The art of the story

-Example of my previous point-
Wheel of time book 1.
It took me several attempt to care about the book/story. Yet... I fell in love with the characters eventually.(Some time around book 3-4)
However, I would say R.J.'s writing style involves slow build-up and massive amounts of depth.

-Yet, I can pick up any Brandon Sanderson book and be hooked from the first chapter.
His writing style tends to be what I want to read.

(I am not saying characters can be crappy. Characters still have to be dynamic and relate-able for me to like a book.)

 

When I think of Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises, I can't remember the characters or the plot, but I certainly remember being riveted at specific pages, and every painstaking detail regarding the bull fighting.

Bukowski's characters are too fleeting to become invested in, the protagonist is not very likable, and his novels literally have no plot. Yet, I count his novels among the best.


So, yeah, it is style.

But to be honest, I don't see why it has to be a trade off.

Nabokov has stellar plots, characters, and style. Dan Brown has the opposite.

 

Style is a matter of taste. It frames the character of the Story.
Like cooking, some may like it sweeter while some prefer it to be bitter.

Without style, any type of story would be tasteless and bland.

However, a Style without a Story is like having all the seasonings but no ingredients.
Which means a good Story is just as important.

Honestly, I believe both of them goes hand in hand. It all depends on the person's taste.

 

I meant from the point of view of a passenger.

If someone is a good driver—somebody who isn't always taking chances or acting like a boy racer, who knows how to meld with traffic, to take blind corners on country roads without risking oncoming vehicles, never tailgates, slows down in plenty of time when the vehicle ahead is slowing down, overtakes only when necessary and without pushing luck, doesn't travel too fast or too slow, keeps an even pace, doesn't drift over the centre line or onto the edge of the roadway—you don't notice their driving. You just enjoy the ride and remember what you saw on the journey. And at the end of it, you know you'll be happy to be that person's passenger again.

That's what I look for in an author. If I want a thrill ride I'll go to a fun fair. If I want to see the world, I'll go with a good driver. And I'll go more than once.

I think we've all known the opposite kind of driver, haven't we? Yeah, they may be flashy and even 'expert' at controlling the car, but damn. I bet you remember the chances they took more than the scenery you passed through.

I see writing as a vehicle. It's a means to an end. It's not the end itself. At least not for me.

 

Voice.

I've learned that mostly from the writing contests here on the forum. I always enjoy the one with the best voice/style (I think there's a lot of overlap) and more exciting plots can't beat that.

 

I suppose I need to find someone with a really good voice to read my next contest entry.
Just not sure who...

 

I don't see the point in choosing one over the other. That said, a great writer can make just about anything sound good, and a bad writer... well he or she is less likely to produce anything I want to invest time reading.

 

I feel like the more into my story I get, the more subplots and character developments and story arcs form.

It's like I'm weaving a cloth, and trying to stick to the main pattern, but I keep adding colors and threads to supplement the main pattern until I have my hands full. And I'm worried that if I create a thread, then forget to weave it back into the pattern later where it's supposed to fit, it'll create this big ugly snarl in my overall work.
Yet all the complexities are necessary to create a believable plot and real characters.

People are so complex. Life is full of nuances you never really see until you try to write, and write real, believable people.

Writing is hard. Haha. But fun! Don't get me wrong.
I have a spiral notebook where I keep all my ideas, but I think it needs to be reorganized so all my ideas that I have thrown out are gone and I have a streamlined outline of what I have so far, plus my notes on where I plan to take everything.

What do you guys do when you start feeling overwhelmed?

 

Planning all of these things out before I start writing is something I find crucial. You might not think of every detail right away, and might add a couple things as you write, but it'll just make it more organic like that. Having it all planned out and not be too complicated is important. Yes, real life is complicated, but this is not real life. It's a story, one that needs to be precise and organized. Too much will also take the humanity out of it and make it too clinical, but that's where the minor improv comes in to save the day. Too much of any one thing is bad I think, but certainly need more planning than anything else or your story will get convoluted and messy, and potentially have loose ends left that turn ugly as you said.

 

i always feel overwhelmed
writing is hard

so make it easier on yourself
plan first
prune what does not fit that story
line up the dominoes so one scene flows to the next logically
then with that sequence to guide you and keep you on track you should not be overwhelmed with extraneous items such as is happening now

 

Most people will tell you to plan ahead, and that's sensible, but I must admit I don't. I mean, I usually have a few key ideas in place before I start, but that's it. Mostly I go with the flow and let the story develop as I write. It's surprising how much the story grows in a short amount of time. I have tried the planning approach and I think it has its merits but it really depends on your style and what's comfortable for you. For instance, characters come to life naturally if you let them and they are sometimes better left on their own so that they tell you who they are. I appreciate I sound a little crazy on that last point, but sometimes these things really do write themselves. I just happen to be their conduit.

If you have an inkling as to the twists and turns and the juicier bits of the narrative, all the better. I tend to write over a few months and then the novel is finished, so during this time I sometimes feel the anxiety whenever I start writing again. But I've never really had a scenario where I can't think of anything or write anything down. Something usually comes. I have found that a story can take many routes and in the end you just have to pick one path, because the potential possibilities are endless. However you go about it, writing may make you feel worried that it's not always going in the direction you want, or you'll be stuck with a blank page, or it's snowballing out of control, but usually it'll right itself again with some necessary adjustments and time to think. Never forget that as writers we can have a lot to say, and so should see each project as just a small part of the whole. You can always use those bubbling ideas in another story or a sequel if you want to add even more dimensions to an already fully formed project.

 

isn't it easier to see the path through the woods if you can be in a balloon over it before you return to do it on foot?

if you go on vacation wouldn't you pick the best route to get you there before you started out?

isn't it easier to move 3x5 cards around on a table top to see if the scenes like up like dominoes before you start writing?

doesn't it waste a lot of time , effort, and paper to create a draft and then try to see if it makes sense and start lining things up to fit ?

a few writers can pantsit well. stephen king and a couple of others do that.
but most professional writers plan first and then write with that as a guide. rowling and patterson are big on planning.

wouldn't you be more productive if you wasted less effort writing, tossing, revising, editing, and rewriting so much as most pantsers do ?

pantsers often claim they can't be creative if they do an outline or plan ahead.
in the end a good book has to be organised. isn't it easier to get the sequence correct before you start writing ?

wouldn't you expect a builder to frame your house before they started putting in the details like appliances, electric outlets etc. ?

i fail to see how there is less creativity in jotting phrases on 3x5 cards with the essence of a scene and getting them to fit correctly before elaborating on them.
after you have the cards in a good sequence then switch to excel to help you add more details to each scene in the time line as a guide for when you start writing.

 

All good arguments but there is no clear rule book to writing, though there are many who claim there is one. While I agree that you wouldn't generally go on holiday without any plan (I've done this once and it turned out to be good fun, but that's by the by) you might end up changing your plan if you go, say, travelling. I've heard this happen a lot. My friend went to New Zealand and ended up staying there for more than a year instead of just two months, because he met so many good people out there and wanted to go at his own pace. Instead of sticking to a painstakingly organised plan, he went with the flow and simply made sure he didn't miss any of his highlights.

These comparisons aren't really watertight, though. The truth is writing is a long, open drive. It's your choice how you go about it, so long as you enjoy it. I think I am a decent writer, perhaps even good. I am far from great. But where I lack in some areas I make up in others. There is a instinctual aspect to storytelling and an awareness of pacing, rhythm and beats. You might not know exactly where you're going, but you have a good idea of what your characters are like when you create them. I am only 20,000 words into my current project, but I know the main characters very well and know that I want to focus on their youth a lot. I know it's a coming of age story, but also that it's a story of overcoming insurmountable odds and proving the world around him wrong. So, there is something tying the threads together even from the start. I have an outline, but the way the actual narrative progresses is largely an ongoing process.

This style, like anything, can be viewed positively or negatively. But really it's more about if the story flows naturally and where it's going. Like Stephen King, I'm all about story and characterisation, and I much prefer his down to earth and hard-working approach. I definitely put the graft in, so I don't write in a fanciful way or take to the pen when the feeling takes me. I just write. A lot. As for re-writes and revisions, this is always an inevitable part of the process, but I'm not going back and forth restructuring the main parts and changing the story completely. If you can learn to adapt, you can respond to the story as and when you need, rather than try and have some concrete plan in place from the start.

That's not to say I discourage planning. I think it's great if you have the main narrative arcs in place, but that's not essential. Sometimes you can't see around the corner until you've arrived, but once you do you know the next step, and then the next. It is sometimes more enjoyable to write as you go along and there's no danger of inconsistency if you know your characters well. Too much planning can also be problematic, I know someone who treated writing more like a science and who tried to have every detail in place before starting. As a result he never actually finished.

There are no shortcuts to writing, but rather than spending too much time thinking I prefer to get straight to the point and let it develop as I go along. The thinking happens in-between. Besides, writing is an ever evolving pursuit, you learn as you go along. I would not publish the book I wrote three years ago, but I am proud of it. From a relative point of view, it was a good piece of work. I may say the same about this one I'm writing in three years, but I will see a big improvement, too. As long as you are serious, by all means write as you think best.

 

Oh, I do plan it. I've got the overall story arc planned, plus several sub plots. But it seems like the more I get into my characters heads, the more the story tends to diverge from my plan. The more I write, the more I realize I need more details to flesh out an idea here, a scene there. So my planning notebook has gotten quite scattered and confusing, which doesn't help me.
If I meticulously planned everything down to the last detail, I would never start to write. And I'd probably end up scrapping half of what I started with once I did get started (if I did.)
When you breathe life into a character, you start to see things the way they see them, you start to see that no, they wouldn't react to something that way (what was planned), they would react to it this way....and then that new reaction starts a domino effect of new twists and reactions and so forth. That's where I feel it gets a bit overwhelming. Trying to keep track of all the new ideas that flow once your characters come to life in your head and on the page.

 

I like the quote from some famous writer saying that writing without an outline is like driving a car at night: you can only see as far as the headlights shine, but you can drive a whole journey that way.

 

I've always loved that quote. And it's totally true. Another way of looking at it is it's like going down a long stream and not struggling against it, just let it take you and eventually you'll end up where you need to be.

But yeah, Stormsong, I wouldn't worry too much about trying to follow the plan to a tee or cramming too much in your head at one time. If you have a really good idea, by all means add it in so you don't forget. But I also think you should always trust yourself to include it in when you write, too. Planning is sometimes what we do as an overcompensation because we are worried about the overall outcome. Once you have some of the story written, you see how the characters will react and get a sense of what they're going to do next. You will usually remember most of your good ideas even if you haven't written them down, especially if you write across a short period of time and not years. I used to write it all down and now sometimes I just make a quick note of something instead. Sometimes it takes a totally different shape but works better. Always trust your instincts and natural storyteller's voice as well and your memory is probably better than what you recognise. You will think 'oh yes, this can go here, I remember.'

 

Hey there ladies and gents.

I've heard it said that writing a story is unlike any other form of storytelling. In order to grip your audience, according to some people, one very important thing is to choose a character for the reader to inhabit. That way, the reader can connect with the focal character, and experience the story and every event that transpires, alongside them. It's a very good way to tell a story; the experience of your focal character facing danger, following his/her desire, and obtaining or failing to obtain their story goal. Because it follows your character, the story has emotion. It has feelings, tension, and desire.

However, I'd really like to write down some 'history'. Rather than tell the story of a person's journey, fears, dangers, and achievements, I'd like to write down a few 'events'--fictional accounts of some historical happening that transpired in a fictional world.

My problem with this is, like all history, simply writing it down is dry. You can TELL a story about history with fervor and passion, and your voice provides the bulk of the entertainment. But I've never seen a WRITTEN story about an event--fictional or non-fictional--that is as exciting as a story about characters emotions. You can TELL a group of people about the Battle of Stamford Bridge, but when you write it down, without a voice, its just bland and dry.

Does anyone have any ideas, or pieces I could read, on how to write down events in a way that makes them bearable--and maybe even interesting--to read?

 

I get what you mean, and it sounds like you're wanting to do a historical documentation of events without it being dull and lifeless. I think this is sort of an impossibility though, it contradicts the show and tell rules. Something I struggle with actually, but that's another story. If you tell your reader what's happened or is happening then it suddenly becomes bland. So you have to show them to make it an interesting story to read. You can do a historical document, or write a story, but if you combine the two then they cancel out. I tried to write something similar to what you described a long time ago...it didn't turn out so well. I have never heard of anything published like this either, but I'm only one person, maybe someone else has...but said story is probably pretty boring tbh.

 

Its such a bummer, too! That's just what I get for liking history.

 

I can't remember the name of it, really wish I could because I'd like to revisit this book/author, but there's this one guy who writes fiction in historical times. He does a lot of research and gets his facts straight as far as the history part of it goes, but then has a completely fictional character live it, and writes about their story. The book I read was about a young man, I think in his early twenties or maybe late teens, who leaves his home in old Britain as I remember. He travels to a few different countries, namely early France, and I think to the middle east , and has a hell of an adventure. Anyway, in the story it talked a lot about historic things and people/places, very detailed and accurate, but everything that happened was fictional as far as the MC was concerned. If I figure out what book it was I'll let you know, I think it might give you some ideas along the lines of what you're talking about, but the entire time it's experienced and lived instead of just being told to the reader. Not exactly what you were looking for, but sorta close as far as historical accuracy and documenting events.

 

Do you know 'The British History Podcast'? Of course, it's narrated, but I feel like there's more to the host's delivery than just vocal range. He has a knack for getting into the people's heads without losing sight of the big picture and keeping things fascinating.

Even if he's not super helpful for your writing projects, he's with plugging.

 

This is a well-known and very enjoyable collection of historical non-fiction. I suppose it is 'pop history' so don't tell the teacher. Not dry at all...there's others, I'm having a think re 1066..

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0349117314/?tag=writingfor07a-20

 

There's lots of really enjoyable historical fiction out there--do you read any of it? If so, you probably know that the authors generally treat the historical figures they focus on like characters in a novel, giving them depth and personalities and all the stuff you seem to be trying to avoid.

Is there a reason you don't want to write straight-up history?

 

Thanks for the responses guys!

@BayView Well, like a lot of people here interested in fantasy, I've tried my hand at creating a world from scratch. Rather than just writing stories that follow characters, I though it would be fun to write down a few myths, legends, fairy tales, religions, and events that happen in the world. These events, like a war, or a battle, or a portal opening, or a country collapsing from drought, don't necessarily have a 'focal character'. Characters naturally play a part, but as @Dr.Meow said above, it's a huge breach of the 'show don't tell' law.

Ideally, I'd like to write these events as sort of "Bible-esque"-- "And God spoke unto Noah and said, "Noah, I am the Father of All and I would ask of thee to perform a great burden and bring me some Doritos." "

The problem is, reading the bible is tough like well done steak and twice as unappetizing. I was wondering if anyone had done it better.

No offense to God or anything ._.