This is topic Old School vs. New School in forum Open Discussions About Writing at Hatrack River Writers Workshop.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/writers/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=002543

Posted by Gnomeinclaychair (Member # 2926) on :
 
I'm getting the idea from posts and critiques that the majority of the folks here feel that the main story has to begin from the very first line written. I don't necessarily disagree.

Stephen King once said that books are like pumps. You've gotta work at it for awhile before you get much out of it. I guess my students would describe a story like that as 'starting out slow'.

Both ways have something to be said for them. For instance, the 'slow' way allows for character development so when things start happening they're happening to somebody we care about. The other, more modern way starts off being interesting but you've gotta pack in character development right away, which can be more challenging to the writer.

My question is, do you guys think the old way is dead and gone? Do publishers not want to see it anymore?
 


Posted by pantros (Member # 3237) on :
 
The publishers/editors/agents who control what is written will not often read beyond the first page of a manuscript if they are not 'hooked' by the bottom of the page.

Hence, the idea to get going on the action of the story.

That said, the pace at which you build your story does not need to meet any particular goal. It just needs to read well.

You can build slowly, working heavily on character and then as the climax approaches, pick up speed and start pumping more action into it.

Or you can rush right in, hammer the action and character together through out, but such tales can be exhausting quickly.

In any case, the story starts when the main plot begins and your story or novel should not start far from that point. If back story is neccesary, we can always talk about the past later.

Modern writing very much follows the idea that everything contributes to the story and anything that doesn't should be cut. If you tend towards digression, your publishing process will take a little longer than most.

 


Posted by Christine (Member # 1646) on :
 
I find it somewhat frustrating that, especially with a novel, I can't spend time setting the stage and the characters. It's the editors who force my hand, not my own writing style. I have to think long and hard about how to make the beginning both interesting and useful. But I want a sell a book, and if the editor won't read past the second paragraph I will fail.

That said, I don't like waiting forever for something to happen...especially in a short story, but even in a novel. The truth is, before i can care about a conflict I have to care about the character it's happening to, as you said, but before I can care about the character I have to sympathize with him/her.

That essentially means that conflict and character development happen simultaneouusly. What a job!

Mary is a nice person. She likes children and animals. She is smart, too, and a little spunky.

Now, assuming I spent the proper amount of time *showing* you all that instead of just telling it, why do we care? Lots of people like children and animals, are smart, and attitude helps but not that much.

Now try it this way:

Mary sees her neighbor's 5-year-old attacked by a large, viscious dog. She has to shoot the dog, even though she knows it's her idiot neighbor's fault for being such a bad dog owner.

During the course of this scene, we can learn how Mary loves children and animals. The conflict makes us keen to watch, because it's interesting, and Mary's actions tell us who she is. But this isn't the end of the story, it's the beginning. What we've done is introduce the character in such a way that engages our attention.

The trick is to pick a scene that really demonstrates character, but does so in an interesting way. I imagine that this dog attack is not the whole story, but just the beginning.
 


Posted by luapc (Member # 2878) on :
 
I think it depends on whether you're an established writer with a good publication history. Established writers seem to be able to write whatever they want because they already have contacts and people interested in their work before they even write a story. This may also mean they're older writers who have been around awhile, hence seen as having an older style.

I think as a new author you probably have a better chance of getting a novel published if you have a snappy quick opening chapter that really grabs attention. Even without one, you could probably still get published, but it might be harder to get a fair read on it.

This is just a thought, as I'm still trying to break the glass ceiling myself. Maybe someone else who has published has more insight.
 


Posted by Elan (Member # 2442) on :
 
There's an article I just read called "How to Open Without A Bang" - by Alex Keegan.
http://www.writerswrite.com/journal/dec97/keegan3.htm
The concept being you have to present something interesting, to make the reader wish to continue. It doesn't have to be explosions, gunshots, or mayhem, but it DOES need to grab the reader's attention and make them want to find out more.
 
Posted by tchernabyelo (Member # 2651) on :
 
My understanding is that you have to work a lot harder to capture an editor than a reader.

A reader may well already have bought a publication; they'll probably read everything in it, unless something's particularly dull. Editors are constantly inundated with submissions, the great majority of which are (by all accounts) rubbish, and they need to junk the rubbish as quickly as possible. Give them any excuse, and they'll toss something on the scrap pile. The job of your first few lines (until you're an established author - and then, yes, the rules change big style) is to sell your story to the editor, not to "normal" readers.

It's different with a novel. You'll capture an editor for that with a good teaser (my habit is to write the back cover copy, which after all is what hooks a lot of novel buyers), a really good synopsis (which I have no idea how to write) and a demonstration that you know what you're doing with prose. The hook is more in the synopsis or teaser than in the opening.

Once you've made a reputation as an author, you can get away with different techniques, because you'll have created a readership that trusts you to interest them; so long as you don't abuse that trust with a book of shopping lists, you'll be fine.

But until then... there's a lot of competition, and you need an edge. Don't try and tell everything in your first thirteen - but tell us enough so that we really, really want to know more.

 


Posted by Silver3 (Member # 2174) on :
 
Yeah, unfortunately, it is true that you can afford to be much more creative when you're famous and you have the ear of editors. Otherwise, you need every edge to stand out. You desperately need the editor/slush reader to get past that first page--although you do need to keep him hooked afterwards, the most difficult part is hooking the beastie
 
Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :
 
You can do anything, as long as you do it well enough.

A lot of "Old School" writers (and I use the term thus because it's not exactly uncommon today) manage with brilliant prose that sparkles even when the text is clearly miles away from the subject on a tangent that has rapidly becoming hyperbolic.

A lot of authors sell on the quality of their prose. Sometimes lyrical, often humorous, occasionally "hip" or some such thing. The best of those authors (the ones that endure long enough to ever be considered "old school") also pay attention to crafting a solid story.

As writers, we always need to be working on both.
 


Posted by Leigh (Member # 2901) on :
 
I have read all of this and went and read one of my openings. Its amazing that I write in both "Old-School" and "New-School" styles without even defining a style of my own yet. But as I read through what all of you have said I have already learned something about it!

I usually tend to get straight into the action, but I'm not really that experienced yet at writing.
 


Posted by Gnomeinclaychair (Member # 2926) on :
 
I'd thought about this of and on, but primarily as a reader. As a writer I just try to start well. If editors nowadays want to see a writer get straight into the meat of the story, I've gotta rethink it.

I've always thought that sci-fi/fantasy writers have the hardest time with getting right into it. Not only do they have to develop the characters, establish the beginnings of the conflict, but they have to deal with unfamiliar settings as well which begs exposition. It's tricky. I'm not complaining though, just kinda thinking in print.
 


Posted by franc li (Member # 3850) on :
 
I was going to object to getting advice from Stephen King, who has name recognition. Though at one point during his career he wanted to see if it was his writing or his name that was getting published, so he submitted four short novels under the name "Richard Bachman". I've seen them published as a single volume called The Backman Books. I also know The Running Man was one of them. It would be interesting to see if he opened those the same or different. He got fan mail as Bachman asking if he was Stephen King. I guess he was seen as more than a copy cat.
 
Posted by Gnomeinclaychair (Member # 2926) on :
 
Yeah, but to be fair, King was refering to READING books, not writing them. I've heard he puts the Clash on his stereo whips out a legal pad and just starts writing with no particular goal in mind sometimes.
 
Posted by franc li (Member # 3850) on :
 
Well, it's a good point. How many of us try to run a marathon without ever having learned to run? I know OSC doesn't recommend writing exercises, but I think it's because he naturally writes a lot without making himself.
 
Posted by djvdakota (Member # 2002) on :
 
SF/F writer's don't have to slow down their openings setting scene. Not at all.

If skillful, a SF/F writer will set a 'skeleton' opening scene with enough familiar stuff in it that the reader can fill in the details on his/her own, based on things that are already familiar to him. The weird stuff can come out later as the story progresses.

It's like walking into a strange house. If there weren't things there that were already familiar to you--couches, chairs, a kitchen, carpet--you'd feel very uncomfortable being there at first. You don't want your reader to be uncomfortable walking into your book, so you show them a 'foyer' that has some familiar things in it. Your visitor can see a little bit of the main house and that it promises to be very different. But since the foyer is familar enough, they trust that you'll take care of them. Then you lead them on in to the main house that is totally or largely unfamiliar. And they're OK with that.

[This message has been edited by djvdakota (edited October 20, 2005).]
 


Posted by abby (Member # 2681) on :
 
I think its mostly gone, or at least from what I have seen in responses to some of my writing. They don't want any suspense or story, just the answer before the questions can be asked. Kinda like they want the see how the story ends before they read it.

Sadly, I am old school, and learned to write with character building leading to suspense leading to a climax. I can't write a climax and lead to nowhere.

When I read I don't want to know everything about a character in one paragraph, I want to learn bits about them as I go along, I can't assimilate it all in one piece. I want the author to tell me important bits such as "Mary values animals." What method the author choose to show it, may not convey the same meaning, in fact it can convey the opposite meaning. If the author write that Mary shot the dog, I would put the book down, and never know she did it because she valued them.

So, yes, there are people who like it one way or the other. Sadly, it seems many want instant gratification. They want to know everything about the character and the stroy before they read beyond the first page. To me, after you know everything about the character, the story is over. So the story would be over after page 1, very boreing.
 


Posted by pantros (Member # 3237) on :
 
I think of my stories in Old-School

I like to be able to set up a setting, characters and then start on the plot.

I am learning to hint at the plot in my opening and to economically describe settings and appearances of characters. I find that Dialogue and POV are very useful in establishing character. Rather than flat out describe my characters, I try to create a sub plot, usually a weak one, to expose the character. The sub(or minor) plot can be an opening plot, as long as it gets the reader on to page 2.
 


Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :
 
I'm in a sort of bad mood right now, but I just don't see the point of complaining about how readers don't like your writing even though you write "just like" somebody else. Whether you're claiming that your openings are "just like" Dickens or Crighton or Joyce or Gibson or Shakespeare, I don't think that you're qualified to make that judgement if you're willing to make such a comparison.

I do believe that there are "fashions" and "trends" in literature as in other arts. Deal with it, you can't change the fact that vampire/ninja/detective stories phase in and out of popularity. But I will say that it makes less of a difference than most people seem to think.

Why do different trends come about? Because of what we call (appropriately enough) "trendsetters". The people that start a trend aren't following one. I know that may sound like a tautology, but think about it for a second. Something becomes popular because someone did it even when it wasn't popular and inspired imitation.

If you're preferred type of story is currently out of fashion, you have the opportunity to lead the pack. Complaining about that sort of situation is just admitting to everyone else that you don't believe that you have the chops to write a story that other people will want to imitate. I can see why, as a writer, you can't keep going if you're going to admit something like that to yourself. But why admit it to the rest of us? That doesn't exactly help.

Get out there and start your own trend!
 


Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
 
Survivor, you have an unusual way of delivering a pep talk.

If I may offer something here?

The literary term that's applicable here is probably "in medias res" which does not mean "in the middle of a chase scene" or "in the middle of a fight" even though some people seem to interpret it that way.

The literal translation is "into the midst of things" which can be any kind of middle.

If "new school" writing tends more toward "in medias res" it's because many of the readers today are not willing to give a new writer set-up time. But they still want to have a reason to care.

So there'a a line to deal with between how much set-up you do and how much action you start with.

Damon Knight used to say, over and over again, that a story should start when something important happens. And he rejected the interpretation of "in medias res" that said a story should start in the middle of that important happening.

If you look at OSC's description of the structures of each of his MICE story categories (in HOW TO WRITE SCIENCE FICTION & FANTASY), he explains how each kind of story should start. Even if you aren't writing science fiction or fantasy, it would be worth reading what he has to say about how to start and end the four kinds of stories.
 


Posted by pantros (Member # 3237) on :
 
Kathleen, (my apolgies if you prefer something less formal)
Where is this (How to Write Science Fiction and Fantasy) ?


 


Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
 
All I can say about trends is I don't recommend hopping onto one. It's probably better to be your own writer and write what you want, and then consider the marketplace.

(Besides, by the time you finish your novel, unless you write very fast, the trend that inspired it might be over.)
 


Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
 
Not sure if this will work, but Amazon has OSC's HOW TO WRITE SCIENCE FICTION & FANTASY at

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/158297103X/qid=1129936413/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/103-9558232-0565464?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
 


Posted by Spaceman (Member # 9240) on :
 
It is one of the best books I own.
 
Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :
 
It's a good book.

The constant battle with pure evil that is my interior life...what can I say? Even the greatest evil can't always be pure
 




Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2