By in-betweens, do you mean transitions? Or what? Cause transitions between scenes can be tricky. I tend to do time space jumps (***), to not get completely stuck in time when the story covers a long period of it, or to cut out things like the mundane bits, such as travel for instance. Think about driving a few hundred miles, it is kinda boring for the most part, and you would skip past that bit if you could. Also why we don't tend to write in 'real time', cause that would make every story like a billion pages long. You can make a mundane task some what interesting if you have it as a background to the characters thoughts and such. And if that can't help make the boring bits interesting, then you might have more to consider than just the boring bits. If you find it really bogs down the story, or doesn't really matter to the story for either the plot or characterization, then you might consider cutting out entirely. Good luck.
Can you give examples? They don't even need to be real examples from your novel, just something to work with. But, to make up an example: Imagine that you have a big scene with Joe's house blowing up. Then you have a later scene where he's in a gun standoff in the hotel room that he's renting. But you feel, for whatever reason, that you need a scene with him moving into the hotel. What other subplots or relationships do you have that you can work with? Maybe Joe has a temper and Joe has a girlfriend. Maybe after the explosion his girlfriend offered to go out and buy him some clothes, and the scene is her arriving with bags of stuff, and him being ungrateful and rude. She's fed up, she breaks up with him, and now he's lost his home AND his girlfriend. That scene lets the reader know where he moved after the explosion, but as far as the reader's concerned, the scene is a pivotal scene in the "plot" of Joe's relationship and his life. You, as the author, know that it started out as a boring "glue" scene, but the reader doesn't. Or maybe you even knew that you needed a Joe-and-girlfriend conflict scene, but only now do you realize you can also use that scene to serve the "boring", plot-glue purpose. As an alternative, maybe you don't need the hotel move-in scene at all. Maybe it's plenty for Joe to just take a hotel key out of his pocket and let himself into his room, and find himself faced with a gunman. In my WIP, almost every scene started out as what I refer to as a "highly flavored" scene, and I find that I need very few "glue" scenes. Now, I have thrown away (well, I removed them from the main novel; I never actually throw anything away) a lot (a LOT) of scenes, but I enjoyed writing all the scenes, so I had more fun writing. Other ways to add flavor to that hotel glue scene: Maybe the bad guy sees Joe moving into the hotel and uses the opportunity to attack him. Maybe Joe doesn't have a girlfriend and the hotel clerk is really cute. Maybe...OK, I wanted at least three, and I'm sure there are dozens, but my mind is a blank. I might return. But, anyway: Examples?
I think everyone's advice here is applicable, but the example you gave pretty much nails the problem and solution spot-on. And, I think in most of my scenes this is the solution I need. I really need to work on making scenes do double-duty and tie my plots together better. In retrospect, part of this probably came from writing plot outlines for subplots that don't intersect scenes from the main plot, then interleaving the scenes and expecting them to tie together on their own. But I think you're also right that if a scene is purely transitional and can't serve a plot/subplot point, it's okay to imply that it happened and move on.
The process you describe is similar to processes that I've heard published writers talk about. There are a lot of different ways to write a book. And in particular, many writers do not start from the beginning, but instead write out of order against an outline. So your basic process is fine, and has worked for many people. What's important is whether it works for you or not. As others have said, I think: if a scene is uninteresting, it should be cut or replaced. Every part of the book should be entertaining! Prose is only the medium through which we tell our stories. If the story itself is amazing, then it will shine through the prose.
My writing process is pretty simple. I always start with a basic idea. This could be quite literally anything. I sometimes try to write down a few ideas for the story, but most of the time, I simply let it spin around in my head for a while. Sometimes it's a silly idea, and I forget about it quickly enough. Other times, it starts to grow, and take on a life of its own. When this happens, I start to think about more details, how the story can proceed, a couple of ways to end it, and just about anything I can come up with. It's mostly just to get a very basic idea where it's all going. After that, I start the actual writing process. I start with page one, line one, then take it from there. Stephen King once said that it's not possible to sit down and write a story from start to finish, and I tend to agree with that. It's "possible" to do it, but not recommended. Stories take a lot of work. So when I write, I start from the beginning, then write for a while. But when I take breaks, I always think a lot about the story, and consider where it can go from here. Then when I get back to the computer, I continue writing. The story will usually flow quite naturally, and I rarely have to steer it in a specific direction. But the thing is, I always write from start to finish. There have been a few occasions where I wrote a scene I intended to use later in the book, but those are very few and far between, and I never really use those scenes anyway. They almost always end up in a "Deleted scenes" folder. I do have a weird urge to re-release a book with the deleted scenes added in from time to time, but I haven't done that yet. Maybe one day I will.
The problem may well lie in the fact that you are simply telling us 'what happened' in a concise, expository way. That makes for flat storytelling. It may be a useful skill when it comes to writing a synopsis, if you need to have one to submit to potential agents, etc. But it doesn't draw people into your story. Slow it down. Expand the reader's view of the situation, and make your characters' experiences seem real. It's better to over-write a scene, giving us all the nuances of the scene—including enough 'meat' so the readers can figure out how the characters feel about what is happening, and identify with them. You're not writing a news story. Remember what good storytelling felt like when you were a child? Do you remember your sense of wonder, excitement, and immersion in a make-believe world? See what you can do to re-create that experience for your adult readers. You can always edit down later, and remove stuff that turns out to be excessive. But you need to have something to work with. Trying to flesh out a minimalist story later on is hard to do. Don't be afraid to be emotional, even melodramatic. Melodrama can be corrected later on.
For me there are always parts of a story that just seem interminable. That's why, for the most part, I start at the beginning and work forward, that way I don't write all of the fun parts and end up having nothing but mind numbingly labourious bit all left over for the end of the draft. Another thing to do is to approach it like you would work. Imagine that if you don't get that novel finished, then you don't get paid, which means you lose your place, your phone gets cut off, your stomach is growling, and the wolves are howling just outside the door you can no longer hide behind. If that doesn't get you motivated, then I dunno, try ice cream. Tiger Tail is my favourite.
Well, I confess my writing process is a mess, but one thing I do first is always research. This helps me to understand the ideas I want to write on my story, also to see if a particular scene can work or character trait for example. Next, to this, I write all my ideas not caring if they make sense or if they are bad because I understand my first draft so later will be changed. After the story then yes it comes to concern, does this make sense? Where is the inconsistency? Is one character not talking too much? Is this dialogue useless? If my answer to this For your second question, I will ask this? Are you excited about your ideas? If so, write it down. If you put all your passion on that particular scene, your readers will as well feel passionate. Reading your story, they will say: Woah! I like this scene. Oh man... shame my favourite character die! You create an impact, a link to them if you want. If not, then it is time to change something or time to research your idea. I hope this helps, and keep on good work never give up and have fun.
I'm glad you mentioned this. Coming from technical writing, I definitely have the urge to summarize whenever possible. I'm better about this than I used to be, but this is certainly a factor in my problem. I sometimes forget that, even though a scene may have an interesting conflict, it isn't coming through because I'm not exploring it properly. The premise for a scene may not be boring, but by not elaborating on and exploring the conflict in that scene it falls flat, just as you say.
@Fieryace - do you have a favourite fiction writer? If so, you might try a trick that helped me. I like lots of writers, but I have a particular affinity for Mary Stewart, the woman who wrote the first romance mysteries back in the 1950s, and who wrote the fantastic Merlin series starting with The Crystal Cave. Like yourself, I was an experienced expository writer. However, when I started writing my novel, I deliberately 'borrowed' Mary Stewart's style and tried to stick to the tone she always took with her stories. They were emotional, but not melodramatic, and her characters always seemed grounded, despite all the crazy stuff that happened to them. It really helped free me from the expository style. In fact, I can now write expository pieces that are a lot more interesting to read than the dry ones I used to produce! It was a win-win. So, if you've got a favourite fiction author, see if you can imitate their style. Perhaps this trick might work for you as well? Don't imitate their stories, but imitate their style. Worth a go.
I'm not sure if you mean like slow bits in which during an action/journey/disaster storyline the characters can't reach their goal so they're stalled for a moment until the next big disaster/action moment. Because mainly writers use these for sharp transitions, jump cuts ahead in time, to switch to another character & storyline or to make the character shine -- kinda like in Jurassic Park when Hammond was telling Ellie about his flea circus while they eat melted ice cream. I love that scene. It's not essential to the plot but it showcases character. I don't really have a driving plotline so every bit has to speak to character, plot or theme. If the action is slow I focus on character. Sometimes plots drive so hard they don't allow certain character traits to come through so you can use the in between bits to showcase something you had no time for and it doesn't need to be a big scene it can be something simple.
There shouldn't be any in between bits. You'll lose the reader with anything dull. It has to be interesting in a different way. Whatever isn't "Action" should be character/plot development. IMHO
By the way, an 'in-between' scene MIGHT be something that could be condensed in a sentence or two. Something like : If the 'in between' scene showed Shelly trying to persuade Matthew, perhaps that scene could be condensed by 'telling' and moving right along. The important scene is the one coming up, where she finally puts her foot down. That one we want to see as it plays out. But the three days before? Maybe not so much. If you struggle to write a scene, I'd move on without it and continue to write the scenes you find exciting to write. After you have your story all finished, you might discover (as I did) that the 'in-between' scenes aren't actually needed. All that is needed is mention of what happened in them, to make the transition.
You're using a method called Scene and Sequel. The scene contains the action. The sequel fills the gap. Your genre determines where the emphasis is. Sequels slow the story down and scene (action) accelerates it. The sequel always hits 3 basic points: react to the last scene, consider possibilities, come to a decision. Always keep that in mind. You have to know how to enter the scene and how to leave it. (IMO, this is true for all scenes, but that's just a theory of mine.) In between, you need escalating tension. In the sequel's case, the tension is caused by there being no easy answer for the MC. The conflict is their indecision. Think of the scene as asking the question (a conflict) and the sequel as coming up with an answer (continuing the plot through story). The next scene asks a bigger question, the next sequel weighs higher stakes, and so on. Let's say you had this simple story: <Action> Wife brains her husband with a frying pan (or hopefully something more clever). Leaves him bleeding in the recliner, still watching the game, more or less. <Sequel> Wife takes a breather by shopping for groceries. Wonders if the husband is still alive. Maybe he is. Maybe she should run. Thinks about kids. Is this the last meal she'll ever get for them? Should she even bother? Do they go on the lam? Does she surrender, die in a hail of bullets? Should she be selfish or is that what got her into this situation? What does that even mean? Thinks of her own mother and derelict father, etc. <Action> Resolution scene. Police arrive. Thing is, depending on genre, the sequel can be the focus of the story. It will be highly character-driven, so you can imagine the genres that would prefer to stay there mulling over possibilities, flash-backing, building metaphor or what have you. You'll see more inner dialog there, and maybe symbolism and quieter ideas appear because the reader is more likely to notice them at that spot. At the end of the sequel, you don't have to explicitly say what the decision is, but the MC should have settled their mind.
