This Improvisers' Secret Weapon

Status
Not open for further replies.

Laer Carroll

Aerospace engineer turned writer
Super Member
Registered
Temp Ban
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
2,481
Reaction score
271
Location
Los Angeles
Website
LaerCarroll.com
Readers in a hurry: skip down the page to THE SECRET.

I just finished James Patterson's 22-part Masterclass. He said not a thing new to me that I've not heard dozens of times before in AW and in fiction-writing books. But it was worth the $90 to me for two reasons.

One, it taught me a little about the man behind the books, someone whom I found to be thoughtful and genuinely wanting to help newcomers to writing. That alone was encouraging to one who's had plenty of doubts about their own desire for a writing career. I was also encouraged when he said one of his most popular books was rejected by 31 publishers. I'd just received the twelfth rejection of my latest book by an agent; this gives me the will to send off another round of queries.

Two, it made me revisit those basic topics: dialogue, character, and so on. Including plotting. James is big on outlining and gave some useful pointers (which you probably have already encountered in AW and elsewhere).

Unfortunately, that last was useless to me. I've tried and failed at outlining, eventually deciding it just was not in my nature. It totally spoils the pleasure I get from improvising: being surprised and usually pleased when I discover (as if reading a stranger's book for the first time) characters or settings or plot twists in my own books.

This forced me to reconsider how I manage to write books (nine so far) by leaping off the cliff into space with the hope I can fly rather than crash. I finally decided that the secret (for me, maybe not for you) is ...
_______________________________________
THE SECRET is structure.

Every one of us has read or otherwise consumed many thousands of stories in our lives. From those we've learned dozens or hundreds of rules for writing, and learned how and when to break them. We apply them every time we write, sometimes intellectually, much more often intuitively.

There is a structure to stories. It was first written down by Aristotle hundred's of years before Christ. He wrote it for plays. Today variations of it is used in every short story, novel, screen or TV play. Even in everyday life, as we chat in the snack room at work or at lunch or (as recently for me) at Thanksgiving.

It's SETUP, DEVELOPMENT, WRAPUP: the three parts of every story. Which you have encountered in AW and elsewhere many times. But bear with me. I'm talking about its use in improvising a story.

Every story begins with a seed: some tiny inspiration that causes us to get excited about a new story. We set about writing it down, maybe on the back of a throwaway menu at a restaurant. Then we set about creating a story from it.

An improviser begins in any part of the three parts of a story. Those few paragraphs, or often (for me) a complete scene, might seem unconnected to anything to an outside observer. But I KNOW where it goes, approximately. My knowledge might be intellectual (I'm an engineer; we're big at that) or much more often intuitive.

That fragment or scene is a piece of a jigsaw puzzle. And I place it on the table close to where it should go chronologically. Knowing that in the final story I may want to move it elsewhere in the stream of text, as a flashback or flashforward or into a piece of dialogue. But more importantly I KNOW its function.

That function might be the trigger incident that causes the main character to decide to launch into a physical or spiritual journey toward some reward (or away from some threat). Or its function might be the deciding struggle that ends the development part of the story, and begins the resolution part. Or it might be closer to the middle of the development part of the story.

Regardless, I now have pinned down a chunk of the story. I might continue to nurture it to a more finished state. Just as often it inspires me to move to a different part of the story and write that. And so it goes till there is a complete story.

I may or may not be done. The jigsaw parts may fit well. Or I may need to do a polish that better fits every thing together. Or even a more extensive rewrite. But whatever the situation I've successfully flown from the cliff edge to a safe landing.

And that's how I can launch off the cliff edge without fear. I've done this nine times before with a book. And dozens of times with shorter stories. All improvised.
 
Last edited:

Jamesaritchie

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
27,863
Reaction score
2,311
Is he actually writing his own books now? Or s he still just writing outlines that other writers turn into good novels?
 

cornflake

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
16,171
Reaction score
3,734
He outlines, and apparently now sells tutorials? Unless they're about getting rich by hiring a stable of writers to write books for you, I'm not sure I see the relevance to Patterson himself, but I'm glad you got something out of it, lc.
 

Laer Carroll

Aerospace engineer turned writer
Super Member
Registered
Temp Ban
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
2,481
Reaction score
271
Location
Los Angeles
Website
LaerCarroll.com
Is this turning into the "I hate James Patterson" thread? I hoped it would be about improv strategy & tactics!
 
Last edited:

Laer Carroll

Aerospace engineer turned writer
Super Member
Registered
Temp Ban
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
2,481
Reaction score
271
Location
Los Angeles
Website
LaerCarroll.com
It struck me that I glossed over Aristotle's story structure, assuming everyone knows it in detail, because there have been several threads about it in Novels, Basic Writing Questions, and other forums. Anyone new to it can find out more in Wikipedia's Dramatic structure entry.

In the later 1800s a German writer created a version that I've seen referred to a lot inside and outside of AW, called Freytag's pyramid. Here's a version of it.

aw-freytag-diagram-cropped-resized-w400.jpg


Aristotle thought the setup should be Act 1 of the play, the wrapup Act 3, and everything in-between Act 2. In stage plays they often take up about the same time. In TV plays the middle usually take up several acts (separated by commercials).

In AW a lot of people have referred to parts of it, especially the "inciting incident" that causes the main character to launch onto some course of action to get something (a treasure, a sweetheart, the solution of a crime, a spiritual state) or get away from something (a horde of the undead, a hated marriage, their boring town, self-loathing).

In the diagram there are two important points in the beginning of a story: the incident that affects the MC, and her decision to do something about it. Her decision to start is the true beginning of the story, not the incident. If she made no decision there'd be no story.

The setup and the wrapup are in grey because they are optional. You see this on TV series a lot. Often there is little or no setup. Regular viewers already know the main characters and their setting. The inciting incident may not be shown. Or it's shown briefly; the cops view the crime scene and the ME tells them the time and cause of a murder.

Similarly, there's often almost no wrapup. The main characters just go home (maybe on the way to everyone's favorite bar) to solve crime another day. The resolving event (the crook is sent to jail) is often not shown. The final confrontation scene ends with the crook looking dumbfounded or dejected.

In fiction stories we have a lot more freedom with how we use this "invisible trellis" around which we improvisers grow our stories. (Or outliners plan them.)

Sorry if anyone finds this unneeded. Not everyone is as familiar with classical story structure as you are.
 

Milenio

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 13, 2015
Messages
602
Reaction score
55
Thank you so much for this! My first story (still needs a LOT of editing) was basically like you do it - I just pounded away at the keys. Then only did I find out about planning and outlining and all that other grownup stuff. My main WIP is very structured, simply because there are so many dates and events I have to keep track of who does what, when. I have another few stories waiting in the wings and I write those mainly in my head, "seeing" the direction the story needs to take - they are my go-to stories when I have brain-freeze with my WIP.

Now I know that whichever route I follow, will eventually be OK for that particular story. I'm not going to beat myself up about not having a structure anymore. Thanks again! :Thumbs:
 

Re-modernist

Sockpuppet
Banned
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
270
Reaction score
39
Thank you for sharing, Laer!
This sounds like another very useful thread on AW.
BTW, I think Patterson writes at least 1-2 novels a year very much alone. Alex Cross is always him and no-one else. The occasional standalone thriller too. The rest he outlines, then gets the growing draft from the co-writer once every two weeks to see where things are going and enforce some changes if there's need, then he revises and edits until he figures it's good enough for publication. He starts it, oversees it, and finishes it.
 

Laer Carroll

Aerospace engineer turned writer
Super Member
Registered
Temp Ban
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
2,481
Reaction score
271
Location
Los Angeles
Website
LaerCarroll.com
I'm not going to beat myself up about not having a structure anymore.
Actually you - and most of us - probably do have some kind of skeletal story structure (or structures). But these structures are in our subconscious, engrained there by our reading/viewing many hundreds and thousands of stories.

We use them intuitively the vast majority of the time. Only occasionally do we consciously think "OK. I've established who and where my story takes place. Time to move on to something else."

That is usually when we stop and critique what we've written. In the white heat of creativity our intuition guides us.

I think Patterson writes at least 1-2 novels a year very much alone. Alex Cross is always him and no-one else. The occasional standalone thriller too. The rest he outlines, then ....
Watching the 22 videos by Patterson I got the impression that he sincerely cares about the craft of writing and spends most of his writing time doing it for the joy of it. He also seems to care about teaching what he's learned to collaborators and students. If he's acting, he should get an Oscar.

I've read three or four interviews with some of his collaborators, thinking I might like to collaborate with him or someone else. Assuming I could meet someone whose strengths complement my weaknesses (and from whom I could learn) and who needs my strengths.

All of them seem to bring something to the process, and the process is different with different collaborators. Patterson contributes the plot, which can evolve if the collaborator has better ideas. Patterson also insists on a few guidelines: short chapters, fairly lean writing, and characters we care about. All of which readers expect of any novel labeled a James Patterson book. Other than that, his collaborators flesh out the stories their way, using their own personal style as long as it doesn't deviate far from the leaner prose Patterson prefers.
 

Milenio

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 13, 2015
Messages
602
Reaction score
55
Actually you - and most of us - probably do have some kind of skeletal story structure (or structures). But these structures are in our subconscious, engrained there by our reading/viewing many hundreds and thousands of stories.

We use them intuitively the vast majority of the time. Only occasionally do we consciously think "OK. I've established who and where my story takes place. Time to move on to something else."

That is usually when we stop and critique what we've written. In the white heat of creativity our intuition guides us.

You're right. My problem is that I come from a very structured, corporate business-writing background and I have to unlearn many habits and ways of viewing writing and text. So my main WIP is staggering under the burden of a formal, written-down structure. My other stories do have that informal structure you speak of and I can write those with greater ease. I have to work on my approach to make my main WIP flow as easily *sigh*
 

Laer Carroll

Aerospace engineer turned writer
Super Member
Registered
Temp Ban
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
2,481
Reaction score
271
Location
Los Angeles
Website
LaerCarroll.com
I'm nearing the end of the latest John Grisham book, Rogue Lawyer. It reminds me that there are lots of variations on the classical story structure. He has essentially written six or seven novelettes, each covering a case. They are tied together by the main character and the setting, which is not just the physical but the often horribly functioning criminal justice system. Actual justice in it is a rarity.

One of my three works-in-progress shares this story structure. Cameron of the FBI covers the first year of a female special agent. Her boss gives her the main care for a half dozen cases which are purposely increasingly long and difficult to help her build up her detecting muscles.

aw-freytag-diagram-pt-3-cropped-resized1.jpg


Some teen books have a similar structure, made up of several shorter stories but in each one the main character grows up a little more.
 
Last edited:

Milenio

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 13, 2015
Messages
602
Reaction score
55
You have absolutely NO idea what you have just done for me! If there were a little heart beating smiley, this screen would be full of it!

I've been struggling with my main WIP. It's a detective/murder riding on the back of human/child sex trafficking. Each murder victim has a story and I had no idea how to fit it all in to the classic "start, middle, finish". The more I tried to make sense of it, the more it didn't.

*sigh* There are so many habits and ways of thinking I have to throw away if I'm going to write anything more than just chapter headings!

Thank you again! :Hail:
 

sunandshadow

Impractical Fantasy Animal
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 17, 2005
Messages
4,827
Reaction score
336
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Website
home.comcast.net
It's interesting how opposite this is from my experience - people have amazingly varied approaches to writing. Me, I'm not a detail person. I love structure, I enjoy writing outlines. But fleshing that outline into an actual plot, much less a story... I'm just missing some ability to generate detail-related ideas. Not really a natural-born storyteller.
 

Laer Carroll

Aerospace engineer turned writer
Super Member
Registered
Temp Ban
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
2,481
Reaction score
271
Location
Los Angeles
Website
LaerCarroll.com
I love structure, I enjoy writing outlines. But fleshing that outline into an actual plot, much less a story... I'm just missing some ability to generate detail-related ideas. Not really a natural-born storyteller.
I suspect you're selling yourself short. Too, no one is natural-born to any skill. We learn them. So start small and work at it.

Try this. Once you have an outline of several scenes, outline each scene in more detail. Your questers cross a desert? Break it into crossing from oasis to oasis over several days. Then break each crossing into further parts: packing up, setting out, crossing, entering the oasis, setting up, fixing and eating food, setting sentries, going to bed. Then break up each of THOSE into smaller parts.

What I just described is another "secret" weapon for the improviser (which planners can also use) - CHUNKING. (An actual psychological term.) Or to rephrase it: divide and conquer, the way you'd do with any job.

How you divide, where you cut the joints, is crucial to doing the job successfully without a lot of wasted effort. My personal favorite is another "secret" - the SCENE.

Dictionaries give several related definitions. The one most useful to me is the dramatic scene: a causally connected series of events with a definite start and stop in time and space. "The quest companions crossed the desert." Long scenes may be made up of shorter scenes. "The first day the crew crossed from the edge to the first oasis."

Every scene has a purpose, to achieve some goal. "Reaching the other side of the desert." "Eating dinner." "Blowing up an enemy outpost." "Show how our scruffy underdog heroine looks in an evening gown, made up, gleaming with diamonds."

If I have a structure in mind, such as Aristotle's three-part structure, I can slot the scenes into it. The setup could be made up of three scenes: "Introduce the main character and her setting." "Describe the trigger incident." "Portray her decision to do something about the situation."

Another weapon: SCRIVENER. I've started using this writing tool because it makes it a lot easier than MS Word to create scenes in whatever order inspiration leads me. I can also more easily put them in different orders in the narrative. Say, start with a scene in the middle of the story, then flash back to the setup.

Of course, every writer is different. Someone else may use an approach that works better for them. I'd love to hear about it.
 
Last edited:

Cicak

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 8, 2015
Messages
55
Reaction score
8
Location
USA
I'm working on 3 books. I swore I'm an improviser. Outlines are for wimps. But, I'm beginning to see a pattern. Maybe I do have an outline after all: it's called the calendar.
 

cbenoi1

Banned
Joined
Dec 30, 2008
Messages
5,038
Reaction score
977
Location
Canada
> This Improvisers' Secret Weapon
> {...}
> THE SECRET is structure.

It's rather ironic the secret to fruitful pantsing is ... following a plan.

I believe pantsers form a mental plan with time and experience, something that lingers in the back of their mind and guides them as they write and revise. I've often heard of experienced reviewers point at page in a manuscript and tell the author "isn't it about here the sleuth finds another body?" or something to that effect. It's that mental plan at work.

-cb
 

Laer Carroll

Aerospace engineer turned writer
Super Member
Registered
Temp Ban
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
2,481
Reaction score
271
Location
Los Angeles
Website
LaerCarroll.com
I believe pantsers form a mental plan with time and experience, something that lingers in the back of their mind and guides them as they write and revise.

Some do not. They are pure, total improvisers. I suspect most of us do, however, have at least a vague idea of the overall structure of the kind of story we want to write.

In a detective story such as you mentioned, for instance, it's not unusual for the good guys to early discover a suspect who seems to be the criminal. Only to find out later that the real criminal is someone totally unexpected. (Sometimes the writer subverts this pattern. S/he has the second suspect also be innocent, and the first suspect really is the criminal.)
_______________________________________

I noticed this morning that I use another technique in improvising a story. I wonder What MUST/MAY HAPPEN next?

An example: In one scene we might write that the main character sees from an upstairs window that her house is about to be invaded by a notorious gang of murderers, maybe zombies. Obviously s/he MUST flee the house.

Well, make that MAY flee the house. S/he may also fight them. She may surrender to be killed (if s/he's suicidal for some reason).

In whatever path we choose we're off and writing. We're improvising a new part of the scene by simply following the logical following actions.

Such as Climb out the window: quietly opening the window, getting through it, jumping to a nearby tree branch, dropping quietly to the ground, sneaking away from the house. Along the way s/he'll constantly solve problems, such as trying two or more ways of opening the window if it is stuck. (Typically at each step along the way it's good practice to have obstacles which must be defeated.)

I said What MUST/MAY HAPPEN next. But the same principal applies to improvising scenes which come before the one we've completed. Some events must have led up to it. What are they? So we might apply the technique of thinking about What MAY/MUST HAVE HAPPENED before the current scene.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.