The Writers Block Thread

I think we've crossed into the subjective minefield. When did the popular opinion ever matter in terms of judging how good a piece of art or craft is? On IMDb, Conan the Barbarian has a score of 6.9, compared to Conan the Destroyer's 5.8, to get a reference point. That just proves the scoring is absolutely worthless and not reflective of anything, if not that the website has no critical credibility whatsoever.

 

Good point. And back to the subject at hand, I'm just really concerned that there isn't enough material here for that much traveling. A person's thoughts are only so interesting for so long without anything else. I loved LotR, but the Return of the King when Frodo and Samwise spent all that time crawling through Mordor, I started skipping whole chapters at a time. Others loved it, but that again is subjective. I'm reading Brandon Sanderson at the moment and I applaud how he just gets to the point instead of describing every leaf on every tree.

Description, for example, in modern literature has been thrown to the wayside for many reasons. Unless something is necessary to the story, then it needs to be cut, and that includes random thoughts of a character. I fear you'd start adding filler just to put space in the pages, but filler is the first thing to go in editing, and it's a big no-no in writing.

 

That's precisely my opinion. This seems like something that should be left to some literary wizards, and I'm not sure there's many alive that could tackle such a thing and do it well. If it's not done exceptionally, then it might just crumble. I think some of the greats could have handled it, but still it might have been rejected in modern literature... It's a risky move even for a master IMO.

 

In the end, yes, but not necessarily at the beginning

I would consider that to be "setting" rather than "character." What kind of person is the dragon slayer, and what would that same person be like if they were in a realistic setting where they couldn't be a dragon slayer?

Going back to the moment where I first realized that I had a story to write about:

Spoiler

My fantasy world featured two heroes and a villain as the main characters. One of the heroes was a Human/Psoglav shapeshifter (let's just say "werewolf" for short), the other was a Half-Human Half-Orc, and both were superheroes in a white magic militia. Both were lesbian, yet not remotely interested in one another personally, and the Half-Orc was caustic and sarcastic yet had a stable girlfriend, while the werewolf was sweet and pleasant yet settled for one-night-stands rather than find a lover whose heart would be broken if the werewolf ever came home in a body bag. The leading villain was a vampire who formed a cult of vigilante serial killers, not because she wanted to protect the innocent (though many of her followers did) but because she wanted to be known as such a transcendent predator that only other sociopathic murderers could be suitable prey for her to hunt.

In my bank robbery scene, I had a group of low-level criminals casing a bank. Their previous target was destroyed by a bomber before they could rob it, and now they're looking for a new one. As they're about to leave, a woman from the FBI walks in and asks for everybody's attention. She explains that the FBI have received a manifesto claiming that the first bank was destroyed to show that the bomber was serious, and now the bomber is demanding a protection payment from this new bank to be collected in one week's time. "At this point, I should hope that the more clever of you have realized that I'm not actually from the FBI." The bomber boasts that the crowd can call the police if they want, but explains that she has a hostage and would gladly let the hostage die alone in a bunker rather than tell the police where to find her. After my lower-level criminals get caught up in her scheme, she tells them that she doesn't even want the money, she just wants to be known as a terrifying bomber who can rip off any bank that she wants.

As I gave more thought to my vampire supervillain, I wondered if maybe "vigilante serial killer" wasn't the type of supervillainy that she wanted to be known for: she wanted to scare everybody, yet her cult made people feel safe that someone was protecting them from ruthless killers. As I fiddled with the motivations of my self-proclaimed megalomaniac, I realized SHE'S THE BOMBER.

This connection wasn't something I planned at first, but it happened anyway was too perfect to pass up.

Character: woman who wants to open a book about the deadliest criminals of all time and to be able to read about her own exploits (such as extorting banks with the threat of terrorist bombing)

Setting: Urban Fantasy world where many people (including my bomber) are vampires

Can you imagine what my two heroes would be like if they were not a werewolf and a Half-Orc? Can you imagine me writing a story about two humans who share their characterization?

It's not an exact science Either a connection happens or it doesn't, and sometimes even if it does it still takes a while first.

That doesn't make sense to me; I don't see any of my ideas as wasted. I'm constantly coming up with new ideas, and some of them connect more easily than others. Even the ideas that I don't use eventually inspire new ideas that I can.

That's basically what I'm talking about. Some people go "I want to write A, which naturally expands to include B, which naturally expands to include C, which naturally ..."

I can't do that. I have to go "Let's see, would A work? B? Maybe both, would C also work? No, I don't think so, maybe D? D works with E, but I don't like D anymore. HOLY **** C works perfectly with E! Can I still fit A and B into this? No, I'll save A and B for one thing and C and E for another. Oh, and I despise F with the fiery rage of a thousand Suns, but the opposite of F is G ... oh, G works really nice with A and B! Maybe H will... No. H sucks. I?"

I haven't

I've been a math and science nerd my whole life, and I'd long since consigned myself to the idea that no SciFi movie would ever portray a wormhole realistically, and I felt joy almost beyond words when Interstellar made their wormhole a sphere rather than as disk

That's what I try to do with the science in my own SciFi/Fantasy works, and I've found that it gives me character and plot ideas to a) look at what I don't like about other characters and plots that I consider to be unrealistic, and b) figuring out how I would want to do it differently. You know how cop movies used to (and possibly still do) have characters shoot each other in the shoulder as a way of not "seriously" hurting them, when in reality this can be just as deadly as a shot to the centre mass?

Spoiler: In the climax of one of my own works...

The hero wrestles the villain's gun away, then shoots her in the shoulders to incapacitate her while the hero calls 911. The hero later finds out that the villain had bled to death in the ambulance.

What specifically do you not like about modern fiction on grounds that it's unrealistic?

Your English is better than that of a lot of Americans.

My favorite singer/songwriter today is Dutch, and I did not know this at first because her songs sounded so natural to my American ear. If you want to write in English, don't let us stop you

I would recommend starying with http://www.springhole.net/writing/write-fantasy-armies.htm and then Wiki Walking from there for a few minutes hours days You're going to lose a lot of time there. I'm not sorry

 

I agree with you about LotR. Filler is a big no-no everywhere. I will try to keep that in mind if I ever actually start writing this. I've gone though the hundred entry long playlist of Sanderson's recorded lectures on YT, each video over an hour long. Though I haven't read any of his books.

Why can't the main character just walk around and marvel at how awesome his world is? If there is something to marvel at then what's wrong with that?

It wouldn't be much of a story if the guy just dragged his feet, day after day, page after page. That can be reiterated only so many times. If he's just walking and nothing happens then that's an implicit "and they lived happily ever after". My intention is not to write a diary, where every chapter is a day on the road (there won't be any roads ). Just because the character will be going through a monotonous activity for an extended amount of time doesn't mean the reader has to join him, I think.

It will be made clear that he's doing a lot of solo strollin, but the story will be about the interesting moments, like when he comes upon an entire isolated society. He will judge their architecture from hiding, decide if they're peaceful, face them, and enquire about their life and what they know about the world. But he won't have any trusty companions to discus findings and make decisions with. That's when there will be internal dialogue, and as the guy's sanity evaporates over the course of the story, the voice will change.

 

Yes, this is why I keep hammering at the 'why' angle. Why is the character isolated? That, in itself, is interesting, and a good place to start.

In answer to your question to me, @FifthofAscalante , I'd say you'll start writing when you finally know what your story is about. Not what the setting is like, but why are you taking us there? The more you think about why ...why is your character isolated, for example? ...the more ideas will hit you, and your story will start to take shape. You'll dive straight into the writing, because you'll be eager to find out what happens next.

If you were writing about today's world, you wouldn't stop at describing the world itself, would you? The terrain is like this, the climate is like this, people live in towns like this, the kind of work they do is like this, their political systems are organised like this, they look like this, they love this, they are afraid of this ...etc. There has got to be more, before our 'world' becomes a story. Otherwise it's just an encyclopedia entry or a history lesson. It can be a very complicated entry or lesson, but unless there are characters who matter doing something that impacts on this world, we fiction readers won't stay interested very long.

 

I agree with Jannert on this. If you start asking the whys then your world will be rich with meaning and we'll feel part of that world ourselves.

I really liked Cast Away. It was different but I never got bored. If something can make me cry when a football(?) called Wilson goes adrift then that's some seriously good shit.

Isolation is a very powerful theme that if done right could be amazing. Look at Life of Pi. Granted, he has a live tiger for company, but mostly he's on his own. Yet because it's about survival and his day to day inventiveness it moves along without ever losing its flow.

 

@FifthofAscalante In the end, it's all what you want to do, and honestly it may be a good idea for you to get some experience doing it. Why not, I've learned lots from simply trying different things. I think it would be best to start with something a bit more easy and straight forward, but that's just me. Whatever you do, don't get discouraged at any point. I think that's my real concern here, especially since you're saying you are knew to writing. It's very easy to self doubt in the beginning, especially if you show your work to someone and they don't like it at all. Keep writing anyway, try different things, figure out what works for you.

Does it mean I'm a bad person because I laughed when Wilson floated away? In my defense, at the time I thought it was the correct response...

 

@Simpson17866 You just articulated the absolute epitome of my writing experience in the most eloquent way I could have ever imagined. Thank you. ( @Apollypopping you might appreciate this one hehe)

 

I see what you mean. On another subject: is the lesbian label applicable to orcs? Animals engage in homosexual behaviour, but they're hardly gay or lesbian, different standards apply - that's my inner world builder talking.

God, am I thankful that I'm not as scientifically aware as I am historically, because one doesn't need to be all that aware to start noticing things. Whenever I watch a sci-fi movie, I always suspect that bullshit is unfolding right in front of my innocent eyes, but even I can see through it now and then. Ages ago, I read somewhere that if you're doing a sci-fi thing, you can change three things about how laws of physics work, and only three at most. The readers will accept and go along with them, but when you start to change things at whim...

Uhm thanks, but for me that is not good enough. Especially when I've been living most of my life in an English-speaking country. And thanks for the link, these kinds of reference websites are always handy to have.

I don't recall ever saying that I'm not interested in storytelling. What would I be even doing on this forum if I wasn't interested in that? Quote me if I have said that and I will retract it. I said that I mostly enjoy world-building, and that writing characters on a personal level is for me the most difficult part.

Yes, I'd say, when Wilson gets lost at sea, that's the most moving scene in the movie, and it really is moving (certainly Wilson is moving away ). More than the part where Tom Hanks finally gets back.

It would make sense to start with something easy, I know, but I can see this world so vividly, it would be a shame to let it trickle away like water through fingers. Still, whatever story, the problem was the same. I hope that it will be no more with this altered approach. Lastly, people cope with different things by means of laughter, so... Yes, you are a bad, bad person for laughing at Wilson!

 

Actually, orcs in my world are people like humans, not beasts like monkeys.

I have never heard it put that specifically. Interesting.

I see.

 

This may be my fault - someone else on the thread said storytelling was a weakness and I think I attributed that to you.

That said, if you're good at storytelling - why are you having trouble telling this story? How do you know you're good at storytelling? You've successfully told stories in the past? So what's different between those times and this time?

 

Storytelling is a very broad subject. In real life, I know two excellent oral storytellers. One being my old, well-spoken history teacher, eyebrow-raisingly overqualified for his position. The other one being my alcoholic grandfather with hardly any education and speech impediment. Both will equally pull your attention. Back in school I've had some basic creative writing tasks to perform. And it's not like I never lied to anyone online ... So to a degree, I'm no stranger to fiction and writing. In fact, it would be a challenge to find someone who is.

 

But it seems like you're having some trouble translating the "online lying" skill to writing a novel, right?

I could be wrong, but I wonder if you're underestimating the challenge of coming up with a satisfying plot. You may think you're stuck because you're too obsessed with world building, but possibly you're stuck because plotting is hard, writing is hard, etc. World building is the fun, easy part, in my experience. It's the actual writing that takes a lot of effort. So possibly your "being stuck" is just "coming to realize this is going to be a big job."

 

Of course writing is hard, but again, it's not world building that I'm stuck on. It's general technicalities. If a character has to get on a horse, I can't help but ask what kind of saddle is he getting in? After I have assessed the type of the saddle then I must know, how does one exactly mount a horse with that kind of saddle? Then I need to know, what is that thing called that one has to grab to pull himself up? Now that I know what it's called, what's that other thing called and what is its purpose? Not to mention how physically able is the character, and is he wearing or carrying anything encumbering? Questions never stop. I must understand everything.

I think it's more of a personal issue rather than one exclusive to creative writing. I am here because I must know how writing is done.

 

Maybe you need to dive deeper into POV. If you're in close third and the character is used to riding a horse, she wouldn't think about getting on, she'd just get on. So you wouldn't write about the details of how she got on, you'd just say she got on. Or skip that entirely and just show her an hour later, on a horse, doing something more interesting.

You can't know everything about everything. Clearly questions have stopped for you in other areas - you're typing on your computer, not endlessly investigating its manufacture, programming, sales numbers, etc. So do the same thing with your writing - whatever allows you to stop wondering in some areas, apply it to this area.

 

Two books come to my mind that consist of big parts of isolation and are still interesting to read, because it's interesting how the MC copes: The Martian and Stephen King's The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon.
I personally would enjoy a book in which it's human against nature or human against all kinds of problems that need to be solved for survival.

But...

... you're right that without some kind of conflict or goal the story would probably not be enjoyed by many people.
(Although I personally would also read stuff that is more like a picture in text or something, if the writing is compelling.)

So, maybe he notices that his sanity is evaporating and realizes he needs to do something against it?

I can related to that very well.
I researched the construction of 18th century linen caps for far too long!

So, a little trick that I use: When I'm not certain about how something is called I put a description in box brackets so that I can look it up later. So, in your case that would be "He grabbed the [thingy on the saddle] and pulled himself upwards."
When I polish the scene later, I can look it up.

When it's more than a word I also put a note in the text [He mounts the horse - do research how!] or just write my best guess marked in red and make a note on my To Research list: "Look up again how a horse is mounted correctly".
If that detail is not crucial to the story, you can easily continue writing and look up all the stuff in a research session later.

 

So, returning to this isolation thing, do the villages have to be isolated? Or just the man? If all you need is isolation for the man, it seems to me that you could somehow achieve that with seasonal bars to travel. He can't get out of some location until the river freezes, or until the river gets low enough to be forded, or something.

 

My OCD might not allow me to progress until I know the answer now, specially if I write it in red. This thing happens to me regularly where I'll be trying to sleep, laying in bed all cosy, when a random word comes to mind. "Kelp." "Kelp." "KELP!" Last time it was the Hiroshima Maidens. I have no clue why it's this or that particular thing, where could I have possibly heard about it, or what is it's significance, but it won't let me sleep until I Google it. Worst of all, I forget most of this stuff .

The villages are integral. If you're interested, below I describe almost the entire story, though I left out a lot of details. I was listening to this (the journey) and this (the forest) when the story was conceived in the dark womb of my mind. If you haven't played that game, I think that's where the motif of travelling east came from.

The main character comes from the Cradle, which is the civilised region with kingdoms and cities. This is where humans supposedly first came to be. Also, in this world humans were supposedly first, then came forests and most of the flora in general. The history of this world has numerous inconsistencies, which the main character hopes to resolve. And so he leaves the Cradle behind to walk east towards this mythical forest that marks the end of the human world as they see it.

This journey takes him a very long time, as he sees human presence diminish the further he distances himself from the Cradle. Even though they name the forest the wilderness, no map charts beyond the Cradle, so he just keeps heading east, and on the way he walks upon a few villages that have no contact with the quote-unquote civilisation. He stops at them, hoping to find out about natives, and therefore about the world.

Eventually the guy reaches the forest, whither lies the wilderness, which some believe to be the place where people go after death. Though no one has any actual clue what's in or beyond the forest. He doesn't go deep before he witnesses something scary that involves the last village he passed through. Though I won't spoil what it is, it's not a story for children. Along the journey, he progressively loses sanity, whether it's caused by the loneliness or not.

This is more or less how I imagine the villagers and the villages:


Basically Slavic highlanders.

 

I come across in my story moments where I need to explain something that I know little about. Take for instance using a bow and arrow while riding a horse and shooting. I then had one of the older characters explain how to use one to the young MC. Same with a horse, I had to briefly show him mounting one and the correct way to do this by putting the leg in the stirrup etc.

Fortunately, you can find that stuff out straight away. It's good to have it there to add more believability, but careful of overdoing these things. Too much and it's an instruction manual. Plus, we need to keep the pace of the story and not lose sight of the point.

 

Are you actually diagnosed with OCD? Are you being treated for it in some way?

Because I think I agree with you that this is a personal question, not a writing question. If you're diagnosed with OCD, I'd talk to your doctor/therapist about this issue and about possible solutions. If you're not diagnosed and this is seriously something that's affecting you in all areas of your life, get to a doctor/therapist and start getting it sorted out.

I don't think any of the ideas we're offering you are making much of an impact.

 

Yes, I was wondering that myself. If you have OCD, @FifthofAscalante, then I now understand why this exercise seems difficult for you. Hmmm. I can see why our suggestions aren't helping.

In a sense, you might look at the real world. You occupy it and deal with it without knowing everything there is to know about it. You see a bird fly by, and you might not be able to correctly identify it. However, you DID see it. You know it's a bird, and you can confidently state that you saw a bird.

If you can take that sort of idea—that you can accept things on a surface level without knowing all their attributes—into the way you think of your story, that might help. If it's important to the story to know what kind of bird it is—maybe it's a seasonal thing, and this kind of bird only appears at a certain season—then you'll need to identify it more closely. However, if the species itself isn't important—say you were asleep under a tree and a bird flew by, and the sound of its wings flapping woke you up—then you don't need to delve into exactly what kind of a bird it was.

By the way, I do like the idea of the villagers, as depicted in your picture there. They look like middle Europeans ...Polish, maybe?

 

No, I was not diagnosed. I know full well how willy-nilly people throw these round the internet these days, so feel free to take it with as big of a pinch of salt as you feel. The degree I have is present in my daily life, but it's far from crippling. If I injure one hand, I will always think about doing the same to the other to maintain symmetry, but I won't do that. Also as much as I'd like to side with you on the have it diagnosed by a professional or you're fine, in practice, few people have the time and care enough to do that (after rereading, I don't think you were saying that, but I'm saying it anyway). I have breathing troubles that have caused me physical discomfort and embarrassment on more occasions than I care to remember, and it took me over half a decade to ask a doctor about it. I'm sure you're no different. As a kid, I was diagnosed with ADHD by a real doctor with a real degree, and the diagnosis couldn't have been further from the truth, I think, so no matter how you look at it, all these mental disorders are an iffy subject. When you see someone online say that they have it, I suggest you forget that it is a documented disorder, and take it as a vague characteristic of their character, like patience or impulsiveness.

I take all of these ideas into consideration and hope to get some use out of all of them. I think the best one is that I need to change my approach and focus on progressing the overarching story rather than on ultimately less important details. Actually, over the course of this discussion, and looking about the forum in general, I came to a certain realisation that I expect many of you to disagree with. But I think it deserves it's own thread, so I'll keep that to myself for now .

Don't ponder on the whole OCD thing for too long, because it affects me and I don't. It's only an annoyance, now and then. I think these people are the Gorals, they live along the Carpathian mountains, so most likely Polish, but could be Slovak, Bohemian or maybe even Ukrainian? I like really like their traditional attire, though I'm not keen on wearing bright colours myself .


EDIT: Perhaps I should've said awhile ago that the case is pretty much closed, but who am I stop people, if they have something constructive to add?