Fiction Writing: Advice and Discussion

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > Fiction Writing: Advice and Discussion

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

A good harsh flensing.

FWIW when I'm trying to get a story out of an idea, I always start with the most obvious response. It's always poo poo. Then I change it, a bit at a time, until it's not. Then I write the story.

Variations on a theme is 90% of creativity, when you get down to it.

# ¿ May 28, 2013 05:15

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 10, 2024 13:07

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

magnificent7 posted:

Thanks but no. I think maybe I should have waited before jumping into the Thunderdome. I'm not there yet.

It might not look like it, but we're gunning for you to get better. And this is a great opportunity. Take Crabrock's offer. Hell, I'll do you a pre-crit too if you like.

# ¿ May 29, 2013 02:10

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

fart particle posted:

Is theme something you have established in the early phases of writing the story? Like, does it completely change how you tell the story?

When I say theme I guess I'm speaking more broadly. Essentially I start with an obvious cliche and start twiddling the knobs until its not obvious anymore. Then I work through the idea in my head until I can see an interesting progression, beginning middle end. Then I write it (not lately though, man gently caress writers block).

I do sort of pick a style; hard boiled, minimalist, elaborate, or whatever and that makes a big difference to how I tell the story.

quote:

I end up writing things sort of like minimalism and the result are these real boring pieces of fiction like the one I came up with for my Thunderdome entry. I guess my problem is an overall lack of control with words, but self-diagnosis can only take one so far. Can anyone help me out on this? I'm not sure which things I'm doing right/wrong anymore.

I just read your 'dome story and I think it's decent, and 75% of the way to good. You've got a nice clean style going on there. But I agree there's something missing. It's like the story truck drove up to the lot and dumped a bunch of bricks and 2x4 and you took a photo of it and called it a day.

First thing: why should I care abut these characters? Have another useful rule of thumb: what does the character want, why can't they have it, why should we give a poo poo? Conflict building character is cliche because it's true.

I also think you missed a trick by describing the most boring parts of your story; why not have them doing crimes on a building site when they get nabbed by the cops? Why not have the fight with the girlfriend? Always have the reader asking questions and don't be afraid to answer them. Then have the answers raise more questions.

sebmojo fucked around with this message at 08:37 on May 29, 2013

# ¿ May 29, 2013 08:02

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

fart particle posted:

Yeah, I definitely see what you mean. I didn't have any of those things in mind while writing the story, and they also sound like great questions to ask while reading other stories. I can already see how Noah's story answers all of your First Thing questions just in the first few sentences. Thanks seb, this will help me a ton!

Can I suggest you give the Spring Break 'Dome story a rewrite and post it? I'd like to see you have another run at it. Maybe pick a genre and recast it in that? Genres can be super helpful by giving you a ready made toolkit of images and rhythms.

# ¿ May 29, 2013 09:14

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

magnificent7 posted:

I finished "On Writing" years ago, and started it again, and finished it again. While I was reading that one, I've had loads of other books recommended. Each came with "you absolutely must read this one". I think before I buy another book on writing, I'll write more, and then read another of the books I'm trying to finish.

And to the comment that you can't get worse, I'm living proof that in fact you can. My first submission was half-good, (5 out of 10 score?) my second was better than the one person I was competing against, my third was counted as one of the worst three, and my last two have been official losers.

There's something to be said about starting out knowing nothing, then learning the rules only to be paralyzed by them.

I like your analogy that writing is like loving.

In the meantime hey hey I finished my first draft. Crabrock, do you want it NOW in case it's a crappy idea, or would you rather the final thing? I'd rather send you the final draft.

Are you going to send it to me too?

# ¿ May 31, 2013 00:16

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Chillmatic posted:

Mag7 initially said he wasn't ready for Thunderdome. I believe he was correct about that. Someone in their first month of playing guitar would not be ready for an open-mic at a cafe. (which is more or less what Thunderdome is) They'd need a few lessons, first. Sure, practice is a big part of that. Huge, even.

As a musician and a writer :smug:

I'd compare Tdome to practice. Actually.

Admittedly it's practice with a bunch of people pointing out your mistakes and telling you you're stupid, but that's just a test of character. If they're right, it's worth hearing, and if they're wrong, how cares what they say?

# ¿ May 31, 2013 04:50

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Sitting Here posted:

^^^ That was a really cool story and one of the few short stories I've felt moved by. I'd never read it before so thanks for linking bro.

Chillmatic made a pretty valid critique of my most recent Thunderdome piece, which was that my character used childish terms instead of the more contextually appropriate dick, rear end, bitch, etc.

If you didn't read it (and I wouldn't blame you), it was a story written from the perspective of a woman who was willingly being tortured and murdered for the purpose of having the most metal sex ever, I guess. True story.

Anyway I originally wrote it with a lot more ugly language, but it seemed too gratuitous and I thought it would be interesting if the narrator used more "cutesy" language that was completely unsuited for the context. I ended up reading a lot about her story, and the usenet newsgroups that kinda validated her torture fetish, and in my head her personality ended up being sort of similar to the character Annie from Stephen King's Misery. Only masochistic instead of weirdly maternal and possessive. Annie was a funny sort because, while she was perfectly OK with kidnapping and hobbling dudes, she would call the protagonist a "dirty-birdy" and wouldn't let him swear.

I didn't want to carry on in the TD thread, but I was interested in any feedback as to how I might have done that juxtaposition better, or whether I should have just gone for the more visceral language.

I think the impulse was right, but that you didn't quite execute (lol, etc) on it properly. Perhaps if you'd made that conflict more central to her character? Shown her losing control over the propriety as her foetid epiphany approached, say?

# ¿ Jun 5, 2013 00:45

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Drugs: Brett Easton Ellis (Less than zero), Irvine Welsh (Trainspotting). Iain Banks (Espedair Street) William Gibson (Neuromancer).

As a quick and crude primer, coke makes you feel like you're a god of, I dunno, Battlefield 3, and you've just stepped onto the conversational battlefield and you're headshotting noobs left right and center, pam pam pam. What you're mainly doing is talking absolute poo poo very fast.

Ecstasy fills you up with warmth and love and makes everything splendid, and makes you prone to seeing the good and lovable side of absolutely everyone and wanting to tell them so (also: dancing). Pure E is technically a drug called MDMA, but there are a bazillion variants and related designer drugs.

LSD is more of a smelly hippy drug, but a light dose will have E-like effects, a more significant dose will make visual shapes melt, put coloured lines over everything and be thoroughly strange.

sebmojo fucked around with this message at 02:59 on Jun 6, 2013

# ¿ Jun 6, 2013 02:56

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

I think you want to have a general idea of what the experience is like, some sense of how the experience reflects your character (the point about choice of drugs made above is spot on) and a telling detail or two for authenticity. For instance, Heroin makes you constipated. Dope smokers who have run out might clean the tar out of their pipe and smoke that. Cocaine is sold in grams/fractions. The only big nono is ignorance - if you've got a detail make sure it's correct for the particular drug culture you're writing about.

# ¿ Jun 12, 2013 22:29

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

crabrock posted:

Was in a writing group the other day and they told me that a line in my story sounded like what somebody who never did crime thought a person who did crime would say. They were right. Off to commit crimes to better my writing...

you cannot say that and not post the line

you just

cannot

# ¿ Jun 13, 2013 03:19

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

crabrock posted:

I edited it out already but it was something like: "just make sure this doesn't trace back to me."

Now that I have killed a man I will avoid such embarrassments in the future.

QUICK LEFTY IT IS THE ROZZERS LET'S SCARPER OUTTA HERE

sebmojo fucked around with this message at 04:52 on Jun 13, 2013

# ¿ Jun 13, 2013 04:47

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Yeah, start by thinking of a really really crap and obvious way to do the story. Then tweak it in your mind by changing bits until you laugh, or cringe, or go 'hm, interesting'. That's your story seed. I normally let my story seeds roll round in my head for a few days gathering lint.

Now think of 2-3 characters (no more) that could go in there, and work out what at least one of them wants, why they can't get it, and why the reader should care. Now sit down and rattle out the story. Now edit it, leave it, edit it again, leave it, edit it, post it.

Throw your prompt up and I'll have a go at it (just the first part, you get to write it).

sebmojo fucked around with this message at 03:14 on Jun 27, 2013

# ¿ Jun 27, 2013 03:12

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Schneider Heim posted:

Thanks, guys. I've never given much thought to "but what if", but I'll see if I can use it.

My flash rule is "your main character must struggle against the control of someone or something outside him/herself"

Ok. Free associating time.

Protag is under control. Mind control, physical control, emotional control. Mind control is dull, aliens? Psionic supermen? Eh. Let's stay away from genre unless we get a cool idea. Physical control, trapped by a criminal? Trapped by a friend? Okay that's more interesting. Why would a friend lock someone up? Helping them get off drugs? Hm, bit dull but warmer. Come back to it. Emotional control, what sort of things control you emotionally - friends, lovers, children. Children. Hm, trapped by your children. Because they're trying to get you off drugs. Or administer drugs, maybe? Ha, Midwich Cuckoos - your main character's child is a psionic superkid with mind powers and has trapped the protagonist until the drugs they're giving him/her take effect. Probably her, as it's a nice twist on maternal instincts.

Still crappy, but I think I could make a story of that.

sebmojo fucked around with this message at 04:25 on Jun 27, 2013

# ¿ Jun 27, 2013 04:20

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

systran posted:

Okay as of now these are the people who have said they are interested:

-systran
-Crabrock
-Crabrock's wife
-Chexoid
-Dr. Kloctopussy

So basically we have not very many people. Kaishai said she is leaning toward "no," but it would be great if we could guilt her into it. I know Muffin is probably doing the Sanderson thing but I don't know if he wants in or not.

I think a googledoc is good and then we can try to organize Skype once we get going. I will try to set up deadlines when I'm home from work later tonight.

If you want in, sign up: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ai2bkoEcAn5ZdFExUTdXMmVsdWhKdVAxWDMxZlB3cVE#gid=0

I think I could afford to step it up a notch. In.

# ¿ Jul 9, 2013 01:12

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

SurreptitiousMuffin posted:

The amazing and underrated Tongan Ninja gives all the bad guys stat sheets.

FIGHTING SPIRIT: 0

But come on Muffin, it's a terrible movie apart from Jemaine.

# ¿ Jul 20, 2013 11:16

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

PoshAlligator posted:

Haven't there been some cases where actual courtroom proceedings have been recorded for the public recently? There's definitely actual transcripts, but I'm not 100% sure on the best place to get those and sometimes you need to pay a fee.

I haven't seen Law & Order but I wouldn't bet on it being exact. But then, there's no reason you have to be either if it's not some law specific thriller.

Google court transcripts. You'll find loads.

# ¿ Jul 29, 2013 22:41

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

My rule of thumb is that adverbs should be removed unless doing so would change the meaning of the sentence.

# ¿ Aug 4, 2013 21:44

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Chillmatic posted:

Thunderdome and its ilk are worthwhile as one grapples with the basics of structure, voice, and grammar. But after the achievement of these baseline skills, it can only damage the writer to stay. Addiction, after all, only feeds addiction. Fellow "writers" in an opium den seeking--and finding--no end of warmth, safety, and futility.

Put even more simply: If you want to hit a home run, drat the strikeout and drat the crowd; practice--but then show up to the game and swing the loving bat.

I was coming here to grumble - because gently caress you Mr Shoe, I'm a better writer than I was after 40k words of Doming - but with Chillmatic's gloss I guess I agree.

# ¿ Aug 12, 2013 07:41

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Sitting Here posted:

On the topic at hand, I recently made a sort of informal decision to back off from the 'dome for a while, for some of the reasons being discussed this past page.

For some reason, though, without the perpetual deadline looming (even if it is a bullshit deadline), I can't write anything. Even my 'real' writing seemed to benefit from the pressure of the weekly competitions, even if I didn't have as much time to get around to it as I liked.

This is me too. Without the 'Dome I wouldn't have written 40,000 words of novel; I'd have written 0 words of anything.

sebmojo fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Aug 13, 2013

# ¿ Aug 13, 2013 00:38

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

systran posted:

Sitting Here and sebmojo, you really should have joined our writing group which features fake deadlines

Haha, theoretically I did. But then I never posted, so I've sidestepped that whole thing. Feel free to flick me anything you want a critique on - I read some stuff for the muffin before.

# ¿ Aug 13, 2013 05:19

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Full Fathoms Five posted:

Just to chime in, I kind of disagree with the "only write if you feel like you were born for writing and nothing else and god help you if you don't spend every waking moment wanting to spew words from your fingertips" stuff. I think some people are like that, and some are the opposite. There are a lot of authors whose creative process seems almost like torture to them, but I don't think of them as lesser authors. Harper Lee wrote one thing in her entire life, and I don't think anyone would say she isn't a great novelist just because she never picked up a pen again.

I dunno, I just think trying to define what makes someone an author or qualifying degrees of "author-ness" ends up being just another attempt to mystify onlookers. If you write, you are a writer. I don't think it matters whether it feels like pulling teeth or whether it's the greatest feeling of all time. I've certainly experienced both, and I've gone through periods where I didn't write a single word for weeks because I just...didn't feel like it. I'm betting most people have. I think as long as you don't quit then there is obviously something of intrinsic worth to you somewhere in the entire process, and that's what really matters. I don't think I've ever seen anyone who wasn't writing for themselves stick with it (not that money / fame / just having people read your words can't be a worthy or powerful motivator as well) but I think everyone comes at it differently. To be honest writing probably makes me feel bad more often than it makes me feel good, but I keep writing because I love it all the same. Maybe I'm just crazy or not a "real" writer or something, I dunno, but I think the only real ironclad rule is "If you want to be a writer, then write."

Exactly. Who cares if you're 'a writer'? What matters are the words you write. Because they can always be better.

sebmojo fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Aug 13, 2013

# ¿ Aug 13, 2013 23:48

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Schneider Heim posted:

I'm going to sound silly for asking this, as I jumped into the current Thunderdome prompt, but what actually makes a story a "story of intrigue"? When I think about intrigue, I think about secrets, of backroom deals or secret agreements. It's the sentiment that something is going on and that you, as a reader, want to get to the bottom of it. Is this correct? I'm just afraid of missing the prompt by a mile.

Yep, you've got it. An intrigue s basically a plot or a scheme, with a suggestion that it's basically internal- so courtiers plotting against each other, or a middle manager plotting to get his rival's corner office.

# ¿ Aug 16, 2013 02:04

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Chillmatic posted:

Unfortunately, no it doesn't. Scrivener actually gets very angry if more than one person has a given project file open at any one time, to the point where it actually pops up a message telling you that it could corrupt the entire thing. It sounds to me like google docs is going to be your best bet if working simultaneously with multiple people is your goal.

Google docs is great for collaboration - I just did an excellent crit/editing pass with Stuporstar on a short story I was submitting for a competition.

# ¿ Aug 29, 2013 23:54

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

qntm posted:

I've got a villain character and he's getting up to give a dinner speech to his people. The speech needs to prove that he's done some bad things. But he's not a moustache-twirling cackling guy. He can't straight up say, "I did this terrible thing, and it hurt people, and I like that, ahahaha! Because I am a bad person." That's dumb.

I'm finding it hard to phrase this question, but what kind of things should he say? What phrases? He and his people found something incredibly valuable to the world at large, and have essentially stolen it for themselves, denying the rest of the world. This is obviously incredibly selfish but I'm having difficulty putting myself in the shoes of someone who'd do that and then declare it a huge success and just not care. The core phrase I've got at the moment is "We're protecting the world from itself", which I think is pretty strong. I mean, what does a Mafia boss say at a big meeting? In reality?

Nobody thinks they are a villain. Have him give an honest and heartfelt explanation about why he is the good guy. With maybe a few tortured phrases to reason around the cognitive dissonance.

So use euphemism, talk around the bad things and focus on the good things (in the Mafia example, this would be family and togetherness, say).

# ¿ Sep 1, 2013 22:23

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Anal Surgery posted:

Hey all, quick-ish question, and if it's been answered ten pages ago, just let me know and I'll go find it. I read from Page 1-20 of this thread recently but wanted to skip forward for an opinion.

I'm getting serious about novel writing again after a bout of inspiration and I've ended up with a little stable of real-world "normal" characters. As a reader, do you guys tend to prefer an author who gives full descriptions of each character or do you like a minimalist description that allows you to come up with your own picture? I'm giving strong attention to making sure the personalities are fully fleshed out, but I'm vacillating on describing everyone's appearance. What they look like has nothing to do with the plot and I don't want six separate scenes of "As Corky brushed his teeth, he gazed approvingly at the man reflected in the mirror. From his symmetrical crew cut and trimmed eyebrows to his angular jawline and oil drum neck, every bit of his six-foot-six, 230 pound frame pleased him, and he caught himself flexing his iron-like pecs in time with the music blaring from his radio." If it was up to me (and ultimately I guess it is), I don't even know that I would bother describing their appearance at all if it wasn't directly necessary for the plot.

I know this is a taste question more than a "proper writing" question, but I've read enough of this thread to appreciate you guys as passionate readers and writers, so I'm open to your thoughts.

Absolutely not. Have description come out of the things they say and do, it's fine for it to be in your head but unless you need it don't. So what you plan to do is good

# ¿ Sep 18, 2013 00:05

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

motherfuckin CHEKHOV posted:

One must be a god to be able to tell successes from failures without making a mistake.

I think descriptions of nature should be very short and always be � propos. Commonplaces like "The setting sun, sinking into the waves of the darkening sea, cast its purple gold rays, etc," "Swallows, flitting over the surface of the water, twittered gaily" � eliminate such commonplaces. You have to choose small details in describing nature, grouping them in such a way that if you close your eyes after reading it you can picture the whole thing. For example, you'll get a picture of a moonlit night if you write that on the dam of the mill a piece of broken bottle flashed like a bright star and the black shadow of a dog or a wolf rolled by like a ball, etc.

In the realm of psychology you also need details. God preserve you from commonplaces. Best of all, shun all descriptions of the characters' spiritual state. You must try to have that state emerge clearly from their actions. Don't try for too many characters. The center of gravity should reside in two: he and she.

When you describe the miserable and unfortunate, and want to make the reader feel pity, try to be somewhat colder � that seems to give a kind of background to another's grief, against which it stands out more clearly. Whereas in your story the characters cry and you sigh. Yes, be more cold. ... The more objective you are, the stronger will be the impression you make.

My own experience is that once a story has been written, one has to cross out the beginning and the end. It is there that we authors do most of our lying.

From this Metafilter thread, which has dozens of great authors' tips on writing.

# ¿ Sep 18, 2013 22:25

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Gygaxian posted:

Here's my question: How do I make my dialogue and description less stilted? I like to write, but I have this recurring problem of everything that I write seem stilted and awkward. I don't want to over-describe or have my characters talk too much, but I feel that my writing is way too clunky. I can't seem to hit the right rhythm for anything that I write.

Start by keeping it incredibly simple. Two people, in a room. What is it one of them wants but cannot have? Why do we care about this? Make us care. Describe what they do, and what they say. Then go back and work out which words you put in there that didn't need to be there, and cut them.

You can go too far stripping stuff down, but it's a great exercise - you actually need very few words to make a scene work.

It's all about choosing the right details, and how the observed detail describes and enriches the character of the person it relates to. And that's really nothing but practice. Stay in Tdome, if nothing else it gives you practice and regular unsentimental critique.

And that said, let's have a look at your Dome piece:

quote:

Murder on the Fourth of July 1,203 words.

History will say that John Adams and I died on the Fourth of July, exactly fifty years after our nation�s independence was born. History will say that we died as friends. History will say many things, but in this, it is wrong.

We kept up appearances to the rest of the country, but our hatred for each other burned brightly through those five decades and longer. And death? Death was but a mere inconvenience for two men of our intellect. We cut our ties with the world of the mundane, and found our own ways to cheat the Reaper: Adams, with secret technology from his beloved Boston, and I with my taste for the occult.

Our immortality transformed our hatred from a mere distaste for each other into more murderous inclinations. No year passed without one of my attempts on John Adam�s life, or Adam�s attempt on my own life. No continent was left untouched by our feud, and nearly every nation felt the weight of our rivalry.

We clashed in Paris when the House of Bourbon was overthrown for the second time, at Veracruz and Huamantla when the United States shattered the dreams of Santa Anna, and at a hundred nameless battles across Europe, Asia, and the Americas. The world never knew it, but much of the nineteenth century was a war of Jefferson against Adams.

The only conflict of that century that we did not take part in to fuel our vain attempts at murdering each other was the War Between the States, a decidedly uncivil war. Instead, we went to Europe, where I whispered into the ear of the great revolutionary Garibaldi, and Adams arranged the great monarchs of Europe against me.

The last time we involved mortal men to help us in our feud was in Russia, where we accidentally caused the explosive occurrence now known as the Tunguska Event. After that debacle, we came to the agreement that we should not involve others in our fight, and that we should have an appointed time and appointed place to carry out our battle. I believe it was Adams who suggested that we should fight on the fourth day of every July, to amuse ourselves in the irony of one of us dying on the same day that we both provided an obituary for history�s sake.

Since then, every Fourth of July has come and gone with a vain attempt by one of us to slay the other. We were both too wily to die to easily, so death never came, and we gradually forgot the reasons for our feud. Still, we continued our private war, being so used to this grim routine that it never occurred to us to stop.

When the Fourth of July inevitably happened once more, I traveled to an isolated portion of California�s Pacific coastline, the appointed place we had agreed to meet at on the fifth of July the previous year. Traveling through eldritch dimensions, I appeared there at the crack of dawn. However, I was not alone.

Adams was there, sitting on the cliff of the coastline, along with his son John Quincy. Adams himself appeared as a portly, middle-aged man, as he had been on the day the Declaration of Independence was signed. John Quincy cloaked himself in the guise of a nine year old boy, the same age he had been when the Revolution began. From my centuries of dealing with the two Adams, I knew better than to trust their appearance. Their skin was entirely artificial, and beneath it lurked not the organs of mortal man, but technological marvels the world could scarcely conceive of. Though I am hardly one to talk; the less said about my own form, the better.

Hearing the faint crackling noise of my arrival from realms best left untouched, Adams turned his head towards me, smiled the broad grin of a man who has not smiled in years, and waved me over to where he and his son were sitting.

�Jefferson! Come, sit with us!� He seemed like a man without burden or care. My suspicions immediately rose, for we had tried to kill each other for nearly two centuries. Surely this was a trap; while our murderous hate had subsided somewhat over the years, it can�t have had faded entirely. Still, I strode neatly over to the two, and sat on the right side of Adams, while John Quincy sat on his left. As I sat, Adams calmly turned to me and said six words which I never expected to hear in two hundred and seventy years of life.

�I want you to kill me.�

I shook my head vigorously, to make sure I had heard him correctly.

�You want me to what?�

�Kill me, Jefferson.�

�But why?� I felt tongue-tied in an astonished way, like a schoolboy being told that his favorite teacher had gone into the woods and been eaten by a bear.

�I want to die, Jefferson. I�ve had a good, long life. I�ve lived through centuries, just as you have. I have learned every language there is to learn, I�ve meddled in wars without count, I�ve seen countless generations of my family die, be born, and live full lives in between. I have done everything I have ever wanted to do. and now I want to see what lies beyond life. Haven�t you felt the same after all these years?�

I barked out a short laugh. �Adams, if you had met the beings I had, and made the deals that I have made, you wouldn�t be so eager to leave this earth.�

Adams smiled wrly. �Perhaps not, but the fact still remains that I would like to die, and I can�t think of a better man to kill me. Besides, you may be the only man alive who could actually ensure that I stay dead.�

I laughed again, though my mood sobered by another thought. �What about your son?�

John Quincy rolled his eyes at me in a particularly petulant manner that he probably learned from the teenagers of this decade. �Jefferson, I�m two hundred and forty six years old. I believe I can take care of my own matters. What my father does is his own business, though I will miss him.� Quincy�s somber face contrasted with his father�s pleasant mood, but a grin quickly dominated. �But before I join him, I think I shall go beyond Earth, and spend a few centuries among the stars.�
Adams smiled brightly, once again unnerving me with his cheerfulness. He had never been as content as he was in that moment, even in the old days.

�I believe that answers that! Now Tom, will you do the honors? Try that fire you nearly ended our feud with back in Berlin.�
Seeing that I could not change his mind, I called forth in my hand an inferno hotter than the sun, and as tainted by the occult as the grand old trickster I had dealt with to gain it.
�Goodbye, John. I hope I�ll see you again one day.� I thrust the flame into the face of my old rival and newfound friend.

It was quick, this murder on the Fourth of July.

I actually kinda like this, especially as a first try. But aside from the solid and funny setup... nothing happens. Adams wants to die, Adams dies. So? Your prose is okay, but more important, why are we actually reading the story? I feel like the interesting story of (and the reason for) their conflict is alluded to and skipped over so you can get to the boring bit at the end.

# ¿ Oct 1, 2013 03:25

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Revol posted:

I've been wanting to write a graphic novel series, a specific story I've had, for what has to be around 10 years now. I've been doing a lot of planning and developing, but no actual writing. I've felt like I've been stuck, especially because I didn't know how to start the story. I felt like I need a breakthrough, but in the back of my mind, I always knew I must be lying to myself.

But I just had that breakthrough, and then some, last weekend. I decided on something that needed to be a theme of the story, and with that, I realized how the story had to begin. And then I had realization after realization, and I think I know how to do this now.

Well, I know how to do the story, but I don't know how to do the story. I don't think I can just start writing the script right away. So I'm here, asking for help on how to do a proper story outline or proof. My story is still fluid and organic right now; I have the beginning, the ending, and much of the middle. I'm prepared for this to evolve further, but I do want to properly get things outlined.

And would I do this for both plot, and then the characters as well?

Edit: Just noticed there was a making comics thread, but... seems this question still might fit better here.

Dude. Just write.

Thunderdome is not a panacea, but it is a panacea for not writing anything. Do a couple of rounds of that, then use it to kickstart yourself into getting your own thing done. Hell, you can probably find a way to meet a prompt by telling a story of one of your characters.

# ¿ Oct 9, 2013 11:48

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Helsing posted:

In addition to writing a lot I think its also important to read as much as possible, and to diversify the genre's you're reading (so if you're writing a mystery don't just read mysteries, if you're writing a romance don't just read romances, if you're writing in a flowery and descriptive style then check out authors who are terse and laconic).

On that note, and in the name of practising what I preach, I've been trying to make myself spend more time on fiction. For some reason I've fallen into a habit of reading non-fiction for pleasure, so I'm much more likely to pick up a piece of journalism or history or philosophy rather than a well written yarn that might give me some insights on how to compose a good story. Then the fiction I do read tends to be very trashy guilty pleasure stuff: Lovecraft, Robert E. Howard, Stephen King, etc.

So if anyone here might have recommendations on authors who they think excel at the craft of writing short fiction I'd really appreciate some recommendations. Recently I've been reading a lot of crime stories by Elmore Leonard and Ed McBain. If anybody could recommend something new for me to read (any genre is fine, but ideally not science fiction or fantasy please) based on the sole criteria that it exemplifies the art of short story writing then I'd be very appreciative.

Alice Munro writes amazing short stories. Damon Runyon and O Henry do too.

# ¿ Oct 9, 2013 23:08

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

blue squares posted:

Today I finished this thread and my first short story in my adult life. It still needs a lot of editing, but I did it.

Post it. I will give you a line edit crit, since I am procrastinating on another thing.

# ¿ Oct 20, 2013 08:31

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

This is by a game developer, Raph Koster, but it works pretty well for fiction:

quote:

Everyone who dislikes your work is right.

This is the hardest pill to swallow. I�ve never gotten a piece of feedback that was wrong. You see, you can�t deny a player their unique experience. Whatever they felt, was true. For them. And something in your work triggered it.

It is useless, and worse, actually self-defeating, to attempt to deny the critique. Sure, there are sometimes reviews that seem spiteful, unfair, and the rest. But the vast majority of the time, people are giving their honest reaction.

And the bottom line is, you put the game out there in order to get reactions. If it were not for reactions, you could have just kept the game in your drawer and gotten everything you needed out of it.

The criticism that is useful is that which helps you do it better.

People make games for different reasons. Some do it just because it is fun. Some do it as a form of personal expression. Some have a message to get across, and some are out to make money to put food on the table.

Whatever your goal is, doing it better is held in common. That sense of craftsmanship is the common ground that unites us all. Do what you do better, serve the work better, and you get to do it again.

That means there are two aspects of your work that you want to hear about the most. What you did right, and what you did wrong.

Nothing�s perfect.

All our babies seem perfect until that first player touches them. We have to learn they are not. Nothing is. People who point out flaws are just pointing out reality. If you can�t see the flaws in your own work, you probably need to get some distance. You can�t do your best work if you cannot get that distance, because you will learn to gloss over problems. It is amazing how they will vanish into a blind spot.

In my case, I often have to leave stuff sit for a long time. A year, or more. The fastest way to short-circuit this process is to stand behind someone who tries to play my game, and shut up and say nothing. It�s awesome: suddenly everything in it sucks! Then I furiously take notes.

The fact is that to do creative work is to know that most of what you do is poo poo. And we feel that way because we know we can do better. Honestly, if you aren�t pushing the boundaries of what you can do, you�re probably not working hard enough. And working at the edge means a lot of screw-ups.

You often have to choose between your ideals and your message.

One of the commonest pieces of feedback I get is that I am choosing some philosophical ideal over the player�s experience. It might be getting wedded to an aesthetic or visual I love that is just confusing the issue. It might be sticking with PvP for too long in order to serve an ideal of virtual citizenship, not paying attention to how many players are being chased out of the game.

The irony here, of course, is that if I can�t make the player�s experience positive enough, my ideal is failing to reach them anyway. And what good is it then?

It doesn�t mean I have to give up on the philosophical ideal. But it does mean that there are many many ways to compromise, and not all of them leave you compromised. In fact, being uncompromising may be the least successful way to achieve your artistic goal.

You have to dig to get the gold.

Most feedback you get isn�t going to be from fellow practitioners. Even when it is, they are not going to know as much about the specific ways in which you did things, the tools you used, the practices you follow, to be able to pinpoint exactly what�s wrong without a pretty deep dive.

This means that usually, when someone tells you that something is wrong or broken, it�s going to be wrong. But wrong in the sense that it will be imprecise. You need to find out what the problem is underlying the problem. In other words, the symptoms described will almost always be right, and the diagnosis will often be wrong.

Don�t discard the feedback because of this. Look at it as a door you need to push on. Dig deeper and find out what the real issue is.

Good feedback is detailed.

Sometimes you get a piece of feedback that is highly specific. It offers alternate word choices. It tells you the basics like you�re an idiot. It offers suggestions that are likely things you considered and discarded. It rewrites the plot for you. It feels like a rug burn: condescending, a checklist of everything wrong. You walk away feeling like this is the worst feedback ever.

It isn�t, though. It�s the best.

Look past what may feel like condescension. This sort of detail is impossible for someone who has not engaged fully with your work. The sign of a critic who does not care is brevity, not detail. It�s dismissal.

Now, all the other caveats about whether or not this feedback is right still apply. It can be detailed and not right. But never dismiss serious thought.

People who tell you you�re awesome are useless. No, dangerous.

They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is. Especially watch out for the ones who tell you that nobody understands your genius.

Honestly, this is going to sound horrible, but self-doubt is one of your most powerful tools for craftsmanship. None of the designers you admire feel self-confident about their work in that way. None of them think that they are awesome. They all suffer from impostor complexes the size of the Titanic.

I am not saying that you need to lack confidence in yourself. (Heck, you�ll never put anything out if that�s the case! You need to have the arrogance to assume anyone will care in the first place). I am saying that nobody is ever done learning, and people who tell you you have arrived will give you a sense of complacency. You should never be complacent about your art.

Someone asked for feedback will always find something wrong.

This is super simple. When someone is asked to critique something, they will feel like they have failed if they don�t find something wrong. So everyone will always find something, even if there�s nothing major to fix.

That doesn�t mean that the thing they mention is wrong. If the only feedback you get from multiple people is the same minor thing, you should feel pretty good!

Good work may not have an audience.

This is a sad truth. There is no correlation between quality and popularity. You may make something that is sophisticated, subtle, expressive, brilliant, and lose out to what is shallow and facile and brash. Oh well. And that really is the right attitude to have about it, too: oh well. Getting bitter about it is pointless.

That said, don�t underestimate the skill required in being simple, polished, and accessible. Dense and rich is easy. Simple is hard. You denigrate �pop� at your peril.

Any feedback that comes with suggestions for improvement is awesome.

That�s because it means the person offering the criticism actually thought about your goals. So either you get avenues to explore that assist you in your artistic goal, or you get told that your goal is invisible to an audience! Both are highly valuable information.

If you agree with the criticism, say �thank you.� If you disagree, say �fair enough,� and �thank you.�

Complaining about a critique, or about a bad review, is utterly pointless. You can�t deny the subjective experience of the reviewer. You also have to be thankful that they paid enough attention to actually say anything at all. The fact is that indifference is the enemy, not engagement, even if that engagement doesn�t get the results you want.

You�re going to face way more indifference in your career than anything else. There are a lot of people out there working really hard, and they all want the audience attention that you do. Always be grateful for the attention. Someone takes the time to let you know what they thought? That�s already one in a thousand. They cared.

You are not your work.

Above all, don�t forget this. Oh, be personally invested, of course. Your art will be poorer if you are not. But every little ship we launch is just our imperfect crafting of the moment. And we move on. We create again, and again. Each can only ever express a fragment, a tiny fraction of ourselves. And if you are trying to always improve in your craft and your art, then every old fragment, everything out there in the world already, that�s old news. You are on the next thing. Your next work, that�s who you are. Not the work that exists, but the work that does not yet.

So if someone savages it, who cares? That was yesterday. It�s not who you are now.

Hold on to that, because a lot of people can�t separate the work from the artist. Including a lot of artists.

(not a response to the person above, btw, I just found it and thought it was useful)

# ¿ Oct 21, 2013 02:12

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Jeza posted:

I think most of the feedback stuff was golden, but I get this weird niggling feeling that game design doesn't map perfectly onto writing.

It looks to have been written with UX and popularisation in mind, and these concepts do apply to writing, but I don't think he draws a clear enough line in the sand that there comes a point where an author's own opinion has to stand up and be heard. Blah, blah artistic integrity, whatever. Everything written seems staged in terms of making your work more accessible because more criticism is always beneficial and you can afford to be inclusive.

More criticism is not always beneficial. For any particular passage of prose you care to write, there are people who will love it, people who will hate it and lots of people who won't really mind it either way. In an ideal world you would be able to edit in order to minimise hate and apathy, while maximising love. In the real world, that isn't always an option. By minimising people who hate your writing, you are far more likely to be manoeuvring more and more people into the apathy camp.

The point is that you can't please everyone, and in my opinion it is an awful idea to even try. In the world of videogame design (SKIRTING DANGEROUSLY CLOSE TO CAN OF WORMS) the general goal is enjoyment, and he clearly states he is willing to compromise in order to allow as many people as possible to enjoy his games.

Videogames and books are different. I don't have the same kind of entertainment popping heads in an FPS as I do as reading a novel. They often recognisably aspire to different ends. As such, when troubleshooting a game, criticism is generally just a lot less subjective: I hate that I can't open the save menu via blah, the UI is unintuitive, these controls aren't ideal. What makes it more or less fun? I guess you could compare this sort of stuff to the 'grammar' of videogames: existing in order to make the experience smoother and more palatable.

At this point I'm desperately looking for some kind of conclusion that isn't retarded. You get a lot of different kinds of critique for writing and comments on the technical and mechanical aspects of your writing should always be heard, without fail, especially if you are inexperienced. More macro criticism addressing your tone or your plot, the ball is more in your court. Be pragmatic. Does it tally with your own misgivings? Are you able to reasonably do anything about it?

tl;dr: I'm not saying pick and choose your criticism. Listen to it all, but remember that you can only take on board a finite amount before you begin to dilute your work. Only you can decide when that is.

Yeah, I think you're right. It's valuable as a one-link antidote to the hugbox mentality, but you need to filter it for applicability to your own stuff.

My own approach is 'assume all criticism is accurate unless you're sure it's not - because the process of becoming sure is how you make your writing better'.

sebmojo fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Oct 21, 2013

# ¿ Oct 21, 2013 21:27

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Martello posted:

It's not obvious at all. It sounds like he's saying that since his writing buddy didn't like his SCREW THE GALAXY book, that meant he wasn't the audience for it. Which is a ridiculous thing to say.

If he's saying something different, he needs to say it differently.

My view is you should assume all critiques are accurate unless you're sure they're wrong. And being sure about something takes effort.

quote:

I was in a writer's group trying to get feedback. One writer said he didn't understand the subtitle: Screw the Galaxy. Hank never "screwed the galaxy." Like literally kicked the galaxy's rear end. At that point I realized, I gave my work to someone I shouldn't have. He will NEVER get it. And that's totally fine. My writing isn't for him. Doesn't mean I suck or he sucks or the galaxy sucks.

This is not effort.

# ¿ Oct 31, 2013 21:23

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

TheRamblingSoul posted:

Thank you for the advice. I meant more specifically about recognizing cliches to begin with, like I think I'm writing good dialogue but it actually reads as cliched to someone else.

My favourite advice for writing dialogue is actually from Scott Adams of Dilbert; he says people in real life never talk to each other: instead they talk around, and against, and in spite of each other.

# ¿ Nov 19, 2013 06:50

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Stuporstar posted:

(whoever's running TD this week, please make this a flash rule for McSlaughter).

Done. I will presume you don't need an official :siren:

Flash Rule :siren:

in the thread, but I will be very grumpy if I see a huge block of exposition by dialogue.

Edit: To acknowledge Jeza's fair point, don't do a huge block of exposition by dialogue unless it's loving awesome. This is the hidden Rule #0 for all of this stuff.

sebmojo fucked around with this message at 05:53 on Nov 24, 2013

# ¿ Nov 24, 2013 05:49

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

McSlaughter posted:

Alright so this leaves me a bit confused. The part of my piece in question here is something I wouldn't consider exposition. Sure, it's a story within the story, but it doesn't outright say anything of a "this sets up the conflict for the rest of the piece" nature and it definitely isn't explicitly what the prompt for this week's TD asked not to have (that is, the beginning explaining the crime in question that is the action for the story [though, spoilers some sort of crime is involved in the story]). So... I'm going to bend this flash rule a little bit and say that the "huge block of exposition" in question will not be present in my piece.

If I fail I guess I fail and I'll take my punishment like a man. Or if I wake up tomorrow and a sudden burst of clarity and enthusiasm strikes me I will pen the entire thing with a totally different approach. Maybe.

Edit: Just for clarification looking back at a previous post, I'd like to redact what I said about the story the father tells as "igniting the events in the [rest of the] story." I can see how that would sound like some sort of device for exposition and I apologize for those choice of words. It definitely doesn't do that, it's just a parallel amid the story that conveys some of the deeper themes going on in the piece.

Just go for it, and we can continue this discussion once you've posted the story.

Edit: vvvv I agree with this vvvv

sebmojo fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Nov 24, 2013

# ¿ Nov 24, 2013 07:34

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Stuporstar posted:

I wouldn't worry. Apparently TD only uses nerf bats these days.

Let's find out. See you in there for another thousand words of evisceration. I'll let you pick the prompt. Who knows, maybe you'll beat me this time?

You won't.

# ¿ Nov 25, 2013 23:01

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

Stuporstar posted:

No, dude. I need to let this one go. I need to let Thunderdome go. I handed over the reigns to you guys a while ago. It's yours now.

# ¿ Nov 26, 2013 00:47

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

TheRamblingSoul posted:

I definitely understand the need to read more female authors.

My girlfriend is recommending Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood for creepy/disturbing good writing. Isn't Atwood a good reference for good female-written sci-fi in general?

Ursula Le Guin is the grand dame of female fantasy writer, A Wizard of Earthsea is a good place to start because it's a stone classic. CJ Cherryh is brutally good and very under-rated - she's probably one of the biggest influences on my style, including my regrettable addiction to comma splicing. She writes gritty but intricate psychologically dense fantasy and sci-fi, try the Morgaine trilogy, Chanurs Venture or Downbelow Station.

On the male side, Joe Abercrombie is good too, his best is probably The Heroes. Clive Barker is a decent stylist in the horror genre, from memory; maybe Weaveworld? Also Michael Moorcock, though his pulp stuff is fast and crappy as a rule.

# ¿ Nov 29, 2013 20:34

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 10, 2024 13:07

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

The Talent of the Room.

quote:

Before any issues of style, content, or form can be addressed, the fundamental
questions are: How long can you stay in that room? How many hours a day? How do you
behave in that room? How often can you go back to it? How much fear (and, for that
matter, how much elation) can you endure by yourself? How many years � how many
years � can you remain alone in a room?

I know people who, when young, had wonderful talents: prose of grace and
resonance that came without effort, sentences that moved intelligently with that crucial
element of surprise, never concluding quite where one expected, so that you were always
eager to read the next and the next. Promising work, as they say. But to write anything
that would keep the promise, to be beyond the letters, verse, and stories of their youth,
written with such enthusiasm, friends and teachers praising them, little magazines
publishing them � to take the next step meant that they would have to sit alone in a room
for years.

# ¿ Dec 3, 2013 03:35

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > Fiction Writing: Advice and Discussion

«‹›8 »