TECH: On Critiquing - Twice-Told Tales Again Again?

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

original posting: Fri, 4 Feb 1994 03:30:05 JST

or recycle chic makes good or...

(alright, mates! get me a Foster's and I'll tell you about the three koalas and the tasmanian devil. I swear it really happened this way... you see, there were three koalas on walkabout, and they stopped for the night where the billies run, and each one built himself a layover for the night. what's that? no, there aren't any pigs in the outback, don't be silly. so, anyway, these here koalas went to sleep dreaming of diggeree does and bo ties and eucalyptus salads. Then out of the dark came the devil. Red eyes, spiky fur, looked like he'd fought a roo and lost...almost as bad as a critic!... :-)

Michael J brought up memories of the many times we've hashed the topic of the cliched or old story...

Suicide is in itself a cliche. Staring at pills gun knife meat cleaver four by four rocks at the bottom of a cliff has been done a zillion times. For a short short, I'd stay away from it for fear of the cliche. I'd give 100 to 1 odds that there's another 100 people out there writing on suicide as I write this down.

(so? what's the positive recommendation??? or should we just shove all of our writing over the cliff because someone else has done it or may be doing a similar piece?)

Hum - just for fun, since I happen to have it handy, I quick-scanned the 12 stories in "On Writing Science Fiction" (by Scithers, Schweitzer, Ford). All first-time sales. TWO suicide stories. One prince and the pauper, one baby birth, one Moriarty strikes again, one young man proving he can do the job, one visit to hell, one "it was only a game," one vampire story, one "god was an astronaut," and one old-fashioned western. Oh, and one old chestnut, "Everyone wants to be a critic."

12 for 12! Every single one done before, every single one cliched up the wazoo (most before SF even got near the scene), and yet - they are all damn good, published stories (no, not during the pulp years, either!) Not just because a leading writer did them, either - these were all first sales.

BTW - the short-short in the group was a visit to hell, written in a very short time, and largely unrevised... talk about a cliche - can't these published writers do anything right?

(that devil looked at the hut the first koala built, and he laughed. just some straw, and he'd heard that story you mentioned. So he huffed...)

How about a little research? Take a look at the New York Times top 10 fiction - or maybe one of those year's best short story collections - or even your favorite literary magazine - and tell me how many brand new, original plots never before done you find. If you find one, let me know. In the meantime, me and Shakespeare and all the rest of the writers will keep on recycling - there's lots of wear left in these old threads (heck, take a look at this one...:-)

Sorry. It won't wash. Our leading writers busily recycle oldies, why shouldn't the beginners? Admittedly, you had best work hard on it, make it really your story, with details and so on the best you know how. But simply because it has been done before - or even is considered cliched - is not a sufficient critique. It's the easiest slash to toss at any piece of writing, but it simply demonstrates lack of thought, since it is so easy.

(and he puffed...)

Tell me how well or badly I've done in handling the cliche. Perhaps I haven't kept your interest, or provided enough beyond the cliche to make it mine - that might be good to know. But don't bother telling me that you recognize the form, the plot, whatever unless you mean it was too evident from the beginning and I didn't provide anything else - no variation, etc.

Heck, I may WANT to recast Cinderalla! I think finding a girl in a modern city that you met dancing - and she rushed off, leaving only a... crystal barrette? .. might make a great story! there's only about a million or so people to sift through to find your princess. How does Prince Charming do it - now?

(and he popped. see, the koalas had heard that other story too, and they found a needle in the haystack, and they knew just what to do with it. so the koalas had a good laugh, and that's the skin hanging on the door of their shack. Now I ask you, would I make up a story like this if it wasn't true? Thanks, I will take that Foster's now... :-)

Okay - one quote from the previously cited book

Obis's Law: Somebody else probably has the same idea - so (a) get started, (b) plan to do it better.

(cheers! <gurgle...gurgle...gurgle...> :-)

Now, if someone wants to do some more dredging on techniques of recycling, how to spruce up your old tales with ornaments and accessories, or even how to make one out of whole cloth, I'd love to read it. Admittedly, we've chewed on the subject before, but there's still some juice in the topic.

But just saying something is old - heck, the world is pretty old, love is old, I'm old, and there's still something new every day to enjoy in all of us.

(wonder... should this be a FAQ? Old tales for new writers - or how to avoid the dreaded cliche, the tales that bite, the toothless dogs of age...? sweep up those old bits from Randy and JC and so froth...?)

(burp!)

TECH: Characterization Problems?

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

original posting: Fri, 12 Aug 1994 18:35:01 JST

A combined list of points to look at in your writing...

1. Is the protagonist (or main character) really the person most deeply concerned with the situation? Are they the person with the most to lose?

Solution: If not, consider changing protagonists--or rearranging the plot so that the protagonist you are using is the right person. Note: Depending on the story, there are times when a slightly "off-center" protagonist provides the reader with a necessary bit of "distance" from the conflict.

2. Is the viewpoint character someone besides the protagonist?

Solution: In most cases, the viewpoint character is the protagonist; revise accordingly. Note: Again, there may be reasons to use a different viewpoints character (consider all the "faithful sidekick" mysteries!).

3. Are any of the characters unbelievable?

Solution: First, figure out which problem you have.

Is the character too one-dimensional? Add rounding.

Is the character too contradictory? Probably a lack of motivation, although you should also make sure you have good reasons for their inconsistency and provide some hints and clues to let the reader understand, too. Consider whether "breaking" the character into two or more is needed.

Is the character boring? Add spices--speech, actions, unusual habits, jobs, etc.

Is the dialogue stilted or boring? Make sure each person has their own speech patterns and talks "like people". Get your "author's voice" out of their mouth and let them say what they need to, not what you want them to say.

Are the actions unclear or unbelievable? Motivate, foreshadow, and (as in golf) follow through! When your heroine climbs the wall to rescue the boy trapped in the tower--the reader should already know that years of mountain-climbing lie behind the skill. And give us a few closeups of that climb, just so we feel her aching muscles...

Are the characters unneeded? If the story "works" without the character, drop them. I know, you spent a week getting that portrait of the apple seller in the park just right--but if it doesn't work in this story, you can use it somewhere else.

4. Do the characters grow and change during the story?

Solution: It is possible that a static character is important to the story. However, most of the time your characters should grow, should change in response to the conflict and plot of the story. If they don't seem to, you probably haven't thought through and shown the reader the effects of the plot on the people. Take a little time and show us the giddy relief in the boyfriend when the protagonist is cleared, and the decision by the protagonist to dedicate her life to ecological warfare--on the side of the insects.

5. Are the characters distinct?

Solution: Make sure each of the characters is a "real person" to you, first. If some are "flat", make darn sure they don't play a major role. Double check that names, reactions, habits, and so forth are sufficiently distinct--and that a reader won't have too much trouble figuring out who is who. Also, consider the size of the cast--often the confusion is caused by having too many small parts and no real focus.

TECH: Over the top and into ACTION!

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

Ramp up the action: Keep your scenes active to give your readers the heart-pounding intensity they demand.

That's the banner headline on the Writing Clinic article by Paul Bagdon in Writers Digest, Oct. 2004, pp. 55-57. Bagdon looks at the first chapter of a thriller , but I think the advice is good for any writer.

First, open with action. The piece that Bagdon is looking at has a little teaser about what that day was supposed to be, setting the stage for something cataclysmic to happen, but then it spends several paragraphs on background material. Bagdon says, "The problem is that now -- on the very first page -- isn't the time to present that material. The reader needs to be hooked -- dragged directly into the adventure --to the point where there's no possibility of her putting the book back on the shelf."

So the initial problem is to avoid spending too much time doing setup and background. Jump into the middle of the action and keep going. Especially in a novel, there's plenty of time later to come back and explain whatever background is really necessary, but the beginning of the story -- the place where you are convincing a reader that they really want to read this book -- that's not where you want to slow down and dump that information all over the page. So cut, cut, cut.

"It's the writer's obligation to create dynamic and engaging situations and scenes in the first paragraphs and pages of an action-adventure novel. Readers (and editors) not only expect such leads --they demand them."

Second, consider the mix of Active vs. Passive. Readers of thrillers are looking for action, what Bagdon calls "good ol' spine-tingling, I-can't-put-this-book-down action." But he adds that in the mix of the thriller we also need a fully articulated protagonist and a plot with rich enough dynamics to support all that tension, intrigue, and violence.

Next, Bagdon points out that action needs to be written in an active way, presented as direct experience perceived by a character through physical senses, emotions, fears, and feelings to make it vital and engaging. Don't let up -- keep the reader right there beside the person having the experience. Beware of stepping back and narrating or describing, keep it acutely active. Write totally in the protagonist's senses and emotions. Make it purely active, a vehicle that lets the reader move, feel, hear, and see what the protagonist does.

But ?

Not just nonstop feverishness and vehemence. "Unintrusive narrative is as much an essential part of a successful thriller as is dialogue or description."

"Visceral, active scenes keep your thriller focused and provide the reader with the heart-pounding intensity he seeks."

So, we've really got two simple pieces of advice. Start with action, and then make sure that your action is really active!

And, of course, write!