Learn Writing with Uncle Jim, Volume 1

Re: I need a method in this madness!

For me, the hard-copy printout of the day's work (made at the end of each day) is the official version.

Those printout pages go, hole-punched, in a binder. Each page has, as part of its header, the filename.

Filenames: Chap1.wpd, chap2.wpd, etc. Next version: chap1_1.wpd, then chap1_2.wpd, chap1_3.wpd ... then chap1_1_1.wpd and so on, as high as it needs to go.

When it's nearing the end, Final1.wpd, final2.wpd, and so on.

Files go in folders, on two different computers, with a floppy-disk backup of each file.

alphasmart

I also have an alphasmart that I use to write on, i like that i can go anywhere and write, then upload the file.

I got it as a high school graduation gift to take notes on in my lecture, which never happened. I ended up only using it on my writing.

That's cool, i wondered if anyone else used that sort of thing. I have a laptop computer, but the alphasmart is more portable.

Good luck in writing. I'm not having as great of luck, all of the files on it are dedicated to different stories (most of them anyway).

Beaver :thumbs

Re: wow, great thread

One file per manuscript, copied weekly to a removable 64MB thumb drive, with the filename TITLE Manuscript 1.doc, TITLE Manuscript 2.doc, etc. I happily delete stuff that I've written if I don't like it. If I want it back, I'll rewrite it, and it'll be better than the first incarnation.

I do the same thing with other critical data on my computer.

(Is there any reason that this isn't its own topic?)

JB

Cussing

From Another Thread:

The over-all rule is that every word in your novel should advance the plot, support the theme, or reveal character.

Vulgar language is just a special case of dialect.

The author must take his/her audience into account. The reader is a character in your book. You cast the reader the same way you cast any of your other characters, the same way you cast the author as a character.

<HR>

The F-Word Song
<HR>

The language you use will be determined by

a) your genre,
b) your audience,
c) your artistic choices.

<hr>

It all varies. Remember the "reveal character" thing.

(Also, Steve is quite right -- Our purpose is to entertain and communicate.... If the readers have thrown our book across the room we've failed in our purpose.)

Now for examples:

In Tournament and Tower, the first line in the first draft read:

<Blockquote>
"This f*cking sucks," said young Randal as he threw another forkload of stinking sh*t over his shoulder.
</blockquote>

As submitted:

<Blockquote>
Slap! Randal swatted a stinging horsefly that had tried to make a meal from his shoulder.
</blockquote>

In Aquatech Warriors, the first line in the first draft read:

<Blockquote>
"Jesus Christ, Tom, get your f*cking hands off my tits!" said dark-haired Mandy Coster.
</blockquote>

As submitted:

<Blockquote>
"You said we were going on a tropical vacation," Rick Cantwell grumbled good-naturedly to his friend Tom Swift.
</blockquote>

On the other-other hand, Tiger Cruise has various military characters, ranging from the Captain's Wife (who would never use a vulgarity) down through junior enlisted who say things like "Those f*cking f*ckers aren't f*cking around!" right there in the printed book.

<hr>

In the real world I know an ex-Mormon who routinely swears like a truck driver, but who in moments of extreme stress and pain (like dropping something very heavy on a foot) will blurt out "Criminty!"

Off to literature again, Studs Terkel, on one book, has a Chicago gangster who, whenever he attempts to swear, automatically bows his head when he says "Jesus!"

That's characterization.

Re: I need a method in this madness!

Fresie wrote:

Please, ladies and gentlemen -- how do you control your drafts and sketches and keep them in order?

Click to expand...

I'm a software developer in my other life, and I write in text files, so I find it easy and efficient to use a version control system. This way I store all the changes I've ever made to a file; if I need to see what I did with a chapter back in May, I can view all the differences with a single command, or revert to any version I need.


Have Fun,
- Steve Eley

me--

I use seven 3.5 disks (each a diff color) and label them with ms name, draft number (those pesky draft numbers become important as you deal with agent and editor)(the draft you send as your final draft becomes draft one) and day of week. On Monday I back up to Monday's disk for what I am working on. I also do a daily backup of everything in my writing folder to CD. And I do a daily printout of what I have done that day and put in ring binder --print out in triple space--purpose is to be able to have enough space for editing later.

I also have an auto back up system for my computer--if it crashes it is only a matter of reloading. Though sometimes things have to be resorted a bit, but at least I have it there.

I used an alpha smart for several years until someone swiped it--bet they thought they were getting away with a lap top computer. Right now I don't have the funds to replace the thing.

Shawn

And/ Because

I have always been taught never start a sentence with 'And' or 'Because.' Are these considered acceptable as good grammar now, or do they fall under what is considered style? Even if used sparingly, should they be avoided in a novel's opening page?

Re: And Because

I file these usages under poetic license which I cheerfully extend to cover prose.

And I use them sparingly.

But don't hesitate if it feels right.

Because sometimes style warrants it.

Re: And/ Because

JuliePgh wrote:

I have always been taught never start a sentence with 'And' or 'Because.'

Click to expand...

"And why not?"
"Because we told you so."

Do either of those sentences sound wrong to you? They don't to me. Develop a good ear, and trust it.


Have Fun,
- Steve Eley

Re: Method in my madness

Wow, thank you, Uncle Jim, and thank you, everybody! I've learned a few very useful things. Now I'm back to sorting out that mess of multiple scene drafts... <img border=0 src="http://www.absolutewrite.com/images/emoteDisappear.gif" />

Thanks a lot!

Fresie

Re: And/ Because

I have always been taught never start a sentence with 'And' or 'Because.' Are these considered acceptable as good grammar now, or do they fall under what is considered style?

I would be very careful of either in narrative.

You can do anything you want in dialog.

Re: And/ Because

I would be very careful of either in narrative.

Click to expand...

IMHO, it's perfectly okay for a contemporary story told in first person... the narration is just one big monologue anyway.

Re: And/ Because

If it's told in first person, it's more like dialogue, anyway, you'd have to take into account the character's writing ("speaking") style.

*edit...

which is what you said...i'm going back to bed.....

Aphorism

A quote from my beloved co-author:

"Where did we get the idea that 'hard' and 'fun' were antonyms? The opposite of fun isn't hard, it's boring."

A great book

Hi everyone

I just wanted to share that my copy of the "Writing the Breakout Novel" workbook by Donald Maass has just arrived, and so far I am finding it very helpful. It is based on the "Writing a Breakout Novel" book by the same author, which is one of my favourite writing books (especially for the proud and unashamed 'genre' writers, like me). I have only read the first section of the workbook so far but he has already raised some interesting points for me about how to make characters appealing even if they have flaws.

One insight from his first book that really helped me was his discussion of so-called "dark" characters. If I might quote briefly, as this could be a good discussion here:

"Authors mistakenly imagine that any character misbehaviour is entrancing so long as at the end of the story that character is redeemed, changed, reformed,r esolved or had grown. Not so. The problem with redemption is that it only happens AT THE END [emphasis mine] It ignores the hundreds of pages of wearisome middle in which the flawed protagonist may refuse to see the light."

I have an example that I think perfectly illustrates this quote I am a huge fan of the show Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and there is this one character, Spike, whom I detest in spite of the internet community's passionate love for him. I could never explain just why I hated him so much until I read the above passage, and it clicked for me: they spend two entire seasons heaping misery upon misery on the main characters, and making some bad characterization choices with this guy, and then...he gets a soul. And all of a sudden, they started using that as a way to write off all of his bad behaviour. Every time any of the characters questioned his loyalty, trstwirthiness, likeability, mental sanity etc. someone would whine "but he has a soul now!" To which my response was always "Yes. And?" Too little, too late. I hated him by then. And giving him a soul does not negate the two seasons worth of crap I watched, witnessed and loathed prior to that.

Maass suggests that the way around this would be to give the "dark" character an appealing trait so that the reader has something to root for while we are waiting for the redemption to happen. To use an example from one of my favourite books, The Sparrow, I love what Mary Doria Russell does with her lead character, Emilio. I generally do not read sci-fi, but thanks to her handling of this character, the novel won me over because it became less about sci-fi and spaceships, and more about a crisis of faith" Emilio was a prest who did not believe. And gradually, as the fantastical events of the story are told, he comes to believe. He comes to believe that g-d has chosen him for something special, that there IS indeed a grand plan. And when it all starts going wrong, he has to try to reconcile that this was part of the plan too...

Anyway, just thought I would share about the book. I have found it quite helpful so far.

Joanna

Re: A great book

Without arguing the character of Spike (I think that the seeds of his redemption are planted early on), I may comment that no one's 100% anything. Characters are mixtures of traits, some good, some bad, some sympathetic, some not.

The balance and mix is what makes 'em work.

Re: And/ Because

Agreed and agreed.

Every character should be a facet of a complex human. Even the villain. Flat, stereotypical, 2-D characters make for a boring read.

Re: And/ Because

<<<I am a huge fan of the show Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and there is this one character, Spike, whom I detest in spite of the internet community's passionate love for him.>>>

I resemble that remark! (no, i didn't ask for the tag. I offered a weak protested..once. Read the new top line to see what I got for my trouble. There's a lesson in there somewhere.)

Seriously, I've never watched the program and can't comment on the way the writers chose to handle the Spike character, but "easy fixes" or convenient answers are a quick way to lose me as a viewer or reader.

Broadcasting a future, major "character change" can work in one of two ways. It's often successful, provided the "change" doesn't come without heavy price. Many novelists successfully employ this method.

However, if the writer waits until the last 3 pages to reveal that our dastardly protag(?) vampyre only need drink the magic potion, thus transforming into an Arch Angel "with all the powers, rights and privileges" ...

Another major faux pas is the complete and total white-wash character reversal. It worked in the "Grinch" but in most cases, leaving the character with at least a couple of familiar flaws would seem easier to swallow.

It all lies within the talents and abilites of the writer. If you can white-wash a character in the final three pages (three chapters, etc...) and make me believe it, or at least buy into it, I'll reach The End.

Unfortunately, televison only has so many minutes to present a story, and obvious short cuts seem more and more common, and acceptable, as time passes.

Re: And/ Because

Hi Spike-like! :clap

Take the show "24" for example. I like the show -- it's riveting and exciting and suspenseful. Generally well written for that genre (nail-biting thriller). However, some of the "character" twists are done for the sake of twists. Like suddenly someone you think is the good guy turns out the bad guy, etc. without any foreshadowing, or the explanation is flimsy at best ("oh, he was a spy", etc.). I really hate that -- the throw the TV across the room moment.

Spike

I heart the Spike and I didn't feel that his getting a soul was all that sudden or deus ex machina. I also don't feel that his redemption coincides with getting his soul back--he's already started down that path by the time he gets the soul. Granted he's got a slippery slope to climb and he backslides plenty--which makes his redemption all the more interesting and real. It's not just handed to him.

Re: And/ Because

I think Spike was a well written character throughout the show, and certainly don't see anything wrong with his 'transformation'.

* It was clear from series 1 that a vampire could have a soul and might in that case act conscientiously and morally (although presumably with any normal human character flaws)
* From the point where he was "chipped" (series 5?) on, the transformation is very gradual. Eventually he gets driven to the point where he seeks out the soul and undergoes a trial to get it, so it isn't as if it is something that's suddenly thrust upon him.
* Then, even after he has it, the characters don't really trust him until the very end.

I think Whedon is very good at writing interesting villains. Although I wish he'd done better with Firefly. I guess I'll always be wondering what he had planned for series 2.

Re: And/ Because

Guess I'll have to look out for the reruns. That program seems to have quite a following around here!

Re: And/ Because

Spike-like, I think you need to know why they call you that.

:grin

Re: Spike

I'm in accordance with Jules Hall here. Spike shows human attributes through the entire series. He loves Drucilla passionately. Without a soul, his good is masked by the darkness. But, it's still there. When he gets the chip, he can no longer do evil. It is against his will, but it forshadows his persona change over the upcoming years. He chooses to battle for his soul because of his love for Buffy and his desire to shed his dark side.


Also, the entire Series is based on "darkness". In the episode that Buffy meets Ct. Drakula (season 5), he tells her even though she is the good guy, her power lies in darkness. Even she shows character flaws thru the series. Her intensions are always good, but she makes bad choices. All the characters show human weaknesses.

Re: And/ Because

Not saying that there was no "evolution" with Spike. Just saying that the way they played it after really did not sit right with me. "But he has a soul!" does not excuse every prior bad behaviour, and I think the writers really overplayed that card.

To use another Buffy example to illustrate the same Maass quote the dicussion originally referred to, I loved the way they handled Anya . She was a vengeance demon with great power for evil. But she became that way by being hurt, being scorned. The viewer could sympathize with her over that, and also relate to her on a wish fulfillment level, because who hasn't ever been hurt and wished they could have revenge? So she is a "dark" character, but she has traits most people can relate to. And we watched her grow, change and humanize---then get scorned again. Did her experience of real love change her enough to stop her from going evil again? Sort of. And when her evil boss does tempt her again, when she is in real pain and with nobody else to turn to, are you entirely surprised that she succumbs? No. And are you a little pleased when it turns otu that love HAS changed her, and she really doesn't have it in her to be evil anymore? THAT is character development!