I'm writing a scene that is basically just a conversation between two characters. The whole reason I have this scene in is to get a piece of information across.
Only...when I actually come to write the scene, the conversation doesn't go the way I expect and the information doesn't come across.
Now, I'm faced with a choice, either a) rewrite the scene and make sure the information gets across or b) live without it (it's important, but not vital) and let the story flow on.
(a) is unpalatable, because I think the scene works really well, establishs the characters strongly and provides far more tension (and hence, I hope, drive to the narrative) than my original plan had.
So I'll probably go with (b)....but I could have kicked the characters, had they actually existed, when I finished it.
posted
Yes. But it wasn't just a conversation, it was the entire character. As originally envisioned, he was a minor character who would be a staunch defender of the Hero and become his 'right hand' man in the upcoming conflict. I had introduced him once (as a walk on), and then brought him back in a later chapter. I'm writing, writing, writing... and all of a sudden *poof!* he did the unexpected and betrayed the Hero. But it worked beautifully, and the conflict/betrayal between these two characters added more depth to the following chapters. BUT, I'm right there with you in that I could smacked the guy for completely breaking the mold I had so carefully cast for him!
posted
WileyKat, if your characters are going to be interesting and strong (as all important characters should be in fiction), they are going to surprise you.
Actually, what is happening is that your subconscious is surprising you.
If you want to talk about this in terms of right brain and left brain, then it would go something like this: you work out what you are going to do in a scene with your left brain, then you start writing and your right brain kicks in, and you are surprised by what happens--but if you let yourself go with it, you have a better chance of writing "good stuff" that way than you will if you force yourself to stick with the left brain stuff.
That doesn't mean that you don't need to go over what your right brain has spilled out onto the paper.
Writing involves two main activities: creating (which is what your subconscious or your right brain or whatever you want to call it is good at) and editing/rewriting (which is what your conscious mind, your left brain, or whatever, is good at).
When you are putting stuff on the paper, you are way ahead if you can let your subconscious do its thing. Once it's down on paper, then you bring in the editor to make sure it works and so on.
Writers who keep the editor active when they are supposed to be trying to be creative can have a really hard time.
I would encourage you to do everything you can to let yourself go when you are doing the creative part. If that means planning something and then seeing unplanned things happen, just sit back and enjoy it.
And then be ready to turn the editor loose to polish it up so it's even more wonderful.
I try, when editing, not to change the actual dialogue that much. I'll change the action description around it, I'll cut bits out, I'll move whole blocks, but other than grammar and spelling, I try not to touch those bits in quotes.
If I do, I almost always break the flow of the scene and make the dialogue seem stilted. If I'm really not happy about it, I'll re-do the whole scene, rather than over-tinker.
My stories contain a lot of dialogue and I try very hard not to damage the flow and drive. I've found only one way to get that flow (writing continuously) but many ways to break it.
posted
I've run into this problem about a billion times in my screenwriting. Especially with the screenwriter's continuing quest to delete pages from his script, I usually find it completely unfeasable to go back and add in the critical information. I usually end up either adding or altering a later scene, or just deleting the original scene altogether and starting over.
Of course, my usual tactic to "get into a tough scene" is to jot it out as little notes on paper first. Just generally who-says-what. Partly, this subverts my pathological sitting-at-the-computer-to-write-phobia, but it also gives me a chance to see how I can fit in the critical exposition BEFORE writing down a semi-permanent version of the story that would cause emotional pain upon deletion ...
posted
When I'm writing, I usually just sit down and write, letting the story continue on, and I end up often not even paying attention when I write my best stuff (weird, I know). It works out pretty well in the beginning, but then I have to go back and read every little thing that I just wrote, just to stay on the same page as my characters, thus taking twice the time to write half the stuff. Uug. The good thing, however, is that I end up knowing which parts are really good (to the reader) and which parts are scrap (most of the time, anyway - there are exceptions to every rule) because I don't have to GUESS what a first-time reader would think, I AM a first-time reader. I was wondering, is there another way to get the same effect, but taking less time?
quote: I was wondering, is there another way to get the same effect, but taking less time?
I hate to give a flippant answer, but...
...practice.
(Stay with me, here, and I'll make a point.)
quote: and I end up often not even paying attention when I write my best stuff (weird, I know)
I don't consider that weird at all. Let me bring in an example from another art -- martial arts, specifically.
My martial arts instructors, as well as the ancient texts, maintain that practicing your techniques for a sufficiently long time results in what people call "no-mind."
When the time comes, or so the philosophy goes, you won't think about your technique. Your brain will shut off, and come back after the fight is over. If you practiced good techniques over the years, and put them in your muscle memory, you'll win. If you practiced poorly, you'll loose.
So, where am I going with this?
You practice writing enough -- though I'm not to the no-mind stage in either of my arts, personally -- and you'll kick into no-mind.
If you have a good foundation -- perhaps that means you thought your story out properly? -- your no-mind material will be good.
posted
"If you have a good foundation -- perhaps that means you thought your story out properly? -- your no-mind material will be good."
Excellent point... I know for myself, that the best parts of my novel are those that just flowed, that I didn't have to think about how I was writing it. BUT, I did a whole lot of background writing for the novel to really flesh out the world. No joke, but I've got about 30 pages of 'world-building' to just flesh out the ins and outs of my society. May not ever appear in the book, but if it does, I won't have to 'think' about it. It'll just be there.
Similarly, I had a chapter that was bugging the you know what out of me... You guys might remember me posting for help on a battle chapter. Spent a whole lot of time 'thinking' the battle through, getting the action, characters, etc right before I started writing it. *Poof* The chapter flowed and (IMHO) is awesome.
posted
Let me emphasize it's just a philosophy, just a way of looking at the world. Like any philosophy, it has no quantitative physical meaning.
Anyway -- I refer the interested read to The Book of Five Rings, by Miyamoto Musashi.
It's also valuable for any of you sword-and-sorcery types, or anyone who writes of physical conflict.
Musashi was the greatest swordsman who ever walked the face of the Earth, and his writings are -- in my understanding -- still the basis of Japanese martial arts. Although I study Korean martial arts, I still find his writings invaluable.
It will give you a new perspective on "the way of the warrior."
Also, he maintains that he "saw no distinction between his arts": besides being the killingest duelist of Japan's history, he was a poet, calligrapher and painter. Many of his teachings apply to any art.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
