katallison | (no subject)

See, if I am just expressing my ideas about the characters, I'm always afraid it will come across as an essay rather than a story, especially in being too static. So what I need is: [a] an idea about the characters and [b] that flash of a sequence of events that will take them through an emotional arc--more or less at the same time. If I only have an idea, as I said, it tends to fail as a story, and if I only have things I'd like the characters to do, it comes across as hollow and dull. I probably do better with only [b] than only [a], though; since I have a restrained prose style, it can be easier to let the characterization fill in around the facts.

I usually have either a bunch of rather meta ideas and/or a bunch of snapshot -like images that I have to then figure out both the physical and emotional connections before I get started writing. This is probably why I do so little of it. *g*

More or less ditto.
I get little snippets, maybe 5 minutes of action, that have emotion and/or backstory attached to them, but they don't go anywhere themselves. So I'm stuck with, say, they've been under this canoe for a couple hours now and strangely it's Fraser who's impatient, fidgeting, and Ray who's like, "dude, chill out." But I don't know how they got there or what happens next, and it comes out like, "so they shot the bad guys and then they fucked, the end." Which is no good at all.

With me, it actually depends on the intent of the story.

With a dialogue-heavy story, I tend to write the dialogue out first, without any description, and then I go back over it and slowly work through the mental work behind the dialogue. And because of that, the story doesn't always look dialogue-based at the end.

With an emotional vignette, I pretty much write from beginning to end. It's all about that initial "Oh, that's what this story is about," moment. And though, again, I revise and refine it, it all pretty much comes out in one whole piece.

Sometimes the actions dictate the emotions, sometimes the reverse. A big part of my writing is about the completely natural flow, just how the words come out, who the person is that I'm writing about, what the purpose of the story is. I also do a lot of intentional circling in my fic, doubling back to the point of the story at various points and at the end.

I don't usually have to spend too much time thinking about the character while I'm writing the fic, because I don't (generally) write fic until I know the characters, until I feel as though I could live them. On the other hand, writing fic has on occasion been how I finally understand a character.

I write the imagery inward. The imagery, which usually starts as a phrase or a picture, is the framing of the intent, and the characters.

B

I voted based on the way I used to write, back when I...er, used to. Vidding's entirely different, but with writing fic, I never took it very seriously. I'd start hearing the characters talk or hearing their thoughts, and scenes would take shape, and I only started typing when the words just had to get out somehow. I'm one of those whackjobs who felt writing as "channeling" (without, you know, actually believing anything freaky/metaphysical was going on). I certainly never planned anything in advance.

Well, just the one time, but that was the DS epic that never got finished. I don't think planning worked all that well for me -- sucked the juice right out. Once I knew what was going to happen, I couldn't be bothered to actually write it down.

Vidding, as I said, is totally different. (:

::raises hand in ... some kind of gesture which is meant to show whackjob solidarity without being threatening in any way::

Yeah, I almost always start a story by hearing a line of dialog (or very occasionally narrative) in my head. My long hiatus was due to not hearing "the voices" anymore (and lo, I was sad).

Hee. Non-threatening solidarity sounds good.

It's kind of a combo for me--since I write in first person, I have to figure out the motivations as I go, at least mostly, but at the same time I tend to visualize scenes before I ever start writing.

I really, really wanted to tick, "Geez, I just keep putting words down..." but that wouldn't be true. Okay, not true anymore, not since 2002 anyway...

When I write I will have usually one specific thing, a line of dialogue, a picture of a scene in my head, etc, that kind of generates the whole story. But, the actual story that it gets into is sometimes as much of a surprise to me as it is everyone else, lol. I'll have a line, think of a general story around it and start writing, and more ofen than not I have nothing plotted or planned other than that very vague idea. Most of the time the characters will then say or do things which generally steer the story itself, and I am able to write something out, reread it and say, "No, this isnt really what I was looking for you to do," and then erase it and start over.

I *wish* I had like, a fimr plot or motivations sometimes, because I think it might be harder for me to then pull myself away from what I've written and see if the characters are all acting the way they *should* be from the wtory I've written, but I usually find that if I plot too hard then I *try* too hard, and wind up frustrating myself and writing nothing *g*

Thanks for doing this poll! I always love to see how people write the way they do!

I usually start with one little piece of the story falling into my head, and sometimes that's an image or a line of dialogue. But sometimes I get an emotional piece instead, this feeling one of the characters is going to work up to or sustain throughout the story. Then I have to figure out what's made them feel like that and kind of work outward from there. Either way, though, I have to figure out what's motivating people pretty early in the writing.

You and Ces are explaining your process of writing from an actors' perspective. I'm not like that at all. I'm more of a director perspective. I start out by hearing a piece of dialogue in my mind, like hearing my actors reherse in another room. And then in my head I'm all "No, you go here, and you go there, and give me more confusion!" I'm molding the emotional content as I go along, I'm not sure what it's going to be. I just know where the characters are coming from and what they have to accomplish. It's almost like a group effort only all in my head... which, as I type this, makes me sound like kind of a nutter, but there you go. Sometimes the characters take me in places I hadn't intended, just as a good director will realize when to back off and let the actor do their own thing. Sometimes the dialogue gets away from me and I have to mentally pull things back on track, just like a director guides actors back on track if there's too much improv. Hmmm... It's an interesting way to think about it. I've always had a bit of a director's eye especially when it comes to media. Cool.

Writing for me happens like plants grow, like songs bloom. I need a seed at the center, a hook into the melody line of the story. The kernel of the process can be a freeze-frame photo of the way someone's face looks, a line in someone's voice, an abrupt idea about the way someone's likely to react or likely to think or likely to want or know or feel. Then I write in whatever order the story comes out, and fill in around it where needed.

When I write anything longer than a ficlet, I have a concept in mind and a few key scenes. Then I fill in the blanks...usually. But there are always exceptions. I know I don't write deathless prose or brilliant, innovative fic -- I leave that to you and Ces. Basically I figure I'm a decent journeyman, can write a snappy line of dialogue or the occasional newish idea, and I plot relatively well. ::shrug:: Once in a great while I think I hit the nail on the head, and it's almost always the story I thought about the least before I started writing.

I pingpong an idea around until emotions start sticking to it, then without much more thought I start writing. The process is often like driving through a heavy snowstorm: you can't see where you're going, it isn't entirely safe, but there's always something to observe and record and you just damnwell have to get there.

I've been working on a talk for Toastmasters about writing for two months. I was struggling to boil it down to 5-7 minutes altogether, I'm finding TM is all about the concision, which is a very good thing for me to learn. One of things that I wanted to address was about different writing styles.
I ended up condensing from this, but I don't happen to have that version here at home. Here's the more expansive version...
I find there are writing issues that no beta-reader in the world can help you with. Writing methods are all different. Many writers can only tell you how their own style works and don’t understand at all how the others work. In a forum like this, it’s easy to claim that you’re organized, that you outline everything first, then you go out after your facts, and then you drape the characters on the frame like a tailor-made coat. Well, some people really do it that way. They have different problems than I do.
I don’t have nice tidy characters like that.
I’m always running along after them, like a reporter with a bad tape recorder, shouting things like, “But that’s not what you said last time!”
They have tendency to say snarky things like, “And you believed me?”
As with glimpsed movie images, I see little scenes, bits and pieces, that assemble themselves into a natural order. Let’s say that I’ve got this scrap of a dramatic sequence with an explosion. When I see a lot of people talking in front of an intact building, clearly the bomb hasn’t happened yet. And there’ll be other little hints and clues hanging out of the scene, if it’s carefully observed. Then you keep watching for the matching bits, as if you’re looking at assembly directions written in badly-translated English. Or trying to match up puzzle bits.

The odd part is that I found out this piecemeal subconscious construction actually hangs together. Mostly. Sometimes tab A doesn’t fit very well into slot B.

I’d never read about anything like my own method until I saw Stephen King’s book on writing. He described that it felt like archeology to him. He was digging out something that was already there. It was his job to figure out what it was, a short story or a novel. Was he digging up a dainty little Archeopteryx dinosaur with feather imprints, or did he need to get out the big hydraulic shovel for the hadrosaur bones?

I find it really interesting the number of people who have said, "Well, I get an image or a picture and then I go from there." Mostly because I'm egotistic enough that I never expect other people to do what I do.

So put me down for that, and then going forward and back in time trying to figure out what made the characters do that in the first place, and what they're likely to do after.

Mostly, I try to have what they say and do make sense. But sometimes they say or do things that I don't understand, and then I have to stop and figure out why they did that, and if it really makes sense.

So it's mostly Method. With a strong disinclination to have the characters do nothing *but* think and emote. 'Cause that's generally (not always, generally) boring, yo.

And on a more meta level, this:

god knows writers would rather talk about the process than actually, y'know, *write.*

...completely cracked me up. Too true.

- hossgal

Steven Brust said to me once that he can't write anything, no matter how many bits of scenes are floating around in his brain, until he's got his first line. I've found that holds fairly true for me, as well. It may not turn out to be the very first line of the finished product--because sometimes the story requires more before where I thought it should start--but I need that First Line for everything else to hang off of.

I often start a story without prep work of ether kind -- with a single first line of dialogue or a single image, and then as I write figure out who's saying or seeing it and why.

With fanfic, I'm very method -- I get into the character's mindsets a lot. But then, in fanfic the characters of necessity exist before the plot. The question is, can I get into their heads enough to imagine what else they might do.

With original fic, it varies more. While I definitely consider myself a character *driven* writer, it's not always that a character comes to me and then I need a story for them to go in -- and, indeed, when I get those they often don't end up going much of anywhere. I often start with a situation/dilemma that intrigued me, and then figure out who the people are -- who they must be to be in that situation, or to get out of it.

As it so happens, this is something I've been pondering -- largely because I find myself unable to write anyting as of late.

This may possible sound incredibly stupid, or snooty, but when I write, I'm not really writing words. I'm writing with words, but what I'm writing is images. My head just gets to be this mass of pictures, accompanied sometimes by lines that, to me, tint the images.

I know what's the the character's heads when I'm writing, most of the time, because the scenes that I see are skewed by what they're thinking. It's part of why my stories tend to be broken down into smaller section. It's possible that my recent inability to say anything out right is also a factor of this -- I write around things now, and I can't make myself write something like "he was angry" any more.

When I look back at my older work, I can see that I used to write words -- I constructed my stories just writing text. I like to think that my writing ability has increased (I've gone from a scarily incompetent 15 year old to a semi-literate 19 year old), and I think my newer stories tend to be much heavier on imagery.

I've always suspected I was wired differently than other people. *G*

Hmmm. Well, at first it's the "here is what happens, and then this happens, and then this happens - and hey, wouldn't it be cool if THAT happened..." and the characters sort of end up expressing themselves around the action.

But then, at some point, the action has carried me as close to the resolution as possible, and I have to actually stop and think about what needs to happen emotionally before I can say the story's done.

That's usually when I stop working on that story...for the next year or so.

Then, after a while, I come back to it, and I'm usually more clear in my head about what they want and how to get it for them - which is always what I'm about, in one way or another; getting them what they want, or what they need, or at the very least getting them healthier and smarter than when they started.

Then I waffle a bit about what actually has to *happen* for them to do those things, and then finally I write the end. =)

Needless to say, the first hundred pages or so are a breeze. It's those last twenty that'll kill ya....

I love this idea of looking at it, and I probably should have checked "a little of this, a little of that." It depends on what I'm doing. Comedy is British character acting all the way, and might not even have all the tons and tons of emotional underpinnings, depending on what level of comedy/fluff we're talking about. Certain types of emotionally expressive scenes, and definitely sex scenes, are all about the Method acting. erm. That sounds more suggestive than I meant for it to be. It's not that I personally need to experience those feelings, but I'll sit and focus and try to get at what it feels like to be that focused on something (it's kind of an onion-y layer thing of perception, I guess) in order to be able to write the POV of someone who is at that moment in time that focused on something, whether it's the next touch of someone's hand or the next words out of someone's mouth.

Generally, though, I have a set-up and I have the characters, doing something, and then I sort of figure out from what they do and say how they're feeling about things. Which I guess is the "something else" option. Then... oo, ticky box.

I definitely write from either a line of dialogue or a conversation, then work backwards to find the emotions. Often, I'll write the story just as huge chunks of dialogue and then I'll go back to fill in the scene details, the emotional motivations, etc. I didn't realize, until Merry posted it, that I do that exact same thing where I stop right near the end of the story and sort of...retrofit the emotions, make sure they're all what I want them to be, then write the end.

I find that if I write from the emotions, I end up being horribly "telling not showing" I'm not a very evocative writer, so my emotional scenes tend to be something like, "And John was really happy. Yay."

I'm big into motivations. My story ideas may come from a concept, but creating the story is all about the motivations.

I think for me it's b/c I'm into the psychology of characters. I want to get into their brains and figure out what makes them tick. So I approach everything with them from an inside out perspective. Yeah, there'll be plot and what have you to go along with that, but the outside stuff only serves to be funneled through the inside.

I think I'm Method, sort of, in the way that Viggo Mortensen was said to be Method when he worked on Lord of the Rings: regardless of how much thought I put into it beforehand, when I'm working on a story too long to be written in a single sitting, I go there, and I don't come out. I think about it all the time, whether I'm actually putting down words or not, which tends to mean I work out a lot of backstory and afterstory and sidestory and motivation and map out future scenes and research all kinds of minute and ridiculous aspects of the story and so on. On the one hand, it makes writing difficult when I can't get myself to focus on one thing long enough to totally immerse myself in it, and on the other hand, it's how I wound up writing the hockey AU.

What I've been doing lately, since mostly what I'm writing is 'thon assignments:

I start with *some* inspiration, a point of entry or an emotional arc, or something, and then I start thinking it through in my head. I've done this a lot lately; thought about a fic for several days and developed the basic functional framework -- the various things that will happen (which are mostly inward things since I don't write plot-heavy fic) in the story.

Then once I start writing, I generally have some idea of what the emotions are... generally, since I'm writing 'thon fic, I have somewhere I *need* to end up, a sort of given resolution, and then depending on how okay I am with the pairing/situation in question, I may need to do more or less work to find the emotional setting in which it would be okay for that to happen.

But often when I'm writing I'll get stuck on the way from point A to point B and wonder *why* the character is doing this, and have to sit back and take stock and try to figure out where exactly she is emotionally.

So. Uh. I don't really know, but obviously writers need to babble about writing rather than *actually* writing, so there you go.

Wandered over here via metafandom and because writing process is one of the most fascinating things ever--I teach creative writing (and students write whatever they wish, including fanfiction, I teach process and workshopping not content genres or "literary style,"), and am fascinated by range of processes, how different things work for different people.

The equivalent terms I have for Method and British are from composition, Planning and Process. Some people don't write a draft until they have it all planned out. Others figure it out as they go along.

I am heavy process in all genres I work in (I write original poetry, fanfiction, academic scholarship).

For fanfiction, I tend to get a "flash" (I get a lot of flashes), and the sense of a shape, and then I start writing, and then the characters do what they do. I write LOTR FPS (and there steal the plot from the source, although I change it for AUs) and RPS (and that's a lot more open, driven by the characters). I sometimes makes notes for a scene which just means that the characters than have something *not* to do and they go off and do their own thing. I know I've read a lot of rants against people who talk about their writing this way, and I understand why (especially if this process is seen as better than others in some way). But I don't privilege it--it's not better or worse than any other process (and I'd defy most people to tell the process from the product), it's just the way I write and always have. And I don't always think it's the best--in academic work, it can take me seven drafts to figure out wtf I want to say. Poems and stories being less "thesis" driven are easier to work out through my process, though since I tend to write long WIP's, I don't have to "figure it all out" over and over again.

At times, whole scenes are dictated to me, literally in the persona of a voice telling me the story. Sometimes it's not that easy. But I never have that clear sense of control that comes from planning. Sometimes I'd like to, but it never happens, and since I keep writing, I figure, why worry too much.

.
*g* I'm "a little of this, a little of that", and "something else" -- something that even I don't have a handle on.

Usually (with a couple of exceptions), I have a vague idea for a story, and an even vaguer idea where I want it to end up. When I'm ready to start, I sit in front of the computer while whisps of 'where to start' ideas float through my head. Eventually, something in me says, "That's the one!" and I write a line to fit that idea and keep writing.

This continues for pretty much the entire story; I'll write a spate (anywhere from 2 - 6 paragraphs), then sit and ponder more floating whisps of ideas. Generally, I write from beginning to end, backtracking as I find it necessary to expand on some points or clarify others. Mostly, I start the characters talking, then try to keep up and write down what they say. Frequently, there's a minimum of description in that; when each 'spate' is finished, then I go back and add the "blocking". (I minored in theater, and that's how I think of it.)

I seem totally unable to 'plan ahead' what will happen in the story, which is somewhat frustrating. I have a 20-minute drive to and from work each day, most of it on open road. It would seem ideal for turning over plot points, dialogue, whatever, and I've tried, but nothing happens. Creativity only seems to blossom when I'm actually sitting in front of the computer, fingers poised to strike the keyboard.

My stories tend to be short (less than 15 pages), heavy on dialogue and/or narration, and light (VERY light) on action. I'm pretty sure that this method of writing (if it can be given so high-falutin' a name) won't work very well if I try to write a case-story or more action-oriented fic. However, I guess I'll change my style if such a story demands to be written. At this point, that doesn't seem too likely.
.

I checked the first box, because I don't really think out a lot of stuff beforehand. I have a bunny and I sit down and write it, editing heavily as I go, and when I come to the end, I'm done. ^_^;;

Stranger here, came over from metafandom. Hope you don't mind me butting in. I’m a little bit of everything, because I have a brain that likes to be occupied with three or more things at once, which is a bugger for trying to finish fics. Though I do get a lot of reading done.

Most of the time I’ll get a voice in my head, a character, and they’ll say something, and the story will start from there. Sometimes it’s fanfic, sometimes it’s an original character. Sometimes I’ll get a situation first, a ‘what if…?’. Actually, I like those, because if they don’t fit into one area, they might fit into another (original or fanfic).

And when I actually start writing, I just keep going until it stops. Sometimes that’s a paragraph, sometimes it’s a page, sometimes it’s a whole fic in one go. And then I’ll go back over it, and I might rewrite, or try and carry on, or I might just save it and close it if I don’t like it (I am virtually incapable of throwing anything away). My other problem is that my brain doesn’t move in a linear fashion – at university I tended to start my essays in the middle, then write an earlier bit, then the conclusion, then the intro, and then fill in the gaps. It’s still working that way, which can be annoying if I want to get something finished.

I’d love to be able to post some of my unfinished stuff (but tidied up) as ficlets, but I’m writing in fandoms where that doesn’t *feel* right (to me) - Spooks/MI-5, Ultraviolet, Hustle – tiny UK fandoms all, and all where a significant amount of explanation is needed for longer fics. Which is probably why I just write character ficlets or het/slash fics, and why my original fics aren’t about spies or conmen .

Hi you! Late the the party as per usual.

Interesting questions! Like you, I just assumed everyone did it like I *try* to do it. *G* Usually, I hear writers divide themselves into people who plot and people who don't, but I think this type of division is even more useful. It explains why others are always suggesting I just "stop worrying and write" and why that makes absolutely no sense to me.

Thanks!

(no subject)

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Whackjobs Unite!!

Re: Whackjobs Unite!!

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

at risk of sounding pretentious...

I'm the scene-first plot-later type

Mostly Method

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Here via metafandom

no subject

no subject