- Joined
- Sep 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,302
- Reaction score
- 414
There seem to be at least a few different states in which a novel can be in once its author "gives up" on it:
1) Gone without a trace except for memories of how bad it was
2) trunked more or less for good
3) semi-trunked, but may have some things from it recycled
4) set aside, but may get reworked
5) sent out for publishing, but didn't get published, but may get reworked
So being "giving up" may be just a stage in getting published or revised. Personally, I'd rather just start something new and get a new angle and use whatever still seems worthwhile from novels in various states of having been set aside or given up on, but maybe that's because for me a narrative scheme is sort of like a character or a plot element; it has to seem "alive" (full of some sort of indefinite potential) for me to want to use it (which means I suppose that for me the current novel is only an mutually transcendent aspect of a narrative scheme and neither one quite "realizes" the other).
Mutally transcendental: sets of things that provide grounds for each other, such as theory and observation in the Sciences. Each is the basis of the other and without one the other doesn't work. You can't have fictional observations of gravity without a fictional theory of gravitation. So
when a novel loses credibility, so does its narrative scheme and vice-versa. So once one or the other happens, then I try something that is definitely not a matter of rewriting or revising.
(edited to explain)
1) Gone without a trace except for memories of how bad it was
2) trunked more or less for good
3) semi-trunked, but may have some things from it recycled
4) set aside, but may get reworked
5) sent out for publishing, but didn't get published, but may get reworked
So being "giving up" may be just a stage in getting published or revised. Personally, I'd rather just start something new and get a new angle and use whatever still seems worthwhile from novels in various states of having been set aside or given up on, but maybe that's because for me a narrative scheme is sort of like a character or a plot element; it has to seem "alive" (full of some sort of indefinite potential) for me to want to use it (which means I suppose that for me the current novel is only an mutually transcendent aspect of a narrative scheme and neither one quite "realizes" the other).
Mutally transcendental: sets of things that provide grounds for each other, such as theory and observation in the Sciences. Each is the basis of the other and without one the other doesn't work. You can't have fictional observations of gravity without a fictional theory of gravitation. So
when a novel loses credibility, so does its narrative scheme and vice-versa. So once one or the other happens, then I try something that is definitely not a matter of rewriting or revising.
(edited to explain)
Last edited:
