Random, Possibly Helpful, Thoughts

One of the problems with regular blogging is that you sometimes feel like every single post should be breathtaking, new, insightful, and most of all exciting. But, truly, none of us has anything new or exciting to say. Maybe different ways to say the same thing. Or new-to-us insights into the same old material. Disclaimer: this is one of those mundane posts that may not have anything new to say, but perhaps it at least offers a new twist on the same old stuff.

Random Thought #1: Strategies for first draft writing come in all different sizes. Some like outlines, some prefer complete plot diagrams, some are pantsers (writing by the seat of your pants). I'm usually a pantser. I frequently know where I'm starting and where I'd like to end up, and maybe a few scenes in the middle, but beyond that, my first drafts are where I discover how I'm going to get from start to finish. I have a lot of fun with rough drafts, even though it's agonizing to create something out of nothing. Here's one thing I've discovered that helps me keep the momentum going--I stop writing before the scene or chapter is over. I send the character into the midst of the problem of the moment, build the tension, and then leave the character there while I go make dinner or whatever. A lot of my writing takes place in the synapses of my brain while I'm doing other stuff, so I let the character be in trouble for a day or two or three and when I come back to the writing, often the character has figured out a great maneuver or solution. I can write that scene, which moves me into the next one, and then I leave the character hanging off the edge of the cliff for a while again.

Random Thought #2: Things not to say to writers. Most of you reading this are writers, so if you'd like to cut and paste this section into an email to all your family and friends, you have my blessing.

• "That's cute." No, cute isn't what I was going for. I don't do cute. So "cute" to me just means you're not getting what I'm writing. Or else you're illiterate and have no idea what you read. Or maybe you didn't really read it at all. Typically for me, the people who describe what I've written as cute are, in this order: 1) my mother, and 2) any of my mother's friends. So I don't show them my writing anymore. It is now my policy that anyone who calls my writing "cute" will never again have the privilege of reading it. 
• "How's your great American novel coming?" I hate this for several reasons. First, it implies that I am ignorant of the publishing industry and I think my novel is the ONE and ONLY important piece of literature of my age. Second, it assumes that I have only one novel in me, ignoring the many others I have already written. Also, it suggests that I'm never really going to finish this thing (despite the fact that I have already completed others), because I'm not really working at it, nor do I really have any serious intent of writing professionally. 
• "I like it." Okay, I know, we all like to hear this--once the thing is published and public. But until then, if I'm sharing my writing with you, it's because I want your feedback, your critique. When you have nothing useful to say, I know you aren't a helpful critiquer, which means, again, that I probably won't be sharing with you anymore. I need critique, by golly, not admiration. I'll call you when the book is for sale, since I know you'll "like it."

Random Thought #3: Why do others want characters to act consistently? People aren't consistent, are we? Nobody I know is consistent. Sure, someone might highly value honesty, say, but they sometimes fudge the truth or tell a "white lie," rationalizing it by saying it spares the feelings of others. I know some people who are definitely one persona when out in public and quite another when they're at home. I think the secret of writing characters who aren't consistent is to make sure the inconsistency doesn't appear just at the moment of highest tension or just jump up when it suits the situation. You have to build the character's inconsistency into the persona and voice of that character from the beginning of the book, so that when the moment comes for that inconsistency to rear its ugly head, it is not a surprise to the reader. Plus, most of us here are children's writers, and kids are constantly changing--sometimes for the better, but not always. So the characters in kid lit should be, I think, inconsistent too. It's a way for them to learn about themselves, see ways that the characters grow, and contemplate their own path. 

There you have it--all the wisdom floating around in my brain today. Well, I do have lots of other wisdom about all kinds of other things, but I don't think you want to here that right now. 

by Neysa CM Jensen

up in Boise, Idaho

Confused About the Term Inciting Incident?

By Julie Daines

As I've been doing various research for presentations on how to write a first chapter, I'm finding a lot of confusion about the term Inciting Incident.

So, because I want to, let's discuss terminology. I'm not saying that I'm the final source of truth in this--we've all heard it different ways--I'm just going to say what I've found in my research to be the most common use of the term.

Inciting Incident: This is the event that makes this day (where your story begins) different than any other day. The event that changes your MC's life, even though they may not know it yet.

Quick movie reference: Tangled, inciting incident is when Flynn Ryder shows up in Rapunzel's tower.

Key Event: This is when the MC begins to actively participate by making a choice that thrusts him/her into the action. When the MC becomes engaged in the story, usually because of the inciting incident.

The key event is often called the inciting incident, along with various other names. This is why there is so much confusion.

Quick movie reference: Tangled, key event is when Rapunzel decides to leave the tower and forces Flynn to help her.

Can the inciting incident and key event be the same? Yes, occasionally they can.

Does it really matter what term I use for them? No, but it's important to understand that both are an important part of story telling.

Plot

One of the writing sites I subscribe to had a recent article about plot. This topic was pertinent as I am planning out my next story. Yet, it is also relevant in putting the finishing touches on a piece I am revising.

A good book must have story. The author needs to take the reader by the hand and lead them to a new world, a new reality. The main character’s circumstance must be believable and the writing smooth. I want to open a book, delve in, and become so absorbed by the story that my own living room seems foreign a few hours later when I come out of the story.

Jane McBride Choate, in the Children’s Book Insider October newsletter, describes plot as a summation of cause and effect. Often this is referred to as sequence action & reaction. It is not merely a series of events. The events must be connected to each other, with each new incident building on the last. Each attempt the MC makes to solve his problem should change something vital for him or her. Choate says every part of the story should be an absolutely essential step along the way to the outcome. If a scene does not belong in your story it should be removed. If its removal can be done without altering the outcome of the story then it doesn’t belong in your story.

Choate advises the author to look at each event through the MC’s eyes. Continually ask, “how does this make the MC feel?” “how will he react to this?” “how will he act in the future because of this?” Ask these questions of each scene of the story. If no answer comes, the scene is either out of order or doesn’t belong. Cut the scenes that don’t advance the story.

In the classic story arc, the main character has an object of desire they pursue. In that pursuit, something gets in the way – the cause, altering the MC’s path – the effect. That, then, becomes the new cause, forcing a change. You can build your whole plot right there. Dorothy lands in Oz and inadvertently kills the witch of the east. This causes celebration of the Munchkins, which in turn causes the arrival of the wicked witch of the west to claim her sister’s powerful red slippers. Acton and reaction, the events connected and built upon the last.

Choate’s message applies to the new story I’m developing, but is important to the one I am revising. In it MC1’s agenda guides the scenes and the story and MC2 merely has to respond. MC1 reacts to that response, and so on. As a writer, I must ask myself if this action/reaction sequence plays out. When it does, fine. If a scene does not help advance the story, it is superfluous and must be deleted.

Plot and Character: Grand Unification Theory

by Deren Hansen

Carrie Vaugh, sharing a, "7 Things I've Learned So Far," post on the Guide to Literary Agents blog, wrote:

6. Plot and character are the same thing. A story's actions should arise out of the decisions and reactions those particular characters make. Different characters would drive the story in a different direction. Why are these things happening to these particular people and not someone else?  Changing the characters, the kinds of people they are, would change the story. If the events of a story would happen no matter who the characters are, then the characters have no impact on what happens, and why should I want to read about them?

I wanted to expand on this idea.

We're often told to raise the stakes in our stories: why have the bad guy threaten to blow up a city block when he could blow up the entire city! But there are diminishing returns as you continue to raise the stakes. The terrorists are about to detonate a home-made nuclear device that will kill a million people. That's frightening. Now we raise the stakes by adding a nuclear scientist to the terrorist line up who knows how to make a better bomb, one that can kill ten million people. Is that ten times as frightening?

The scope of what's at stake is at best secondary to the significance of what's at stake. That's why a quiet book about someone's heart being broken by an untimely death will elicit more tears than a shoot-em-up where bodies fall faster than autumn leaves.

I'm sure you've heard literary fiction characterized as character-drive in contrast to plot-driven commercial fiction. But the deeper truth is that good stories, regardless of the genre, are about things that matter.

And how do we know what matters?

Because someone cares about it.

Significance is a fascinating attribute because it is not an objective property. Significance only exists because we attribute it. Washington, D.C., sits on a patch of ground that was utterly insignificant until George Washington argued it should be the capital. Once a few people cared about it, a great many others came to care about it too.

Carrie Vaugh's suggestion that plot and character are the same thing leads us to a grand unification theory: character and plot are internal and external aspects of the deeper, underlying unity that meaningful stories about the people and things that matter to the people in the stories that matter to us.


Deren blogs daily at The Laws of Making.

Battle of the Century: Story vs. Writing

By Julie Daines

This is the question I've been asking myself lately: What makes for the best books--sublime writing or an amazing story?

If you hope to win a Newbery Honor, you might need to lean toward perfect writing. If you want to make it to the New York Times best-seller list, then a well crafted story could be enough.

I read a book a few months ago where the writing was so awful I wanted to throw the book at the wall. How could this much telling and repetitive language make it to the NYT best-sellers list? Didn't this author know anything about good writing? But the truth is, I couldn't put it down. I had to read all night to find out what happens. The intense, original story and great characters drew me.

Last week I read book with some fantastic writing--clever, moving, full of meaningful imagery, great dialogue. But I had to force myself to finish it. I didn't care about the main character, I didn't care about her friends. All that beautiful language was wasted on yet another story of a tortured teen who suddenly discovers she has super/paranormal powers and then finds herself in cliched situations. It was so predictable, I already knew the ending by reading the jacket cover.

Of course the best answer is C) All of the above. Writing and plot working together in perfect--and perfected--unison.

So, what do you think? Story versus Writing Throwdown--who wins?

Lost in the Maze: Buried Plots

By Julie Daines

As a reader, I've recently found myself lost in a maze of words. I'll be reading a book or manuscript and find that I have no idea what story thread I'm supposed to cling to as the main plot. Sometimes the main plot points are eclipsed by sub-plots or fancy wording and I don't know when to give particular events sufficient significance. Suddenly, I find myself wondering what I missed. I don't know which parts of the story are important and which are secondary. I'm lost.

As a writer, I need to avoid that so my readers don't get frustrated or bored.

The problem is, I don't think I have all the answers to this problem. It's not always easy to spot a buried plot, and fixing it can take a lot of work. But here are a few thoughts that may help:

When you are writing an important scene or plot point, change the wording and sentence structure. If you normally write with long, flowing sentences throw in a few short ones that are heavy on action or emotion. If you use a lot of metaphorical language, be blunt and straightforward. Or if you rarely use metaphors, use a single powerful one to make your point stronger.

Use shorter paragraphs to give importance to whats happening. Make the event stand out on the page.

Cut down on the number of sup-plots. I think this is a big one. Too many minor threads makes the reader loose track of what's really important. Especially in YA and children's writing, the story should stick to the main character's objects of desire. A reader has to be able to recognize (at least subconsciously) the inciting incident and the main plot points that lead to the climax and conclusion or the story won't make sense to them.

Use an objective correlative that can add significance to certain events, dialogue or thoughts. See my post here for more on objective correlatives.

Add some direct thought rather than just narrative thought. This is sometimes easier to do in third person POV because first person is in some ways already direct thought. But if you can make it work it might help set the important situations apart from the other fluff.

That's what I was able to come up with in the few minutes I've been typing this post. Any other suggestions are welcome!

Conflict Should Not Be Contrived

By Julie Daines

Conflict. The driving force behind the novel. The peril that pursues our main character through crisis after crisis. The element of the story that keeps the reader turning pages or reading late into the night. The only problem is, it has to be believable.

I recently read a novel where the first two-thirds of the book was driven by conflict that just wasn’t believable. A high school girl starts to fall for the wrong guy. He’s bad—as in not human.

The problem is that her father, mother and brother, who all love her very much and want to protect her, know the truth about the guy. They tell her over and over to stay away. But they never explain why. I don’t buy it because if they really loved and worried about her, they would tell her the truth about the guy.

I call this secret keeping conflict. Other people know the truth, but for whatever reason—usually to protect the main character from becoming upset or scared—they just don’t tell. It can sometimes work, and often not. Because it feels too contrived.

So, I guess my advice for this post:  Make sure your conflict feels real and not contrived.

How do you do this? You have to constantly question your character’s motives. Why would he do this? Why wouldn’t she just…? What is preventing him from simply…? Would she rather…? Wouldn’t it be easier if he…?

If the answer to any of these questions is because it would mess up my story, you might have a problem.

This is where the critique group comes in handy. They read your chapter and say, why wouldn’t they just tell the truth? And you ask yourself, why indeed? Then you snatch your manuscript out of their hands and head back to the drawing board to fix it. Hopefully.

This post is dedicated to the Sharks and Pebbles, who ask the questions I seem to miss.