed up enough time, but something else happened over the course of the last two weeks that I didn't expect.
I wanted to spend more time on my YA novel, and I did. At first. Then last week I was hit with a brand new shiny idea for a fantasy romance short story (which I am very likely going to finish today), and that totally took over my brain. It would not allow me to focus on anything else until it was finished. So for about a week now, I haven't touched my novel WIP.
I have been thinking about it, though, and in the thinking, I've realized some pretty harsh truths.
The main thing is that this novel is not going to be finished anytime soon. The first draft is nearly complete, yes, but that feels like a drop of water in a 5-gallon bucket. All I can see is how much there is left to be filled.
The other thing is that the process of writing this novel has been one big string of mistakes. I make a mistake, then I work backwards to fix it. Then I move forward a bit more... and find another mistake, then work backwards to fix it. While this is extremely frustrating, it has not made me want to give up completely.
The great thing about being a writer is that you have the freedom to make mistakes. You can make one big gargantuan mistake--mistakes that require extensive rewrites or ditching everything you've written thus far and starting over from scratch--or you can make several, smaller mistakes that simply require a bit of polishing to fix, and no matter what mistakes you make, it's all part of the job.
It's really okay. And we are unique in that we can have this freedom and still be employed.
Some careers don't allow for so much "trial and error" after the initial training phase, but in any creative endeavor, the trial and error is constant. You learn from your mistakes, knowing you will still make more, because every new project you start is in some way different from the others you've already finished.
When you allow yourself the freedom to make mistakes, that is usually when your best work is produced. It is for me, anyway.
I started my new short story as a way to test myself. I was frustrated with the slow progress of my novel, and needed to start fresh on something completely new. Something I could finish quickly. Something short and sweet. Something kind of similar in theme to what I was writing, but wholly different in every other aspect.
I had no intention of doing anything with this story after writing it. Knowing this, I tried a new writing style from "my usual" and created an entirely new fictional culture and beings. I figured it didn't matter. If it crashed and burned I would be the only witness. So I tossed a bunch of new stuff I'd never done before into my writer's melting pot and watched it simmer. And when I tasted it? It really wasn't that bad.
In fact, I think it's the best thing I've written this year. Simply because I went into it without any expectations. I went into it... completely free.
But really, that is how every project should be. As the writer, you are the creator of every part of the story. You are the one who determines the writing style, the content, the theme, the concept. You have the ability to change whatever you want, however you want.
For the rest of this week, take the pressure off and see what develops. Try something you have never tried before. It can be a completely new project, or maybe a scene of your WIP that you don't plan to use. Do not worry about who will see it. Do not worry about getting it published. Do not worry about story structure (I know, coming from me, that's HUGE). Do not worry about keeping tension and creating conflict. Do not worry about anything but writing something different from your usual.
You will likely find that, once you've written a certain amount of this new concoction, that your writerly instincts automatically kick in. And it suddenly turns into a well-structured story, or the descriptive prose becomes snaztastic, or your brilliant focus on character shines through, or a fabulous conflict pops up without even trying, etc, etc.
You may even find that you have something worth sharing with your critique group, or worth pursuing publication. But if not, you haven't really lost anything either. That's your writer's freedom.
Happy writing,
~Lydia
~anonymous
The main reason for our recent blog break was that I had to take care of some things at home that had been sorely neglected, and with family visiting on top of it, there were only so many hours to get things done. Anti-blogging freed up enough time, but something else happened over the course of the last two weeks that I didn't expect.
I wanted to spend more time on my YA novel, and I did. At first. Then last week I was hit with a brand new shiny idea for a fantasy romance short story (which I am very likely going to finish today), and that totally took over my brain. It would not allow me to focus on anything else until it was finished. So for about a week now, I haven't touched my novel WIP.
I have been thinking about it, though, and in the thinking, I've realized some pretty harsh truths.
The main thing is that this novel is not going to be finished anytime soon. The first draft is nearly complete, yes, but that feels like a drop of water in a 5-gallon bucket. All I can see is how much there is left to be filled.
The other thing is that the process of writing this novel has been one big string of mistakes. I make a mistake, then I work backwards to fix it. Then I move forward a bit more... and find another mistake, then work backwards to fix it. While this is extremely frustrating, it has not made me want to give up completely.
The great thing about being a writer is that you have the freedom to make mistakes. You can make one big gargantuan mistake--mistakes that require extensive rewrites or ditching everything you've written thus far and starting over from scratch--or you can make several, smaller mistakes that simply require a bit of polishing to fix, and no matter what mistakes you make, it's all part of the job.
It's really okay. And we are unique in that we can have this freedom and still be employed.
Some careers don't allow for so much "trial and error" after the initial training phase, but in any creative endeavor, the trial and error is constant. You learn from your mistakes, knowing you will still make more, because every new project you start is in some way different from the others you've already finished.
When you allow yourself the freedom to make mistakes, that is usually when your best work is produced. It is for me, anyway.
I started my new short story as a way to test myself. I was frustrated with the slow progress of my novel, and needed to start fresh on something completely new. Something I could finish quickly. Something short and sweet. Something kind of similar in theme to what I was writing, but wholly different in every other aspect.
I had no intention of doing anything with this story after writing it. Knowing this, I tried a new writing style from "my usual" and created an entirely new fictional culture and beings. I figured it didn't matter. If it crashed and burned I would be the only witness. So I tossed a bunch of new stuff I'd never done before into my writer's melting pot and watched it simmer. And when I tasted it? It really wasn't that bad.
In fact, I think it's the best thing I've written this year. Simply because I went into it without any expectations. I went into it... completely free.
But really, that is how every project should be. As the writer, you are the creator of every part of the story. You are the one who determines the writing style, the content, the theme, the concept. You have the ability to change whatever you want, however you want.
For the rest of this week, take the pressure off and see what develops. Try something you have never tried before. It can be a completely new project, or maybe a scene of your WIP that you don't plan to use. Do not worry about who will see it. Do not worry about getting it published. Do not worry about story structure (I know, coming from me, that's HUGE). Do not worry about keeping tension and creating conflict. Do not worry about anything but writing something different from your usual.
You will likely find that, once you've written a certain amount of this new concoction, that your writerly instincts automatically kick in. And it suddenly turns into a well-structured story, or the descriptive prose becomes snaztastic, or your brilliant focus on character shines through, or a fabulous conflict pops up without even trying, etc, etc.
You may even find that you have something worth sharing with your critique group, or worth pursuing publication. But if not, you haven't really lost anything either. That's your writer's freedom.
Happy writing,
~Lydia
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)