-
Guest please check The Index before starting a thread.
[Collaborative] WriteALong
- Thread starter Harro
- Start date
I remember taking part in the initial stages of a project like this several years ago. I'm trying to remember details but I'm afraid I'm coming up mostly blank. It was run by a company that had linked up with, I think, the YouGov surveys that are done in the UK, which is how I found out about it. I think to begin with, they collected initial ideas for a character, setting, problem, and then narrowed it down to a shortlist, which people then voted on. And then expanded on the winning ideas, with participants voting on which direction to go in. I think they had stated at the start that everyone taking part would get a writing credit, but I can't remember how the financial details were sorted out. We had to agree to them first before taking part.
I dropped out after the first few stages, as I recall. It was a fun exercise at first, but the problem was that the story direction that the voting resulted in held no interest for me. I think that would be my main concern with something like this if I did it again. It's a lot of time and work to put into something that you don't connect with on the deep level that you typically would with your own writing.
I dropped out after the first few stages, as I recall. It was a fun exercise at first, but the problem was that the story direction that the voting resulted in held no interest for me. I think that would be my main concern with something like this if I did it again. It's a lot of time and work to put into something that you don't connect with on the deep level that you typically would with your own writing.
At the moment, no. But I have read some books in my life.
And I see the point that you want to make. But let me ask of you to not compare this idea one on one with how normally a story is written. Rather I would like you to look at it as a totally new way of creating stories. Stories which are most likely very different from stories as we know them, with other qualities and possibilities. And maybe it turns out that this process is not applicable for writing stories for books, but rather for videogames or movies. For example, perhaps it would be perfect for creating interactive stories where the reader can decide which way a story should go and that multiple directions are possible. I just don’t know yet.
It’s still very uncertain of where this project could lead to and that is exactly what I like about it. Anything can happen.
@Sophia Sounds interesting! I’ll try to find it. The problem you mention is very valid. Hopefully, by hosting multiple different projects and enabling people to meet like-minded people this could be solved for a part. I think this all depends on how many people would be active on the platform.
PS; I found out how to add a signature. Feedback is of course very welcome, but please be a little bit gentle when burning down my website. I know it doesn’t look very fancy, it’s still in beta...
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 16,171
- Reaction score
- 3,734
That's what I thought.
My point was not that this is not how stories are written.
The question came from your comment in a previous post about having someone who writes action scenes writing that then having someone who writes something else write the next scene.
I can't see someone who actually reads, or who loves books, thinking that. I don't want to read a book with one scene written by Stephen King and one written by Dean Koontz and so on. They're entirely different writers with entirely different voices. It would be an unreadable horror show. Heh.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2013
- Messages
- 11,733
- Reaction score
- 10,520
- Location
- In my head
- Website
- thewanderingquille.blogspot.com
100% agree with Cornflake here. You ask not to compare to how books are written, and it may seem that way, but really, we're not. Multiple people can and have written bestsellers (Good Omens, for example, being a combination of two of the best fantasy minds). We're comparing to how books are READ. How books are FIXED. How books are SOLD.
How books are READ: The purpose of a story is to keep the reader in and avoid throwing them out as much as possible. And that is very easy to do. Change a character's name, even if it's introducing a nickname, and they're out as they try to figure out who's being talked to or about. Timeline hiccup? Out. Drastic change of voice? Out. This can be as blatant as switching from American spelling to British spelling or as subtle as just FEELING something wrong. Either way, it's a chance for the reader to put the book down and not pick it up. In a good multi-writer book, you have to struggle to tell who contributed what. The voice flows between writers. They sound almost the same. Every writer has their own voice. Finding someone who matches your own is not easy, but it's the best method to start a collaboration. Get fifteen writers, you best make sure every single one sounds identical. Otherwise, the next part is going to get very hard.
How books are FIXED: What's the plan to edit these stories when they're done? If it's something written for fun and just for the participants, it's fine if the final product is a disaster. If it's being written for other people to read, to BUY, it needs to be scrubbed into a shining diamond. There can be no plotholes between story parts, no differences in voice. What will be done if someone refuses to let you (or whoever) edit or change their portion? Authors have the right to decline recommended edits. The more authors involved, the more risk of them saying "No, this stays" for something that HAS to go. What will you do then?
How books are SOLD: Agents and editors prefer to work with as few authors on a story as possible. It's cleaner and easier to have a contract with one person. It's easier to have one person saying "Yes" or "no" to changes. It's easier to send the checks on to one person. More authors on a book = more work for the agent or editor on that one book. Time and effort they could be putting into several other single-author books. They also prefer to work with books that have lower chance of lawsuits. If someone wants the book pulled for whatever reason after it's gone to publication, or one of the writers doesn't sign the contract in a timely matter, or someone else in the group self-published the work on their own website, or god forbid someone plagiarized their portion, it starts a mess no one will want to be involved with. Again, fewer authors involved, fewer risks. I can't imagine any agent or editor of any repute accepting a book from so many authors. Self-publishing would be the only likely avenue for anything created with this method, and then all the contracts, payment, selling, etc is on YOU.
What we're saying here is this is VERY high risk for low reward. We've seen dozens of authors and publishers come in with big ideas that "are going to chance the face of writing/publishing." If we've heard from them again, it's to say it didn't work, because when it comes to writing and publishing, nothing is broken.
How books are READ: The purpose of a story is to keep the reader in and avoid throwing them out as much as possible. And that is very easy to do. Change a character's name, even if it's introducing a nickname, and they're out as they try to figure out who's being talked to or about. Timeline hiccup? Out. Drastic change of voice? Out. This can be as blatant as switching from American spelling to British spelling or as subtle as just FEELING something wrong. Either way, it's a chance for the reader to put the book down and not pick it up. In a good multi-writer book, you have to struggle to tell who contributed what. The voice flows between writers. They sound almost the same. Every writer has their own voice. Finding someone who matches your own is not easy, but it's the best method to start a collaboration. Get fifteen writers, you best make sure every single one sounds identical. Otherwise, the next part is going to get very hard.
How books are FIXED: What's the plan to edit these stories when they're done? If it's something written for fun and just for the participants, it's fine if the final product is a disaster. If it's being written for other people to read, to BUY, it needs to be scrubbed into a shining diamond. There can be no plotholes between story parts, no differences in voice. What will be done if someone refuses to let you (or whoever) edit or change their portion? Authors have the right to decline recommended edits. The more authors involved, the more risk of them saying "No, this stays" for something that HAS to go. What will you do then?
How books are SOLD: Agents and editors prefer to work with as few authors on a story as possible. It's cleaner and easier to have a contract with one person. It's easier to have one person saying "Yes" or "no" to changes. It's easier to send the checks on to one person. More authors on a book = more work for the agent or editor on that one book. Time and effort they could be putting into several other single-author books. They also prefer to work with books that have lower chance of lawsuits. If someone wants the book pulled for whatever reason after it's gone to publication, or one of the writers doesn't sign the contract in a timely matter, or someone else in the group self-published the work on their own website, or god forbid someone plagiarized their portion, it starts a mess no one will want to be involved with. Again, fewer authors involved, fewer risks. I can't imagine any agent or editor of any repute accepting a book from so many authors. Self-publishing would be the only likely avenue for anything created with this method, and then all the contracts, payment, selling, etc is on YOU.
What we're saying here is this is VERY high risk for low reward. We've seen dozens of authors and publishers come in with big ideas that "are going to chance the face of writing/publishing." If we've heard from them again, it's to say it didn't work, because when it comes to writing and publishing, nothing is broken.
Unfortunately, Harro, your idea is not a new one. This kind of thing has been floating around the internet for years. A quick Google search turned up: Folding Story, Ficly (now semi-defunct), Story Timed, and StoryWars, as well as a host of others (Fabulate, WikiStory, StoryMash) which have gone defunct after a couple of years, usually because funds to run the program/website dried up.
On the StoryWars website, I found this interesting language:
Um, yeah - no thanks.
That statement did prompt me to ask: who will own the stories on your website? You?
On the StoryWars website, I found this interesting language:
Um, yeah - no thanks.
That statement did prompt me to ask: who will own the stories on your website? You?
Ok, you guys are making it difficult for me, I like it. The thing is that I do agree with all the problems that you mention, yet I think that I see them more as solvable challenges (complicated challenges though).
I should have mentioned this earlier, because I did my market research on co-writing methods. I know about all the other websites mentioned by mrsmig. The fact that I’m not the first one to have this kind of idea is not a surprise, I take it more as a sign that there is a market for it. Additionally, I found an Italian co-writing method called Scrittura Industriale Collettiva (SIC). With this method a group of 115 authors was able to co-write a book called ‘In Territory Nemico’.
This method is publicly available and can be used for any purpose, so I used it as an inspiration to develop WriteAlong. An important aspect of the SIC method is that before the story is actually written, a story foundation is build. In this foundation all the relevant story elements are determined (such as characters, locations, objects, style, symbols, metaphors etc..) All these elements are provided with an elaborate description of their characteristics, physical appearance, psychological traits, background story, relationships with other characters, ways of doing/talking, passions, etc..
The websites mentioned by mrsmig skip this step and start writing the story right away. While I think it is crucial to have if you want to end up with stories which are coherent. The foundation helps to get everyone on the same page and in the right direction. Every submitted piece of writing will be assessed by the crowd if it fits to the foundation. Designing the platform in such a way that the stories and scenes are continuously assessed, improved and adapted through feedback loops with the crowd should hopefully result in a story which is able to grasp and maintain the readers’ attention.
The one thing I don’t like about the SIC method is the fact that everything is decided and guided by a single person or team. They decide and develop the main storyline, all the requirements and decide what is added to the story and what is not. Therefore, my aim is to decentralize the decision-making process as much as possible (through voting and ratings) and to have the whole project run and driven by the crowd.
And to answer your question mrsmig; Initially, as I expect that the stories will not be of a very good quality right away and are not marketable, the stories will be under a creative commons license like I mentioned in a post before. So, everyone would be free to share, copy and redistribute the material. They can adapt it and build upon it for any purpose, even commercially. But only under the terms that they give appropriate credit to the creator, include a link to the license and indicate if changes were made. This is the same as with Story Wars.
The ultimate goal would be to change the license and eventually end up with stories which are partially owned (based on the point system) by the participating writers but exclusively licensed to the WriteAlong website. This way the participating writers are bound to each other through the website, so they are not able to take the story and develop it somewhere else. They do keep their intellectual property rights though. I want it to be as fair as possible for everyone, I’m not an evil guy lurking to steal good ideas from others. If it turns out that there is a better solution to do this, I am happy to hear it!
WriteAlong would also facilitate the whole publishing process with the interests of the writers as core value. A lot of work, but if this point is ever reached at all, it will hopefully not be only me working on it.
And, as the writing process is different, the reading experience will probably be different from normal written books as well. Positively or negatively? I’d liked to find out by actually trying it.
I should have mentioned this earlier, because I did my market research on co-writing methods. I know about all the other websites mentioned by mrsmig. The fact that I’m not the first one to have this kind of idea is not a surprise, I take it more as a sign that there is a market for it. Additionally, I found an Italian co-writing method called Scrittura Industriale Collettiva (SIC). With this method a group of 115 authors was able to co-write a book called ‘In Territory Nemico’.
This method is publicly available and can be used for any purpose, so I used it as an inspiration to develop WriteAlong. An important aspect of the SIC method is that before the story is actually written, a story foundation is build. In this foundation all the relevant story elements are determined (such as characters, locations, objects, style, symbols, metaphors etc..) All these elements are provided with an elaborate description of their characteristics, physical appearance, psychological traits, background story, relationships with other characters, ways of doing/talking, passions, etc..
The websites mentioned by mrsmig skip this step and start writing the story right away. While I think it is crucial to have if you want to end up with stories which are coherent. The foundation helps to get everyone on the same page and in the right direction. Every submitted piece of writing will be assessed by the crowd if it fits to the foundation. Designing the platform in such a way that the stories and scenes are continuously assessed, improved and adapted through feedback loops with the crowd should hopefully result in a story which is able to grasp and maintain the readers’ attention.
The one thing I don’t like about the SIC method is the fact that everything is decided and guided by a single person or team. They decide and develop the main storyline, all the requirements and decide what is added to the story and what is not. Therefore, my aim is to decentralize the decision-making process as much as possible (through voting and ratings) and to have the whole project run and driven by the crowd.
And to answer your question mrsmig; Initially, as I expect that the stories will not be of a very good quality right away and are not marketable, the stories will be under a creative commons license like I mentioned in a post before. So, everyone would be free to share, copy and redistribute the material. They can adapt it and build upon it for any purpose, even commercially. But only under the terms that they give appropriate credit to the creator, include a link to the license and indicate if changes were made. This is the same as with Story Wars.
The ultimate goal would be to change the license and eventually end up with stories which are partially owned (based on the point system) by the participating writers but exclusively licensed to the WriteAlong website. This way the participating writers are bound to each other through the website, so they are not able to take the story and develop it somewhere else. They do keep their intellectual property rights though. I want it to be as fair as possible for everyone, I’m not an evil guy lurking to steal good ideas from others. If it turns out that there is a better solution to do this, I am happy to hear it!
WriteAlong would also facilitate the whole publishing process with the interests of the writers as core value. A lot of work, but if this point is ever reached at all, it will hopefully not be only me working on it.
And, as the writing process is different, the reading experience will probably be different from normal written books as well. Positively or negatively? I’d liked to find out by actually trying it.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 16,171
- Reaction score
- 3,734
Your website desperately needs editing, just btw -- there are basic English errors all over it.
I guess I still don't see the point. Why would someone do this, like put time and effort into it? To what end?
I guess I still don't see the point. Why would someone do this, like put time and effort into it? To what end?
Hello Harro, and welcome to AW. I must say, I have had a very good giggle at this thread. Maybe you're having us all on? But you seem very earnest, and I appreciate that your intentions are good.
I have to say, your idea sounds a little Black Mirror-ish and algorithm-ish and it makes the part of me which loves the organic creativity of writing a little heartbroken because, who knows, it might actually work? Frankly, there's something magical about muddying through the mess of the written word as a lone pilgrim on some kind of pointed and simultaneously pointless quest.
I'm a writer because I'm a hermit and I love figuring things out on my own at first, and then getting feedback. Not all feedback resonates, but some does and then I tinker with the plot or the character or the imagery and it gets a little better, perhaps a little clearer. And that's all I have. Something to hand to a reader that says something about what it means to be alive at this point in time.
I'm not saying that there aren't giant machines of thought-programming already operating on society ensuring that we read certain books and write them in particular ways. There are. There's a hungry, demanding audience that demands some kind of next thing - but served up in a palatable, page-turning, thrilling way. I'm not knocking it. I enjoy reading some commercial fiction too. Something tasty and easy to digest. But for me the real magic is breaking out of expectations, and trying to be some kind of phoenix breaking out of the ashes of conformity. It's the only real place where a little piece of the truth of what really makes me tick can flutter for a moment in infinite time, and is gone. So, the writers who want that, will do that, and I guess those that want to collaborate will come to your site and collaborate.
For me, it's personally about playing with the words on the page and the ideas that flow as you write. I love that unmediated alone time. And sometimes I make a dirty mess of it all, just like life. But writing is different things for different people.
What was it about writing you discovered you loved? You could always collaborate with a few people on a book yourself. I've seen people who are more socially orientated (or perhaps I should clarify and say: group effort orientated) do it, and they seem to enjoy it.
I have to say, your idea sounds a little Black Mirror-ish and algorithm-ish and it makes the part of me which loves the organic creativity of writing a little heartbroken because, who knows, it might actually work? Frankly, there's something magical about muddying through the mess of the written word as a lone pilgrim on some kind of pointed and simultaneously pointless quest.
I'm a writer because I'm a hermit and I love figuring things out on my own at first, and then getting feedback. Not all feedback resonates, but some does and then I tinker with the plot or the character or the imagery and it gets a little better, perhaps a little clearer. And that's all I have. Something to hand to a reader that says something about what it means to be alive at this point in time.
I'm not saying that there aren't giant machines of thought-programming already operating on society ensuring that we read certain books and write them in particular ways. There are. There's a hungry, demanding audience that demands some kind of next thing - but served up in a palatable, page-turning, thrilling way. I'm not knocking it. I enjoy reading some commercial fiction too. Something tasty and easy to digest. But for me the real magic is breaking out of expectations, and trying to be some kind of phoenix breaking out of the ashes of conformity. It's the only real place where a little piece of the truth of what really makes me tick can flutter for a moment in infinite time, and is gone. So, the writers who want that, will do that, and I guess those that want to collaborate will come to your site and collaborate.
For me, it's personally about playing with the words on the page and the ideas that flow as you write. I love that unmediated alone time. And sometimes I make a dirty mess of it all, just like life. But writing is different things for different people.
What was it about writing you discovered you loved? You could always collaborate with a few people on a book yourself. I've seen people who are more socially orientated (or perhaps I should clarify and say: group effort orientated) do it, and they seem to enjoy it.
Hi there, noorderbuur. 
First of all, where's the incentive for people wanting to be involved? Sure, writing together with other people can be fun, depending on the people. Nothing saps interest as much as writing projects with people who don't click. Who is going to keep writing a story into a direction they don't like but the majority of participants do? What if there's a big disagreement halfway through the project? People will drop out in favour of more personal and more fulfulling writing and the rest of the participants in that project will be left hung to dry. Seen it happen more than I care too remember.
I see very little fun to be had in your proposal and lots and lots of work. The idea that every character, every plot point and setting aspect have to be completely determined, vetted and agreed on before hand means many months would pass before even two sentences of the story itself are written.
You'd need people at the helm, continually hounding everybody for ideas, votes, participation. Moderators to ease conflict and make decisions what to vote for, when, and what do to when the vote results in an ex aequo, or decide when the discussion has run its course. The more people in the mix, the more the reality of conflict.
The amount of reading and remembering information people would have to do just to keep up sounds more like a day job than anything else. People would have to be really, really dedicated to go through something like this that is likely to demand years of everybody's time with absolutely no garantee of any useful result at the faraway end. Unless there's a lot of money involved I just don't see a lot of people signing up for that.
I highly doubt any great high-quality story can be made by a committee of hundreds of participants. I have done years of collaborative fanfic writing not that much different from what you propose but I'd go running screaming for the hills just from the idea of doing something like that with hundreds of people. So. Many. Potential. Problems.
First of all, where's the incentive for people wanting to be involved? Sure, writing together with other people can be fun, depending on the people. Nothing saps interest as much as writing projects with people who don't click. Who is going to keep writing a story into a direction they don't like but the majority of participants do? What if there's a big disagreement halfway through the project? People will drop out in favour of more personal and more fulfulling writing and the rest of the participants in that project will be left hung to dry. Seen it happen more than I care too remember.
I see very little fun to be had in your proposal and lots and lots of work. The idea that every character, every plot point and setting aspect have to be completely determined, vetted and agreed on before hand means many months would pass before even two sentences of the story itself are written.
You'd need people at the helm, continually hounding everybody for ideas, votes, participation. Moderators to ease conflict and make decisions what to vote for, when, and what do to when the vote results in an ex aequo, or decide when the discussion has run its course. The more people in the mix, the more the reality of conflict.
The amount of reading and remembering information people would have to do just to keep up sounds more like a day job than anything else. People would have to be really, really dedicated to go through something like this that is likely to demand years of everybody's time with absolutely no garantee of any useful result at the faraway end. Unless there's a lot of money involved I just don't see a lot of people signing up for that.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 20,759
- Reaction score
- 2,707
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA
- Website
- www.gallagherwitt.com
Okay, chiming in as someone who has participated in a large writing project (23 books set in one world written by around a dozen authors, either individually or in pairs) and who has co-written a number of times (including a 3-way co-write)...
As much as I love collaborating, I'm hard-pressed to imagine many writers being interested in this particular breed of collaboration. When I co-write, I absolutely want a lot of interaction with my co-writer(s), but I need a certain amount of freedom to do things on the fly. If I'm off and running with a scene, I need to know that I can throw some curve balls without having to consult with my co-writer at every turn. Not major stuff like massive plot twists, but surprising character development or a conversation that goes in an unexpected direction. I always know that my co-author has veto power if they really don't like where I've gone with it, but it's rarely exercised (and I rarely exercise mine when they go off in an unexpected direction). Most co-writers I know (whether I've written with them or not) have similar feelings on the subject.
If I'm understanding your setup correctly, everything would be discussed and agreed upon and hashed out on a micro level, whereas my personal experience when co-writing has been that planning works best on a macro level, giving each partner room to toss in some firecrackers and see what blows up. In fact, half the fun is writing a scene or chapter, leaving it on a cliffhanger, and turning it over to the other author with a note of "hahahahah....have fun! *wicked grin*" Debating and discussing every single detail before it goes on paper would be exhausting with two people. A whole group? *whistles*
Of course everyone's experience is different. Everyone's method is different. Maybe I'm wrong and there are writers out there who would thrive in this kind of set-up. I just haven't met -- or cowritten -- with any of them. But I still wish you luck.
As much as I love collaborating, I'm hard-pressed to imagine many writers being interested in this particular breed of collaboration. When I co-write, I absolutely want a lot of interaction with my co-writer(s), but I need a certain amount of freedom to do things on the fly. If I'm off and running with a scene, I need to know that I can throw some curve balls without having to consult with my co-writer at every turn. Not major stuff like massive plot twists, but surprising character development or a conversation that goes in an unexpected direction. I always know that my co-author has veto power if they really don't like where I've gone with it, but it's rarely exercised (and I rarely exercise mine when they go off in an unexpected direction). Most co-writers I know (whether I've written with them or not) have similar feelings on the subject.
If I'm understanding your setup correctly, everything would be discussed and agreed upon and hashed out on a micro level, whereas my personal experience when co-writing has been that planning works best on a macro level, giving each partner room to toss in some firecrackers and see what blows up. In fact, half the fun is writing a scene or chapter, leaving it on a cliffhanger, and turning it over to the other author with a note of "hahahahah....have fun! *wicked grin*" Debating and discussing every single detail before it goes on paper would be exhausting with two people. A whole group? *whistles*
Of course everyone's experience is different. Everyone's method is different. Maybe I'm wrong and there are writers out there who would thrive in this kind of set-up. I just haven't met -- or cowritten -- with any of them. But I still wish you luck.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 16,171
- Reaction score
- 3,734
I have to say the bolded confuses me -- you did the research and found this has been tried a bunch of times and failed each and every time. The Italian thing appears to have produced a book that has not sold basically at all.
That proves there's a market?
I don't understand.
If I saw six different people had started companies selling bologna-flavoured ice cream and all had gone under, I would not take that as a sign that there's a market for meatsicles in a cone with sprinkles on top.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2013
- Messages
- 3,044
- Reaction score
- 1,500
Also re: the Italian thing. They have a complete tutorial on how to do it at home at this link: http://www.scritturacollettiva.org/files/ManualeSIC_0.pdf
I haven't read the entire thing (out of time), but one of the major things they utilize is an "artistic director" who guides the entire process, works to make the work flow, and makes final decisions (although they're encouraged to let the group decide as much as possible).
With that added element, I could see it actually working to some degree. I've seen large choruses work well together as a team, because they have a director making the major creative decisions. I've also seen quartets with no official "leader" fall apart because of differences in creative visions.
As the person who usually ended up carrying my teams in university, I ended up doing a lot of filler work. These were all the boring bits that no one had wanted to do. I really wanted those grades. The point here is that writing stories also has a lot of boring bits. You're very focused on the shiny bits that everyone loves. Ideas! The exciting action scene! But someone is going to need to do the filler work. Someone needs to turn the mess of work by a hundred different writers into a coherant story. These are the people you're going to have trouble recruiting, because it's not a fun job and will likely come with a lot of grief from participants.
Really, the best thing you could do right now is to write a novel. On your own. Just write it, edit it, get it to the point where it could be submitted to a publisher. That will give you a good idea of what you'll need to do for a group-written book, as well as a chance to learn about the industry.
Really, the best thing you could do right now is to write a novel. On your own. Just write it, edit it, get it to the point where it could be submitted to a publisher. That will give you a good idea of what you'll need to do for a group-written book, as well as a chance to learn about the industry.
Every so often, a new poster comes by here with an idea for a different way of writing. I believe the latest was someone who wanted help churning out read-once-and-throwaway romances because Tom Clancy got his start in a similar way.
So now, I kick back and wait to see where the new idea is in a couple of years' time. Personally, I've got zero interest in participating in some sort of giant group write-along, or reading the end results of this, for all the reasons everyone has mentioned.
Plus, I once collaborated with a friend of mine to write a story, which ran into problems when my friend developed clinical depression and couldn't write. Our pre-story discussions had not taken this into account, so we had to wrap the story up fast, with me doing most of the work and my friend feeling even worse that she couldn't help more. No way am I risking an experience like that again.
So now, I kick back and wait to see where the new idea is in a couple of years' time. Personally, I've got zero interest in participating in some sort of giant group write-along, or reading the end results of this, for all the reasons everyone has mentioned.
Plus, I once collaborated with a friend of mine to write a story, which ran into problems when my friend developed clinical depression and couldn't write. Our pre-story discussions had not taken this into account, so we had to wrap the story up fast, with me doing most of the work and my friend feeling even worse that she couldn't help more. No way am I risking an experience like that again.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2015
- Messages
- 126
- Reaction score
- 22
Agreed 100%, especially when one of the very first things you said was: "Other than doing the writing course I absolutely lack any creative writing experience."
I'd be a little skeptical of your claims about a new way of writing when you admittedly don't have any experience of the common-or-garden-variety of writing. How do you know if what you're doing is different, or better, when you don't know what you're comparing it to? Gaining some experience of the "old" way of doing things would surely be the first step in developing a "new" way? Whether you eventually love it or hate it, I genuinely don't think you can have an appreciation or understanding of how this works without, well, doing the work yourself first.
Personally, as someone who has a lot of experience co-writing with just one other author, that was fraught with enough complications -- everything from time-zones and time commitments all the way through to contracts and payments -- that the thought of doing it with hundreds of other people would be my idea of a nightmare.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2011
- Messages
- 985
- Reaction score
- 785
- Location
- Bucharest, Romania
- Website
- caribbeandawn1720.jcink.net
This kind of websites already exist. Collaboration is not difficult, and I love the interactive writing site I am an administrator of. The one in my signature - Caribbean Dawn RPG - is done this way. And you don't need to publish it elsewhere - it's already published on the net when you write each instalment, for the enjoyment of the other people. So forget about the marketable point, because no money will be involved in your project. No companies/ committees are involved either. It doesn't need any legal framework, just a set of rules, and it has no logistical difficulties (it is running for seven years and a half, and counting, and we have covered the period January 1719 - August 1720 in our story). It is simply an interactive story, with every writer having one or more characters which interact together. There is no money involved either - the forums are free hosted, and everyone writes its part as a creative hobby. We have had, during these seven years and a half, sometimes 6 members at a time, sometimes 40, aged 15-65, each with their characters, and the stories we have been weaving were, some of them, interesting and creative, and some simpler.
The forum provides the best environment for writing, and I agree that it is more enjoyable than a story I write alone (even if I have written first alone, for several decades, before discovering that such interactive writing exists). The bonus is that you make friends with people from various countries who have writing as their hobby too. When a person retires from the group, his character is either killed, or sent elsewhere, or fading to the background.
How the story is credited? It is clear on the forum which character is written in x post, and there is a list with the characters and their writers, so everyone knows who had written which part.
@Harro, I understand why you love this concept. I love it too, and I know it is feasible. Mine, who got at its third "volume", is the proof that it is feasible and can be kept coherent. You just have to give up the notion of money and marketable, because it is something one does for free, for the creativity sake.
Last edited:
I'm going to have to agree with this point. Stories won't flow if you've got too many authors or completely different personalities in participating authors.
Thanks again for all the feedback. I’ve been giving it some thought and came to the conclusion that I have to change my overall aim. So, like you mentioned, instead of trying to write a marketable story with hundreds of people, the focus would be more on creating a fun, creative and social writing game. A game which helps people to practice their creative writing skills, to express their creativity and to meet like-minded people. So more aimed for educational use and as a way for people to connect.
That sounds more feasible. I was once part of an online Transformers RPG where every person took one character and posted on a forum as that character. Plot-wise, this rambled in every which direction (and would not have made a publishable novel as a result), but it was fun, light-hearted and a good exercise in voice. Good on you for taking feedback, some of it quite critical, into account and making your plan more workable for writers.
Hi there!
It has been a while, but for those who are interested, I rebuild the website from scratch. And like I said it is more of a game now.
Please take a look and try it out! I need people to test it in order to graduate for my study
And if you have any feedback, I'm happy to hear it as always!
It has been a while, but for those who are interested, I rebuild the website from scratch. And like I said it is more of a game now.
Please take a look and try it out! I need people to test it in order to graduate for my study
And if you have any feedback, I'm happy to hear it as always!