framlingem | Right! Writerly folk!

annathepiper, I am looking at YOU specifically. 'Kay?

I write poems. I write short stories. The longest thing I have ever written weighs in at a staggering twenty -seven double-spaced pages in a twelve-point font - I was seventeen when I wrote that, and looking at it now, the first two thousand words are completely unnecessary and are really more of a companion essay than part of the story.

This is because I have never yet had an idea I think would translate well enough to anything longer. I've always hated wordiness in novels, and to have a wordy short novel would be even worse.

I have an idea which I think would work well as a novel... but I have absolutely NO clue how to go about writing a novel, in terms of mechanics. Obviously having an outline would be a good idea, as well as notes on character background and world background (it would be a speculative fiction novel set at a hypothetical point in Earth's future, on Earth, so I'd have to extrapolate quite a bit), but in terms of sheer _mechanics_, I am up the creek.

How do I work in background without going into long descriptive passages? How do I pace it? All my stories hinge on one event - usually, they hinge on one _sentence_. Is writing a novel like writing a lot of directly sequential short stories about the same people? The best way to learn is probably by figuring it out, but I'd rather have a roadmap.

It's weird - I learned how to write short stories by reading a lot of them; I read novels voraciously (probably over a hundred and fifty a year. Fortunately, there are libraries and I can read things multiple times happily, otherwise I would be very, very poor.), and I still can't fathom it.

They say everyone has a novel in them. (Not everyone has a _good_ novel in them, though :p) I can probably do this over the next decade or so, and I'd like it to be decent because I really like the idea, and I've been thinking about it for weeks and I'm pretty sure it's not directly derivative of something I've read like most of my ideas. I was enamoured with the whale-farming idea for a bit, but then remembered Clarke already did that. Someone else ALWAYS already did something. But not this time. Leastways, I don't think so.

Current Mood: curious

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

annathepiper

Huh er what? Oh, I'm on tap? OKAY THEN!

Um. I can certainly tell you how it's gone about working for me, though I will emphasize that how it works for me may not wind up being how it works for you. A lot of the folks who've given panels at the Writer's Weekend conferences I have attended stress that different writers work in different ways, and just because one writer does something in a given way doesn't mean you should.

I do use an outline; I find it very helpful. I may not actually wind up writing what's ON my outline; a lot of the time my characters will wind up sort of 'telling' me that they need to do something else besides what I planned, or else I'll just find a logistical flaw in what I outlined, or whatever. But having an outline in general gives me a roadmap to follow. Other writers... not so much with the outline usage.

Character notes and background notes: yes. Take whatever notes you feel are relevant. For both Faerie Blood and Lament of the Dove I have individual files on all of the major and several of the minor characters, tracking what I know about them. I also take notes on important swaths of other data, especially for Lament; I spent a good month and a half world-building for that before I wrote word one of its current iteration.

How do I work in background without going into long descriptive passages?

Good question. The first answer that comes to mind off the top of my head is the cliched but nevertheless vital "show, don't tell." What this actually means... well, it's a complex enough topic that they had a whole panel on it at the last Writer's Weekend. ;) If you go look at this post of mine and skim down about a third of the way, you'll hit my notes on that panel.

How do I pace it?

This is something I'm kind of learning still myself. I've been told Faerie Blood has good pacing; I don't know about Lament yet, since I'm only a little over halfway done with the first draft. ;) But a good way to approach this might be some very helpful advice that Jim Butcher gave at Writer's Weekend, too. He told us that in every single scene of a novel, one of two things needs to happen: you either need to have an active conflict of some sort, or you need to be dealing with the ramifications of the last conflict. An example of the first sort of scene might be 'the bad guy's minion breaks into the heroine's house to steal the priceless necklace'. An example of the second might be 'the heroine storms down to the police station to report the theft to the lieutenant she's secretly hot for'.

Is writing a novel like writing a lot of directly sequential short stories about the same people?

It hasn't been for me, though I know of at least one novelist who's come out with a book lately where this was in fact the case. Ryk Spoor's Digital Knight was six shorter stories released as a novel.

Perhaps another piece of advice I heard from a pro giving a panel (this time at Norwescon a few years back) would fit here. Mike Moscoe talked about how he approached building a plot as an escalating series of problems. You start off with your characters in their various starting situations. Then you throw the first, reasonably low-key problem at them. They either fix it, or they screw it up, and how that plays out leads into the next problem. Repeat this process, making the situation more and more urgent, till you get up to the big climactic thing that has to be dealt with, and then the final resolution.

Does any of this sound helpful? :) I could say more, but I don't want this comment to get too huge. Feel free to bring these questions over to

scuzzboppers, too--this is excellent topic fodder for over there.

From:

full4zaccordion.livejournal.com

Um. I can certainly tell you how it's gone about working for me, though I will emphasize that how it works for me may not wind up being how it works for you. A lot of the folks who've given panels at the Writer's Weekend conferences I have attended stress that different writers work in different ways, and just because one writer does something in a given way doesn't mean you should.

So true. I don't use an outline at all because I've always hated them for some reason. Besides, my story tends to evolve as I go along. My stories start out in different ways. Sometimes, I come up with a character in my head and I decide that he/she needs a story. Other times, I come up with a one-sentence story idea and expand on it.

I have to flesh out my characters before I start. To me, it's important to know who my characters are and why they do the things they do. In high school, I was in drama, where I learned about the concept of Motivation. That plays a big part in my character development. Drama also taught me how to get inside a character's head and walk in his/her shoes.

Also, when writing a particular scene, I sometimes picture it as a play and it helps me get my characters to move around. Even when they're just talking, I always have them doing something, because I keep thinking back to that rule about not having characters just stand there on stage.

As for the story itself, I just start writing and sometimes plot ideas will come to me while I'm writing. When the story ends, I'll know. I don't worry about length. I can always go back and add more if I feel parts of it are too thin.

Anyway, that's just me. The important thing is to just start writing.

Also, funny thing, I seem to have trouble writing short stories. I can never write anything concise enough. That Newfoundland short story I wrote was the closest thing I've ever done to a true short story. I still think I could turn that one into a novel if I wanted to.

From:

annathepiper

Oh cool, I didn't know you were a writer as well. :) (Or if you'd told me at any point on the OKP or the Fishtank, I'd missed it!) Excellent!

Besides, my story tends to evolve as I go along.

So do mine! And like I mentioned, I often find that I don't write what I actually put on the outline. But I do like to have one to start with just because I need it as a starting point, and if I go without writing for a while, it helps remind me where I left off.

I can definitely respect a writer who works without one, though.

I have to flesh out my characters before I start.

Some critical fleshing-out needs to happen for me, too. At the very least, what characters have what motives as of the start of the story. Though here, as with many other aspects of the writing, I often find that my character motivations evolve as I write more and find myself discovering aspects of the characters I hadn't known before. :)

Also, when writing a particular scene, I sometimes picture it as a play and it helps me get my characters to move around.

Heh! I come out of a background of MUSHing, which is very much like an impromptu, ad-libbed play of sorts. Working on the book I'm dealing with right now, I have found myself approaching scenes a LOT as if all my characters are roleplaying out a scene with each other. :)

I don't worry about length.

I try not to! Though if one wants to write a marketable novel, this does need to be a consideration eventually. From what I've been learning from the folks in the industry at Writer's Weekend or on various blogs, if your novel is too big and unwieldy, this will hurt your chances of selling it. The publisher sites I've been looking at tend ask for submissions to be between 100,000 and 150,000 words.

But you're totally right--if the story is too thin, you can go back and add more later. The main thing to do is to get the story out of your head into first draft form, and then to go back and polish it up. :)

Also, funny thing, I seem to have trouble writing short stories.

I hear that. I am NOT a concise writer. :) (She said, nearly 110,000 words into a novel that she's only barely over halfway done with...)

Thanks for chiming in on this! Good thoughts, here. :)

From:

cathi-eirye.livejournal.com

Writing a novel doesn't guarantee anything except you get totally involved in characters and it kind of hurts when you finish.

Okay, I'm not annathepiper but here's my advice, having done it because I just love the writing: you get your idea, like the short story, but this time, just keep writing. If it's a short story it'll end itself, but if it could be a novel, write whatever gets into your head and keep going, don't worry about length or anything, just write. The more characters and situations and memories you bring in the more likely that's going to evolve (or devolve depending on your perspective, lol) into a novel. If you have time (I know you are busy with school, etc) try something like NaNoWriMo where you just sit and write and see what happens. It's a good exercise if nothing else.

From:

drakkenfyre.livejournal.com

http://www.nanowrimo.org/

All us cool kids are doing it.

The object is to write. Not well, necessarily. Just in quantity.

Who knows? In December, you might not think writing a novel is that daunting, after all.

From:

framlingem.livejournal.com

No can do - full-time student with a job who has thirty-thousand words of papers due in November and exams to study for.

Last year I did a modified one and aimed to write six thousand words (which is a LOT for me in fiction) and did that.

From:

drakkenfyre.livejournal.com

Well, all I can say is that to write a novel, one must write a novel. Or at least a novel-length piece of work.

Maybe you could do Nanowri...year. November could be your outline and then you could do two-ish chapters a month.

From:

drakkenfyre.livejournal.com

As in, it doesn't have to be perfect, it just has to be there. Because lots of my friends really believe that something totally clicks in you after you've finished your first 100,000 words.

Good luck!

From:

aras-55555.livejournal.com

I agree that a novel is mostly like a short story that just keeps on going.

If all else fails, pick something you really like and imitate its structure. By the time you write your own story inside it, it'll be totally unrecognizable anyway.

From: (Anonymous)

Your problem is a little puzzling to me. But maybe what you have isn't an idea for a novel at all. See, "whale farming" isn't what I'd consider an idea for a novel. It needs to be a *story* embryo, an idea about at least two characters and a conflict or problem. Now, if you don't have that, I can see why you are having trouble. You don't have to know ahead of time all the twists and turns and details of the story, of course, but you at least have to have in your mind "Character One really intensely wants something and does something and this causes a problem with Character Two, who..." and then you work to fill in the blanks. An outline is optional, but you at least have to have in your head that little story idea, with an understanding of the possible conclusions (what failure would be, and what success would be).

But as for mechanics, if you have read a lot of novels you have surely noticed how other authors work in background and pace the action. It is not something to worry about ahead of time. If you're writing along and realize that something is too wordy and nothing interesting is happening, then you cross it out and decide whether that information is really necessary or whether it can simply be ditched. If it's necessary, then you figure out a more interesting way to work it in.

Anyway, that's how I see it.

Donna

From:

hansbekhart.livejournal.com

I second the post above me. The first thing that I start out with isn't a plot, but a conflict ... have at least two characters vaguely set up and a conflict that they have to work out. That's tricky. I have a hard time with the conflict part. But I'd say that the only thing you can really do is just ... write. Once you get started, it doesn't really matter if you know exactly where you're going because that will develop while you write the story. And if it sucks, or it's not well paced? That's what rewrites are for.

The mechanics thing ... maybe you could treat it like it's a puzzle, or it's the "twist" in the story. If you lay out all your backstory all at once, it's not interesting. But if you hold out a piece at a time, then the reader is going to follow along with you. But the only way to find out what works and doesn't work for you, is to do it.

From: (Anonymous)

I've heard other writers say that a novel or short story begins with two or more half ideas or observations put together to form something new. You seem to have gotten through that bit, which is the easiest part.

Elmore Leonard suggests making a very loose outline. If you get too detailed and anal about the outline, it's just typing, and you cut yourself off from going down story avenues that might prove interesting. In my opinion, you might find it's best to start with that key sentence and work backwards until you reach the catalyst or natural beginning of the story. One does not have to begin at the beginning.

As others have said, you have write. Put one word in front of the other and see what happens; have faith that much will come to you during the process.

As for background information: Jump right into the action without worrying about explaining everything all at once. Write to a smart reader who can figure things out and who knows that the author will eventually answer their questions. Break up long chunks of expository with action or dialogue and offer background through a pair of eyes that will develop character or plot or tone.

Regarding unnecessary words: short works compress the prose, loading it in poetic fashion. As you are primarily a poet, this might explain your desire to be brief. In novels, prose is less condensed; it takes the time to give details, concrete examples (of character and setting) and can be rich in imagery. Plots can be more complex and you can introduce far more characters in a novel... All of this, not wordiness, takes time and space.

I hope this helps.