Love your tips! Years ago I made a video about the 7 deadly sins of screenwriting: 1. Stereotypical characters (like the Manic Pixie Dream Girl) 2. No dramatic throughline (the goal of the main character) 3. No clear conflict (characters going through the motions on the surface, but no actual meaning behind the scenes) 4. Repeating the same story beat over and over again (there should be a progression) 5. A Deus Ex Machina plot resolution 6. No self-revelation for the main characters in the end (the viewer will ask himself why he watched the movie in the first place) 7. The it was all just a dream plot resolution (the biggest betrayal of the audience)
Please don't stop making these "back to basics" videos. I always feel like at least something you've said has made me consider some aspect of my approach in a new way, always valuable perspective. I don't listen to this kind of stuff from any other youtubers. Thanks.
I was my D&D group's DM most of the time growing up so now when I write I constantly view it through the lens of "Would the players be interested and having fun at this moment if this were a role-playing game".
Reportedly, Abrams, Johnson, and (at the time) Trevarrow DID have at least one meeting to discuss the overall story of the sequel trilogy, but obviously it wasn't enough given how Abrams and Johnson were completely out of sync with each other (and Trevarrow later left the project).
As much as I love TV Tropes for giving me a vast encyclopedia of genres and writing techniques to flip through while doing research, it has probably single-handedly launched the epidemic of pseduo-intellectual critique channels on youtube and given rise to a generation of writers who think novelty and subversion are priority no. 1 in fiction. I would not be the least bit surprised to hear that Rian Johnson starts any project he gets by going to TV Tropes.
Editing while writing is a mistake I made early on. My continuity became pretty messy because of it. Overall, a tip that's been super useful for my workflow is to just write, even when you feel it in your stomach that what you're writing is bad. And keep writing until you have a finished draft. It's easier to edit bad work than to edit no work.
Just writing is a good way to get a feel for what you want. It’s a great exploratory process. But I find I always go back and organize the thing, rewriting it from scratch but in a far better form.
I actually have to edit as I write. If I wait until the end of the story to do editing, I often find that there are too many mistakes to go back and fix.
The way I do it is I write a scene ro a bunch. Next day I come back and correct spelling errors etc. and make basic corrections. Sometimes minor editing. Next day I write next scene. After some significant part is done I make very basic editing-looking for incosistencies etc. I read the whole thing and note the elements that need fixing. I never do actual editing untill i finish. Its just too much work that is diverting your attention from writing.
@@batman5224 I'm the same. The process is just personal preference IMO no "right way". I am the most effective and efficient with my writing by switching between creative bursts and editing bursts. I don't like sticking in creative mode for an entire draft personally because it can very easily become a big mess by the time your done. But if your shifting between creative and editing while you go through the draft its much harder for potential narrative problems that you don't notice to pop up and mess your whole story up. When those problems come up it can easily turn into a domino effect of problems that need to be addressed. And that is not a fun thing to deal with when it happens. But some people are super clean when they're in creative mode and they know exactly what they need to keep track of and what direction they need to take. But I usually have too many details I'm throwing in and I tend to write very loosely in the creative phase so that doesn't work for me.
Recent grad of an MFA program in genre fiction here, and I would add to your list. First, reading your genre. Being an expert, or at least a specialist, in your genre of choice. I couldn't believe how many "writers" in my program wanted to write mystery because they loved crime shows, or fantasy writers wanted to write fantasy because they liked anime. When I would say, "Why don't you write a screen play," or what have you, I was always looked at as if I just didn't get their vision. I even had a girl who wanted to write "black space opera" because there were too many white space operas. When I asked what drew her to the genre if she didn't like space operas, she admitted she'd never read any and said that gave her an advantage in the market because she was going to be a new voice. Listen, any new writers out there: do not do this. If you want to write fantasy, read fantasy. Read the greats, read the hypes, read the fails, read it all and mine 'em all for what you want to do/not do with your stories. Every story is a learning tool. And while watching anime and crime shows might give you some insights in what you want in your story, it does not teach you how to write it as a novel. Sounds simple but some will make you wonder. Also, not as glaring an issue but definitely noticeable: live. Get some life experiences. As a fantasy writer, I would see this problem a lot in critique groups when we would look at someone's new fight scene, or when looking at someone's new, hot sex scene in their romance. Everything would be set up well, but then the execution of the fight or sex would be treated just as matter-of-fact as the set up. It would be as if the fight was being watched from ring side but the POV would be 3rd limited. I could tell the person had never been in a fight or else they wouldn't have written it so cleanly. Now, I'm not saying that person had to go get in a fight to write it convincingly, but I think this is a problem of a lot of aspiring writers. Since reading and writing is a solitary pursuit and often associated with kids who prefer indoor activities, aspiring writers can rely too heavily on what they've read or have seen in the movies and they try to translate that to the page even when dealing with something that requires a certain level of research or lived experience to accurately portray it. This is similar to your point on "head movies," but goes deeper because I think we as audiences have accepted a certain level of "Hollywooding" of experiences (ie, things are reduced to surface level), and it's a flaw. And, if corrected, can turn a mediocre novel into one with some substance. A so-so military drama can become recommended reading if just the little details of military life are added that just tell the reader I'm reading and learning about something worthwhile because I'm learning about a new, real place even if that military drama is set a thousand years in the future.
@ClandestineOstrich I concur with a majority of your post, excluding the _"As for the second paragraph, it would require exceptional genius to be able to pull that off in an impactful way"_ point. Allow me, an unpublished random guy in a youtube comment who recently completed what he believes is his first novel, to elaborate. I agree with the OP that living is important, as writing about things that have happened to you is both easier and easier to make more realistic and visceral. But I disagree that it'd require exceptional genius to pull off a good "simulation of experience", if you will. (Though if I'm wrong and genius is required, I thank you for the compliment!) But even though I've never been in a swordfight, or in a real fistfight after I grew up, that doesn't stop me from describing them in what I believe is an effective manner. Keeping the basics in check (utilise as many senses as possible, etc.) and placing yourself in your character should be enough to make it good enough. I see it as method acting, except that the writer has to method act for all of his characters. How would it feel to have a blade slice into your shoulder? The shock of pain dulled by adrenaline, the force imparted on you, the tactile grinding of steel on bone that you experience through your body? What about being tackled to the ground by surprise and having your head slam into the cobbles? Blunt impact when you hit the ground, searing pain in the head that persists afterwards, momentary disorientation, the air escaping your lungs? How would it feel to kick someone in the ribs? The delight of vengeance as you defeat the thug that attacked you, the panicked shock of disabling the attacker before you run away, or the joy of beating your victim to a pulp if you were the attacker, coupled with the resistance of the flesh under your boot, the grunting or shouting of the fallen victim, and the pain in the toes after repeated kicks? I'd argue that indeed, we draw upon life experiences when, and only one who has experienced a lot will have a large "vocabulary" to draw from, but I'd posit that you can faithfully represent a situation you've never been in. You just have to put yourself in your character's place. Well, and read a lot about how things would feel, too.
#7 "no plan" -- It strikes me that if nothing else, having some sort of plan will help you write something where your (potential and inevitable) errors become more obvious. You can then lay out whatever your story is, get it done, and then reread and see what the totality of the story needs and whether you've done it (at all or well). It's another way into story, you might say. I think Stephen King can be rightly criticized for stories that are often overly long and repetitious. While they might still be decent, how much better would they be if he was able to cut the superfluous? Thanks for the video!
@@christianbjorck816 I think I know what you mean. There will be, of course, those who view his stuff as categorically bad since he's a genre fiction writer. But, correct me if I'm wrong (please), you are saying he often doesn't get well-deserved flack from his fellow genre fictionistas? I think there does come a point when reputation that you deserved for some great past work, becomes a reputation you don't always work to maintain with current work. Did I read you correctly? Thanks for the comment
Ahabite Yes preciscely what I meant! I think he has done some good work, though he’s not one of my favorites I can acknowledge that, but most of his writing isn’t that great and could use heavy editing and other types of characters/plots. He lives a bit too much on old success.
@@christianbjorck816 There's a funny story that Stephen King tells about his fans telling him that their favourite/his best book is The Stand (published in 1978)! I've read a ton of King and some of his books are nearly as thick as cinder blocks, and don't need to be. I'm looking at you Desperation...I wonder, and this might be a parallel point, to what degree his editor even bothers with editing. I guess it goes back to the reputation of the writer somewhat. I mean, if King is selling and could probably sell an itemized laundry list, why go overboard editing? It does put me in mind of the rewriting King did on his Dark Tower series. And I confess, I don't know how to separate the young me's love for the Gunslinger (original edition) from the disappointment I felt reading King's rewritten version. Does removing some purple prose from the original make it better? Or does it merely sanitize it? I guess it depends on what 'better' means... One last point: I think the frequency of King's publications works against him. I do support the draft as fast as possible (Bradbury) approach but I also think careful (slow) planning works well with the fast drafting (in my opinion). I dunno, I'd love to be in King's position in some ways, but I also think his reputation has sort of trapped him. If you are interested, there is a great interview/conversation between King and GRR Martin that addresses the fast vs. slow writing approaches.
I'm a 'by the seat of my pants' writer. Mind you, for my epic fantasy/sci-fi novel I wrote out a three page synopsis first. I eventually got to a point where I'd surpased what I had written for the synopsis, but by then everything was so well established I had plenty to go on ... but in doing so I've done the exact opposite of write myself into a corner ... I've written myself into a wide open field with an endless horizon. And that I find quite daunting.
Only been writing since November of 2019 and I've already seen improvement. Just keep writing. + Make notes as you learn new techniques, then when editing happens, go back and use your new skills to spruce up the draft into something even more fun. He's right, you have to learn by doing and then mold it into later versions of your series. Its ok to have clay in the beginning. That's what drafts are for. I use excel spreadsheet to keep the events and timeline coherent in my series. Along with quick character references. If you are stuck on a scene, I just put in what I want the character to do for that part, plus how it ties into the plot, then move on. When I have a firmer idea of what to write, Ill go back and flesh it out.
Great advice on emphasizing plot and character vs. theme/politics. I made the no-outline mistake, but OTOH I discovered a lot about my world by fumbling through. That said, I won’t be making the same mistake again. Another mistake I made was latching onto an idea that was always too big for one book. Start with a little idea, because it will grow in the telling.
Freestyle writer here. I've tried outlines, and they don't work for me. They actually cause writer's block. As soon as I try to force the story into following an outline, I avoid writing. Within a day, I say the heck with it, toss the outline and write the story as it comes to me. I've found the things that make this style not work for many gets solved after writing a lot. I visualize the story many times before I write a scene, so that may be what helps me avoid the problems others have with this method. I've been writing for decades both fiction and non-fiction. The non-fiction helped me be concise and edit to word count. In magazines and newspapers, you get only X-amount of words, so I needed to learn how to tell the full 'story' within those guidelines. I'm always looking for ways to improve my writing, and that keeps moving me closer to where I want to be as a writer. One mistake new writers sometimes make is they ask dozens of opinions for their first novel. Beta readers won't like or dislike the same things, and new writers either want to please them all or value their advice above their own instincts. Ask 2 or 3 people, then edit it the best to your ability, then work with an editor to polish it. But don't spend years editing. Get it done and move on to the next project. One can learn only so much from each project. Let them go. Looking back, it's easy to see the progress of experience with each project. My first fantasy novel, "Shadows in the Stone", lost some of its essence because it was edited to death with too many opinions of others being applied. I tried to inject the spark back in after I realised it, but it was difficult to reclaim what was lost.
Re. point 7 I find myself still often getting stuck with writer's block when writing a chapter. Not because I don't have an outline of what is going to happen. I do have one; for both the story at large and for what is going to happen in each actual chapter. It's just that I often get stuck trying to execute those ideas. Like spending time trying to get the flow of a conversation right so that it naturally hits all the subjects I need it to cover. Do you have a suggestion or tip to overcome issues like this or is it simply a result of my inexperience? Love your videos as always and I hope you respond.
Think about the value of that scene, is it really important to the story. If not just cut it and move on, but if you need it for important character development or story beat then just be patient and work through it.
Try to imagine flow of the scene in your head before actually writing it. Bit by bit what is happening and what is being said. Do not rely on notes. Notes are abstract and show nothing, only intent of the scene. You need to play it in your head before you will write it down. You need rehersal. If you try to write without it typically you will jam your brain with too much things to consider and to do at once. Yo do not have to immediatelly write it down. You can leave it for a while. Like a day. Treat this as wrting, but in your head, its not a waste of time, its part of the process. The next day force yourself to sit down and write what you have seen the day before. This should help, because now you have "seen" the scene in action, and your brain should be free to simply express it.
Just write. If you have to, put a place marker there and get back to it later, let it process in the back of your mind for a while while you move on. Write, even if you're just going to have to edit it out later; it's like you're panning for gold, just write until you hit upon what you've been looking for. While writing, you might pull a brilliant nugget out of your ass that surprises even you, then you can go back and make full use of it, set it up. Maybe you'll find that something isn't as important as you originally thought and the story is better off without it. Move on, don't dwell or stay stuck on what's blocking you, you can come back to it, don't let that molehill become a mountain that completely shuts you down with frustration.
Everyone struggles with execution; it's difficult (compared to planning) by its very nature. The best you can do is just make an attempt now, and if it's not working (say it's not going in the right direction to reach the destination) give yourself some time working on other things to identify whether you need to make another attempt at the same, or swap it out for something else entirely.
I am a pantser with ADD. I’ve tried to plot and I end up frustrated and bored to death. But what I found what worked for me was creating a character bible, a giant map , on poster board, of my fictional village and filling in the names of shops, restaurants etc and aligning them with characters and my character bible. It’s kind of a hybrid pants/plot idea.
As chance would have it, I just watched this after reading Drink We Deep by Arthur Leo Zagut, which is a textbook example of great execution. He follows the pulp novel formula closely enough, but the execution is amazing. He plays with the formula, gives readers what they expect in interesting ways, introduces unexpected elements that fit and spur on the suspense. Worth checking out as an example.
I'd love to hear your point of view on linear and non-linear chronology when telling a story; like including flashbacks, prequels (before the story is finished chronologically) etc. How this can impact audience retention levels is something I've been curious about. For example, the character of Darth Vader and how we are given his story in non-chronological order with the introduction of the prequels after the original trilogy. If we started from his childhood we might have a better appreciation in regards to his sacrifices, but on the other hand the impact he has as we see him in the original trilogy would be far weaker, not to mention completely nullify Luke's shocking revelation about his father.
I’d say contradicting themes is a big one and that the language doesn’t feel consistent. Take Moby Dick for example, that book uses the sea for metaphors and language. ”Feelings came crashing like waves” and the like. It had been very odd if Melville started to use farming terminology in a large capacity later in the book to describe things if they were still at sea. You want to keep your language somewhat connected to your themes and characters. And if you abandon your theme halfway through then the reader will think ”then why do I need to read the rest?” Let’s say the theme of Moby Dick had been ”whale hunting is bad” and the author builds that up, with the main character regretfully on the ship, hating the crew and what they do only to result in the main character killing the whale mid way and he is making a lot of money from said kill, then living happily ever after without reflecting on what happend. Then you have failed to convey your theme and usually it turns into a mess.
Always dig your videos. Another thing to remember about “flying by the seat of your pants”: pilots were able to do this with their planes because they learned their planes inside out and gained considerable experience in their air flying them. They wouldn’t allow them to take on such dangerous missions until they gained that king of experience. Not if they wanted to win the war.
I think that 1, 4, and 7 can use a little arguing and additional explanation. 1) I think early author attempts actually get deeply stuck here since they just learn how to worldbuild and don't want to mess up, then some actually start enjoying it so much they get stuck absolutely overplanning their world (and to a lesser extent the story, too). It could be good as some practice in creating worlds if you know where and when to stop. I net-know a person who only ever wrote 1 Naruto fanfic in their life now trying to create a book series. They planned it to be an 8 PARTER, but for a long while they were now stuck on what appears to be several scenes from crucial story points spread across their books along with a (badly in need of review and rewrite) initial part of what may not even be considered the first draft, below 10k words. They have this huge world they CONSTANTLY talk about and make small revisions to and at this point I basically warned them they will run out of enthusiasm before they finish their first book at this rate. And they wanna do 8 in that world. 4) I feel like this is a "if you know what you are doing" situation. Some quiet moments of respite are very helpful in characterization and letting the reader catch a breather too, but it is easy to accidentally write pointless scenes sometimes 7) I do think "Gardeners" have a more difficult time "getting" their creative process. If you completelt by-the-pants something, you will likely end up with something you can use more like an extensive outline or very bad first draft in need of multiple reviews and rewrites. Which is not very terrible if you have the time. But if we go with the idea that gardeners create the story in their head thanks to the characters and settings as they go, we do arrive at a good piece of advice. Those deeper into the architect zone generally do well by knowing and successfully establishing their plot first. Those deeper in the gardener side need not only a grasp of how their world works, but REALLY need to know their characters to an UNUSUAL (even 'voices in my head level) degree to be able to push them through the grinder while discovering the story on the go to come up with something decent. And then they need another crucial thing : Brakes on that thing, a.k.a knowing when to actually finish the story.
1) Being afraid to make a bold character, either by toning down a character that would generate backlash, or amping up a character in fear that SHE won't come off strong and independant enough for a reader not to complain. Don't let social politics and busybodies ruin a good character. 2) Drugs/alcohol won't make you a literary genius.
I've been on both sides of number 7 -- jumping into the writing with no concrete plan and either I recognize a direction pretty quickly, or writer's block sets in when the initial creative dash wears off. The best part? Taking time to actually WRITE DOWN a plan (i.e. outline) before starting doesn't even help me in this regard.
It's not about the ideas, it's about the execution - thank you, that's sobering to hear; in a good way. On the Seat-of-your-pants writing approach, however - one has to remember that Stephen King was getting *a ton* of rejections before Carrie got published. So it's very likely that this approach does work, but one has to practice a lot for it to work.
Thanks for the tips. Much appreciated. Personally, I attempt to use tropes either to subvert them (yawn) or also as a shorthand. If I can convey a large amount of information in a very simple way, then trope it is.
Big mistake: Not putting down the finished MS first draft before beginning editing. Walk away, work on a new MS or something else for at least a month, then come back.
Cannot be stressed enough! Taking time away avoids creative exhaustion (burnout) and provides time to find new ideas. For example, in one of my mental worldbuilding settings I eliminated one of its 'stock fantasy species' (gryphons) because (1) the same setting has feathered dragons (which could get confused with gryphons already), and (2) I've spent more time ruminating on winged manticores and determined they integrate better with specific characters and backstories.
Agreed pretty much entirely with this. Some points...ehh...I have various other opinions on, but... Still really enjoyed and learned from the video, David! Keep spouting your wisdom upon us simple authors and readers.
Re: ideas vs execution: I think you hit on why the Star War prequels failed: Lucas had some great ideas, but couldn't execute them without a lot of help from others. The Disney sequels seem to have gone the other way: some quality execution, but no ideas to speak of.
I'd like to write a story (although I don't know if it'll be a serialized web comic or just a book) I'm not an experienced writer, how should I plan it out? How do I world/character built the right way or how to start?
There is no wrong way to start this endeavor. You will learn more through your first writing attempts then you could possibly gain listening to me prattle on, so give it a try. I would start with a simple story treatment. A couple of characters and what they do. What are their goals and who is trying to stop them. How are they going to succeed and where are they going to fail. Then start writing the prose and see what happens.
@@DVSPress That's true, I get too invested in the "right way" sort of thinking school gets you into, haha. Yeah, I think some simple short stories to test some waters first and prototype the character would be the best way, and just see what i can pull out of it.
Kraven83 The elder scrolls and the fallout series are very different. For the quest to be engaging it will likely have to tie into the lore and story. If the quest could be put into either game then it may be bland and predictable.
Have you read Shad M. Brooks' (channel Shadaversity) novel "Shadow of the Conqueror" yet? If so, I'd like to see a review from you, and I think he'd appreciate some feedback as well. I thought he did a pretty good job at world-building, establishing a magic system and making fleshed-out characters. :D
I guess planning isn't for me. something about following a predetermined path kills the fun, so I end up losing interest and abandoning the project. even if I push through and finish it, the quality is never as good as when I improvise. when just let everything play out naturally, without trying to funnel the events into a specific sequence, the descriptions are richer, and everything just flows better.
If you like to read short stories, then writing short stories is fine. Most writers I meet, however, want to write novels, and the two things are very different beasts and require different approaches. Some short stories contain no dialogue, for example, and this is fine for that format, but terrible for a novel. Short stories can give you good practice with dialogue and prose, which will transfer to writing novels. The bigger lessons about characters and plot, not so much.
How many of us wannabe writers just want to entertain? I always hear about the self insert fantasy or the soap box or the big brain running amok. Anyone else out their who just wants to take folks for a ride then bump fists afterward? Is that not enough to form a foundation for a novel?
It's okay for a MC to be reactive sometimes, especially at the beginning of a story. Luke Skywalker doesn't start out with a mission to overthrow the empire, after all.
I can relate to several of these, but am sort of struggling with #2 in a peculiar way. I'm in a wheelchair due to having essentially no legs and only 1.5 arms (congenital thing). I'm working on a sci-fi/space opera-ish story set in a different universe. I've been planning on having one of my main characters also be missing some appendages. The same ones, actually. On the one hand, given our anatomical similarities, as well as him being interested in philosophy like I am, this could feel like an author-insert character. On the other hand, he's not the only protagonist, he's not going to be a Mary-Sue type, and I think the whole no-legs angle could make for interesting storytelling (or at least "flavor" or "color," since his disability will not be essential to any particular plot point). So I'm torn.
I can relate (although in a lesser severity, an operation on my spine years ago) I guess the Question(s) you can ask yourself is: What difference would it make, if the character doesn't have this "specific similarity to myself"? Would something similar also work? Or is there an underlying theme, that can be explored (additionally / independently) that complements the story? What about this is relatable to the intended reader/audience? Is it a relevant part of the character arc? Or does it help / make the story flow better (maybe a moment when the char imparts experience on another character)? I, for myself, wouldn't copy my own life experience directly - instead there is a character which has (for example) lived through an accident which caused brain damage, or the character is stubborn and restless when sick, another might struggle with his/her own body image because of scar tissue or self-confidence issues
Having a character that is disabled like you doesn't necessarily mean an author insert as I am talking about it. I mean something that is more like a power fantasy or primarily about a fantasy of yours - like if you make your main character a best-selling author who is secretly a spy. Disabled characters can be very interesting. Disability was actually on my list of ways to Make a protagonist likeable.
@@DVSPress Got me thinking. I agree, it's not an insert, more like a "tricky subject" In my irl experience there is a risk of a halo effect, where people really focus on the impairment, would surely be worth a surprise, when a character succeeds in a task which might seem "impossible" but s/he has a strategy/ace to deal with it. Also: Pity isn't Sympathy, People that are "shocked" by the revelation of disability might (want to) emotionally detach themselves
1:41 I keep hearing people say this, but I disagree and think it’s the other way around: 1984 is ONLY remembered because it had good ideas, and NOT because it had an interesting plot or characters. The “story” is simply a vehicle for Orwell to express his political ideas. From a literary standpoint, the story itself is forgettable and it’s only redeeming qualities are it’s ability to weave the message into the setting and it’s simplicity. People only talk about the ideas and themes when discussing the book and rarely ever mention the characters by name. The plot is just a setup for Winston’s eventual betrayal, and characters themselves are one dimensional. Only three characters are named and they are all one dimensional. Consider their motivations: Winston is simply an audience surrogate whose only motive is to find out information about the world on the readers behalf and not get in trouble while doing it. He has no other interests or goals. He DOES have a backstory (albeit a vague one), but that only highlights the fact that none of the other characters do. O’ Brien is a mustache-twirling bad guy whose sole motivation is to serve the party. Making him conflicted about his actions or forced to obey orders he disagrees with to save himself or his family would have fleshed him out, but we get none of that. The Fire Chief in Fahrenheit 451 was a better O’ Brien-type character because it’s implied that he used to love the thing he now fights against. And then there’s Julia, whose despite being one of only three characters who has a name, has zero personality outside of wanting to have sex with Winston. That’s her only motivation. When Winston tries to strike up a conversation that isn’t about sex, she brushes him off. She has zero agency and never says or does anything that fundamentally alters the plot in any way. She’s so irrelevant that she could literally be replaced with a pillow and nothing would change because the story is entirely a struggle between Winston and the Party, which O’ Brien is the personification of. Big Brother is a personification of an otherwise faceless organization, NOT a character. We don’t even know if he even exists or is just a fictional character/mascot like Uncle Sam or Mickey Mouse, but most people make the mistake of seeing him as a person (such as a stand-in for Stalin) when he is really just an idea. - In my opinion, the personality cult around him isn't even the most important idea in the book (Orwell wrote an entire appendix about Newspeak but doesn't even give us a single quote from B.B.), but 90% of discussion around the book acts like it is. It also falls victim to point #1, wherein the book is consumed with worldbuilding such that it even stops halfway through to deliver a lecture about how the party functions instead of weaving it into the plot like a good author would.
I've had two main takeaways from my creative writing classes - write what a character feels and not just what is happening (character-driven stories), and plot is always about motion (internal or external). But this is creative writing and not literature. As far as literature class is concerned, they're supposed to teach critical thinking, aren't they? This basically means that you learn how to analyze literature but not how to write it. This is the same as how hearing, reading, speaking, and writing a language all use different skills. I'd expect a literature class to help with writing but definitely not to make your writing better.
I don't remember exact titles, but browse through his Storycraft playlist; you should find plenty in there. If you have time, check out his Writestreams too. In this case, I think he's referring to having an outline of the story to help you pull through the writers block. It should be easier to carry on if you at least have broad strokes of what comes next than if you have naught.
@@1COMODIN9 I will check those videos out thank you. I'm trying to figure out how to keep my writting productive and this video was very informative. I have a lot of loose ideas and concept characters I want to make a story for but I just dont have the disciple or knowledge to make an intresting story. I can never seem to finish a though and I think its because I dont understand the guidelines. I'm going to start with a few short sentence summaries and pic the best one, then I'll choose a theme I want to explore and hopefully I can make characters fit in somehow. For anyone reading, any tips for preparing/prepping would be much appreciated Thank you
The biggest mistake I can think of that is not on the list is over explaining magic or technology systems. For example, Paolini's "Inheritance Cycle" ended up with a decent first book however about half way through the second book we learn everything about the magic system so it becomes boring. Or "Voyager" where all the technobabble results explanations that obviously make no sense and are continuously contradicted. Neither one used an info dump to do it. If you contrast that to books like "Lord of the Rings" or "The Dragon Riders of Pern" the magic system is never explained and anything that magically happens is fantastic and even if it is commonly done it remains extraordinary. Another example from film is "Farscape" where literally nothing is explained almost to the point where the setting boarders on a bizaro world but because we do not and cannot understand the world so we just have to trust it and it becomes very difficult to say what is and what is not possible.
Yes over explaining fantastical systems can rob some of the mystery and fantasy from a story. What I think of is the vampire Chronicles books after the third one. All of the origins were explained so there was really nothing else to learn about this mysterious vampire society.
I generally describe myself as a pants-er but anything over 20k words I need to start making notes character bios and so on or it all becomes impossible to remember.
Execution just means what the actual final product looks like. To use an example, the broad-summary idea of Lord of the Rings is pretty much just "A group of friends and a wise wizard go on a journey to destroy an evil artifact." What made LOTR so good to so many people was the execution; exactly how the personalities, character-arcs/growth, the flow from one event to the next, etc. was presented to the audience. Using painting as another example, two artists could paint a representation of the exact same landscape, but if one artist has badly-done lines/messy paint-application while the other artist's painting is vivid and clear, people are going to prefer the second painting even though they were both painting the same thing. TL;DR: It's not just what you do; most of the work (and success) lies in how you do it.
@@Brawl847 ok I think I'm starting to understand like I can have all these cool characters, location and scenes but how they play out is the meat of it all. And like you mention there would be different techniques to make those aspects shine, dynamic characters and exciting dramatic events that connect to each other in some sort of harmony beyond just: this happens then this happens.
@@romanruano1369 Exactly; you've got it. The tricky part is that there really isn't a definitively *RIGHT* way to go about it. You can learn how *NOT* to do things by looking at stories that aren't good and finding out why people didn't like it, but you'll still have to figure out your particular schtick; your 'style' of making things play out in an interesting way. Your story's sense of humor, how characters dress/behave, how graphic or kid-friendly the content is, etc. Speaking from experience, it won't come quick; I've been writing for nearly a decade, and I'm only just now really starting to realize what my style truly is. The best route is to just write and rewrite, keep moving forward, and eventually you'll look back and start to notice how you tend to do things. Another good bit of advice I wish I knew from the start is to not get paranoid and shut yourself off from entertainment (movies, tv, etc.) out of fear that you'll subconsciously plagiarize everything you see. While straight-up _plagiarism_ is terrible, you can still look at how another writer executed a story/scene/character/etc. that you like and see if it inspires you to try doing things a certain way in your stuff.
Editing and Revisions are the most important things you need to face. Any writer who thinks their stuff is good after the first draft is a delusional idiot and their stuff sucks. Editing, cutting out as much crap as you can after you've written it, is a painful and necessary thing; it's something every writer has to sit down and do with an almost callous seriousness, their story will be better for it. And revisions, many many many revisions, are required to truly make a story good; you are the master of the future and past, you can play revisionist history as much as you need to to make yourself seem like a brilliant writer who had all the steps planned out -- so do that, go back and iron out all the wrinkles and plant all the seeds that will come to beautiful fruition -- don't think that the work you just hammered out is even worth showing to another human being, if you can be bothered to polish it at all then it isn't worth anyone's time to read. Writers who refuse to edit, and don't think that their story needs any revisions, are the worst writers of the most lazy, sloppy, pathetic, festering drivel ... and writers who mindlessly rely on auto-correct/spell-checker, and never bother to look up word definitions and synonyms, are also pathetic and awful. It's either the arrogance, ignorance, or laziness, but those notions/beliefs/habits are possessed by the worst (and most stubborn) writers.
So... 1 it's not important what you say but how you say it. 2 it's not important what you say but how you say it. 3 Don't write what you know, write what normies want to read. 4 If you are writing a book, write a book, not a screen play. Make sure to tell the audience what the characters are feeling, not show them. 5 Less is more. 6 Get out your cookie cutter and follow the formula. Also, Don't use every cookie cutter you have in your drawer. 7 It's not how you say it but what you say. Got it. 8 Your creative writing/literature degree was a waste of time and money.
You can really tell where the emphasis is on writing today: brevity. None of this "advice" explains how great authors like Tolkien wrote, because according to this he committed most of the "mistakes." If you want to make a quick sale or "climb the ladder," this constitutes worthy advice. If not, this constitutes suggestions only.
Hunter S Thompson said he learned to write by copying The Great Gatsby over and over, word for word. Also, Steven King is the single most overrated writer in the history of writing and no advice given about him or from him should be taken.
"Steven King is the single most overrated writer in the history of writing and no advice given about him or from him should be taken." This, a thousand times.
The funny thing is that most of the authors I come across in forums etc. turn out to be Pantsers. More than that, many claim that their characters live in their head and they are the ones who write the book and that the author has no idea what's going on or where the story is going or how it will end. I've read so many posts where the author says they were totally amazed at what happened in the story because the characters did something totally unexpected.
Love your tips! Years ago I made a video about the 7 deadly sins of screenwriting:
1. Stereotypical characters (like the Manic Pixie Dream Girl)
2. No dramatic throughline (the goal of the main character)
3. No clear conflict (characters going through the motions on the surface, but no actual meaning behind the scenes)
4. Repeating the same story beat over and over again (there should be a progression)
5. A Deus Ex Machina plot resolution
6. No self-revelation for the main characters in the end (the viewer will ask himself why he watched the movie in the first place)
7. The it was all just a dream plot resolution (the biggest betrayal of the audience)
Please don't stop making these "back to basics" videos. I always feel like at least something you've said has made me consider some aspect of my approach in a new way, always valuable perspective. I don't listen to this kind of stuff from any other youtubers. Thanks.
I was my D&D group's DM most of the time growing up so now when I write I constantly view it through the lens of "Would the players be interested and having fun at this moment if this were a role-playing game".
Well this explains how disney star wars was made. :P
Reportedly, Abrams, Johnson, and (at the time) Trevarrow DID have at least one meeting to discuss the overall story of the sequel trilogy, but obviously it wasn't enough given how Abrams and Johnson were completely out of sync with each other (and Trevarrow later left the project).
@@Stratelier ,
I thought he couldn't get a script approved and was fired?
@@aralornwolf3140 Either way Trevarrow had to "leave" the project, with Abrams trying to finish what he started.
As much as I love TV Tropes for giving me a vast encyclopedia of genres and writing techniques to flip through while doing research, it has probably single-handedly launched the epidemic of pseduo-intellectual critique channels on youtube and given rise to a generation of writers who think novelty and subversion are priority no. 1 in fiction. I would not be the least bit surprised to hear that Rian Johnson starts any project he gets by going to TV Tropes.
Editing while writing is a mistake I made early on. My continuity became pretty messy because of it. Overall, a tip that's been super useful for my workflow is to just write, even when you feel it in your stomach that what you're writing is bad. And keep writing until you have a finished draft. It's easier to edit bad work than to edit no work.
Nice one.
Just writing is a good way to get a feel for what you want. It’s a great exploratory process. But I find I always go back and organize the thing, rewriting it from scratch but in a far better form.
I actually have to edit as I write. If I wait until the end of the story to do editing, I often find that there are too many mistakes to go back and fix.
The way I do it is I write a scene ro a bunch. Next day I come back and correct spelling errors etc. and make basic corrections. Sometimes minor editing. Next day I write next scene. After some significant part is done I make very basic editing-looking for incosistencies etc. I read the whole thing and note the elements that need fixing. I never do actual editing untill i finish. Its just too much work that is diverting your attention from writing.
@@batman5224 I'm the same. The process is just personal preference IMO no "right way". I am the most effective and efficient with my writing by switching between creative bursts and editing bursts. I don't like sticking in creative mode for an entire draft personally because it can very easily become a big mess by the time your done.
But if your shifting between creative and editing while you go through the draft its much harder for potential narrative problems that you don't notice to pop up and mess your whole story up. When those problems come up it can easily turn into a domino effect of problems that need to be addressed. And that is not a fun thing to deal with when it happens.
But some people are super clean when they're in creative mode and they know exactly what they need to keep track of and what direction they need to take. But I usually have too many details I'm throwing in and I tend to write very loosely in the creative phase so that doesn't work for me.
Recent grad of an MFA program in genre fiction here, and I would add to your list. First, reading your genre. Being an expert, or at least a specialist, in your genre of choice. I couldn't believe how many "writers" in my program wanted to write mystery because they loved crime shows, or fantasy writers wanted to write fantasy because they liked anime. When I would say, "Why don't you write a screen play," or what have you, I was always looked at as if I just didn't get their vision. I even had a girl who wanted to write "black space opera" because there were too many white space operas. When I asked what drew her to the genre if she didn't like space operas, she admitted she'd never read any and said that gave her an advantage in the market because she was going to be a new voice. Listen, any new writers out there: do not do this. If you want to write fantasy, read fantasy. Read the greats, read the hypes, read the fails, read it all and mine 'em all for what you want to do/not do with your stories. Every story is a learning tool. And while watching anime and crime shows might give you some insights in what you want in your story, it does not teach you how to write it as a novel. Sounds simple but some will make you wonder.
Also, not as glaring an issue but definitely noticeable: live. Get some life experiences. As a fantasy writer, I would see this problem a lot in critique groups when we would look at someone's new fight scene, or when looking at someone's new, hot sex scene in their romance. Everything would be set up well, but then the execution of the fight or sex would be treated just as matter-of-fact as the set up. It would be as if the fight was being watched from ring side but the POV would be 3rd limited. I could tell the person had never been in a fight or else they wouldn't have written it so cleanly. Now, I'm not saying that person had to go get in a fight to write it convincingly, but I think this is a problem of a lot of aspiring writers. Since reading and writing is a solitary pursuit and often associated with kids who prefer indoor activities, aspiring writers can rely too heavily on what they've read or have seen in the movies and they try to translate that to the page even when dealing with something that requires a certain level of research or lived experience to accurately portray it. This is similar to your point on "head movies," but goes deeper because I think we as audiences have accepted a certain level of "Hollywooding" of experiences (ie, things are reduced to surface level), and it's a flaw. And, if corrected, can turn a mediocre novel into one with some substance. A so-so military drama can become recommended reading if just the little details of military life are added that just tell the reader I'm reading and learning about something worthwhile because I'm learning about a new, real place even if that military drama is set a thousand years in the future.
@ClandestineOstrich I concur with a majority of your post, excluding the _"As for the second paragraph, it would require exceptional genius to be able to pull that off in an impactful way"_ point. Allow me, an unpublished random guy in a youtube comment who recently completed what he believes is his first novel, to elaborate. I agree with the OP that living is important, as writing about things that have happened to you is both easier and easier to make more realistic and visceral. But I disagree that it'd require exceptional genius to pull off a good "simulation of experience", if you will. (Though if I'm wrong and genius is required, I thank you for the compliment!)
But even though I've never been in a swordfight, or in a real fistfight after I grew up, that doesn't stop me from describing them in what I believe is an effective manner. Keeping the basics in check (utilise as many senses as possible, etc.) and placing yourself in your character should be enough to make it good enough. I see it as method acting, except that the writer has to method act for all of his characters. How would it feel to have a blade slice into your shoulder? The shock of pain dulled by adrenaline, the force imparted on you, the tactile grinding of steel on bone that you experience through your body? What about being tackled to the ground by surprise and having your head slam into the cobbles? Blunt impact when you hit the ground, searing pain in the head that persists afterwards, momentary disorientation, the air escaping your lungs? How would it feel to kick someone in the ribs? The delight of vengeance as you defeat the thug that attacked you, the panicked shock of disabling the attacker before you run away, or the joy of beating your victim to a pulp if you were the attacker, coupled with the resistance of the flesh under your boot, the grunting or shouting of the fallen victim, and the pain in the toes after repeated kicks?
I'd argue that indeed, we draw upon life experiences when, and only one who has experienced a lot will have a large "vocabulary" to draw from, but I'd posit that you can faithfully represent a situation you've never been in. You just have to put yourself in your character's place. Well, and read a lot about how things would feel, too.
Thanks for the shout outs, David!
#7 "no plan" -- It strikes me that if nothing else, having some sort of plan will help you write something where your (potential and inevitable) errors become more obvious. You can then lay out whatever your story is, get it done, and then reread and see what the totality of the story needs and whether you've done it (at all or well). It's another way into story, you might say. I think Stephen King can be rightly criticized for stories that are often overly long and repetitious. While they might still be decent, how much better would they be if he was able to cut the superfluous? Thanks for the video!
Wisdom.
Ahabite Stephen King doesn’t get enough flack for this, most of his books lead to nowhere and have the same characters in them.
@@christianbjorck816 I think I know what you mean. There will be, of course, those who view his stuff as categorically bad since he's a genre fiction writer. But, correct me if I'm wrong (please), you are saying he often doesn't get well-deserved flack from his fellow genre fictionistas? I think there does come a point when reputation that you deserved for some great past work, becomes a reputation you don't always work to maintain with current work. Did I read you correctly? Thanks for the comment
Ahabite Yes preciscely what I meant! I think he has done some good work, though he’s not one of my favorites I can acknowledge that, but most of his writing isn’t that great and could use heavy editing and other types of characters/plots. He lives a bit too much on old success.
@@christianbjorck816 There's a funny story that Stephen King tells about his fans telling him that their favourite/his best book is The Stand (published in 1978)! I've read a ton of King and some of his books are nearly as thick as cinder blocks, and don't need to be. I'm looking at you Desperation...I wonder, and this might be a parallel point, to what degree his editor even bothers with editing. I guess it goes back to the reputation of the writer somewhat. I mean, if King is selling and could probably sell an itemized laundry list, why go overboard editing?
It does put me in mind of the rewriting King did on his Dark Tower series. And I confess, I don't know how to separate the young me's love for the Gunslinger (original edition) from the disappointment I felt reading King's rewritten version. Does removing some purple prose from the original make it better? Or does it merely sanitize it?
I guess it depends on what 'better' means...
One last point: I think the frequency of King's publications works against him. I do support the draft as fast as possible (Bradbury) approach but I also think careful (slow) planning works well with the fast drafting (in my opinion). I dunno, I'd love to be in King's position in some ways, but I also think his reputation has sort of trapped him.
If you are interested, there is a great interview/conversation between King and GRR Martin that addresses the fast vs. slow writing approaches.
Soooo good. I'd love to see you breakdown a story that was "written by the seat of the author's pants" and analyze it.
I can never unseen the anime Mary and child.
I'm a 'by the seat of my pants' writer. Mind you, for my epic fantasy/sci-fi novel I wrote out a three page synopsis first. I eventually got to a point where I'd surpased what I had written for the synopsis, but by then everything was so well established I had plenty to go on ... but in doing so I've done the exact opposite of write myself into a corner ... I've written myself into a wide open field with an endless horizon. And that I find quite daunting.
Only been writing since November of 2019 and I've already seen improvement. Just keep writing. + Make notes as you learn new techniques, then when editing happens, go back and use your new skills to spruce up the draft into something even more fun. He's right, you have to learn by doing and then mold it into later versions of your series. Its ok to have clay in the beginning. That's what drafts are for. I use excel spreadsheet to keep the events and timeline coherent in my series. Along with quick character references. If you are stuck on a scene, I just put in what I want the character to do for that part, plus how it ties into the plot, then move on. When I have a firmer idea of what to write, Ill go back and flesh it out.
Great advice on emphasizing plot and character vs. theme/politics. I made the no-outline mistake, but OTOH I discovered a lot about my world by fumbling through. That said, I won’t be making the same mistake again. Another mistake I made was latching onto an idea that was always too big for one book. Start with a little idea, because it will grow in the telling.
Freestyle writer here. I've tried outlines, and they don't work for me. They actually cause writer's block. As soon as I try to force the story into following an outline, I avoid writing. Within a day, I say the heck with it, toss the outline and write the story as it comes to me. I've found the things that make this style not work for many gets solved after writing a lot. I visualize the story many times before I write a scene, so that may be what helps me avoid the problems others have with this method.
I've been writing for decades both fiction and non-fiction. The non-fiction helped me be concise and edit to word count. In magazines and newspapers, you get only X-amount of words, so I needed to learn how to tell the full 'story' within those guidelines. I'm always looking for ways to improve my writing, and that keeps moving me closer to where I want to be as a writer.
One mistake new writers sometimes make is they ask dozens of opinions for their first novel. Beta readers won't like or dislike the same things, and new writers either want to please them all or value their advice above their own instincts. Ask 2 or 3 people, then edit it the best to your ability, then work with an editor to polish it. But don't spend years editing. Get it done and move on to the next project. One can learn only so much from each project. Let them go. Looking back, it's easy to see the progress of experience with each project.
My first fantasy novel, "Shadows in the Stone", lost some of its essence because it was edited to death with too many opinions of others being applied. I tried to inject the spark back in after I realised it, but it was difficult to reclaim what was lost.
Re. point 7
I find myself still often getting stuck with writer's block when writing a chapter. Not because I don't have an outline of what is going to happen. I do have one; for both the story at large and for what is going to happen in each actual chapter. It's just that I often get stuck trying to execute those ideas. Like spending time trying to get the flow of a conversation right so that it naturally hits all the subjects I need it to cover. Do you have a suggestion or tip to overcome issues like this or is it simply a result of my inexperience?
Love your videos as always and I hope you respond.
Think about the value of that scene, is it really important to the story. If not just cut it and move on, but if you need it for important character development or story beat then just be patient and work through it.
Try to imagine flow of the scene in your head before actually writing it. Bit by bit what is happening and what is being said. Do not rely on notes. Notes are abstract and show nothing, only intent of the scene. You need to play it in your head before you will write it down. You need rehersal. If you try to write without it typically you will jam your brain with too much things to consider and to do at once. Yo do not have to immediatelly write it down. You can leave it for a while. Like a day. Treat this as wrting, but in your head, its not a waste of time, its part of the process. The next day force yourself to sit down and write what you have seen the day before. This should help, because now you have "seen" the scene in action, and your brain should be free to simply express it.
Just write. If you have to, put a place marker there and get back to it later, let it process in the back of your mind for a while while you move on. Write, even if you're just going to have to edit it out later; it's like you're panning for gold, just write until you hit upon what you've been looking for. While writing, you might pull a brilliant nugget out of your ass that surprises even you, then you can go back and make full use of it, set it up. Maybe you'll find that something isn't as important as you originally thought and the story is better off without it. Move on, don't dwell or stay stuck on what's blocking you, you can come back to it, don't let that molehill become a mountain that completely shuts you down with frustration.
Everyone struggles with execution; it's difficult (compared to planning) by its very nature. The best you can do is just make an attempt now, and if it's not working (say it's not going in the right direction to reach the destination) give yourself some time working on other things to identify whether you need to make another attempt at the same, or swap it out for something else entirely.
I am a pantser with ADD. I’ve tried to plot and I end up frustrated and bored to death. But what I found what worked for me was creating a character bible, a giant map , on poster board, of my fictional village and filling in the names of shops, restaurants etc and aligning them with characters and my character bible. It’s kind of a hybrid pants/plot idea.
As chance would have it, I just watched this after reading Drink We Deep by Arthur Leo Zagut, which is a textbook example of great execution. He follows the pulp novel formula closely enough, but the execution is amazing. He plays with the formula, gives readers what they expect in interesting ways, introduces unexpected elements that fit and spur on the suspense. Worth checking out as an example.
I'd love to hear your point of view on linear and non-linear chronology when telling a story; like including flashbacks, prequels (before the story is finished chronologically) etc. How this can impact audience retention levels is something I've been curious about.
For example, the character of Darth Vader and how we are given his story in non-chronological order with the introduction of the prequels after the original trilogy. If we started from his childhood we might have a better appreciation in regards to his sacrifices, but on the other hand the impact he has as we see him in the original trilogy would be far weaker, not to mention completely nullify Luke's shocking revelation about his father.
I’d say contradicting themes is a big one and that the language doesn’t feel consistent. Take Moby Dick for example, that book uses the sea for metaphors and language. ”Feelings came crashing like waves” and the like. It had been very odd if Melville started to use farming terminology in a large capacity later in the book to describe things if they were still at sea. You want to keep your language somewhat connected to your themes and characters. And if you abandon your theme halfway through then the reader will think ”then why do I need to read the rest?”
Let’s say the theme of Moby Dick had been ”whale hunting is bad” and the author builds that up, with the main character regretfully on the ship, hating the crew and what they do only to result in the main character killing the whale mid way and he is making a lot of money from said kill, then living happily ever after without reflecting on what happend. Then you have failed to convey your theme and usually it turns into a mess.
Always dig your videos. Another thing to remember about “flying by the seat of your pants”: pilots were able to do this with their planes because they learned their planes inside out and gained considerable experience in their air flying them. They wouldn’t allow them to take on such dangerous missions until they gained that king of experience. Not if they wanted to win the war.
I think that 1, 4, and 7 can use a little arguing and additional explanation.
1) I think early author attempts actually get deeply stuck here since they just learn how to worldbuild and don't want to mess up, then some actually start enjoying it so much they get stuck absolutely overplanning their world (and to a lesser extent the story, too). It could be good as some practice in creating worlds if you know where and when to stop. I net-know a person who only ever wrote 1 Naruto fanfic in their life now trying to create a book series. They planned it to be an 8 PARTER, but for a long while they were now stuck on what appears to be several scenes from crucial story points spread across their books along with a (badly in need of review and rewrite) initial part of what may not even be considered the first draft, below 10k words. They have this huge world they CONSTANTLY talk about and make small revisions to and at this point I basically warned them they will run out of enthusiasm before they finish their first book at this rate. And they wanna do 8 in that world.
4) I feel like this is a "if you know what you are doing" situation. Some quiet moments of respite are very helpful in characterization and letting the reader catch a breather too, but it is easy to accidentally write pointless scenes sometimes
7) I do think "Gardeners" have a more difficult time "getting" their creative process. If you completelt by-the-pants something, you will likely end up with something you can use more like an extensive outline or very bad first draft in need of multiple reviews and rewrites. Which is not very terrible if you have the time. But if we go with the idea that gardeners create the story in their head thanks to the characters and settings as they go, we do arrive at a good piece of advice. Those deeper into the architect zone generally do well by knowing and successfully establishing their plot first. Those deeper in the gardener side need not only a grasp of how their world works, but REALLY need to know their characters to an UNUSUAL (even 'voices in my head level) degree to be able to push them through the grinder while discovering the story on the go to come up with something decent. And then they need another crucial thing : Brakes on that thing, a.k.a knowing when to actually finish the story.
1) Being afraid to make a bold character, either by toning down a character that would generate backlash, or amping up a character in fear that SHE won't come off strong and independant enough for a reader not to complain. Don't let social politics and busybodies ruin a good character.
2) Drugs/alcohol won't make you a literary genius.
Those who don't follow 1) tend to end up falling into 2)
Let this first comment be in appreciation of the wisdom and knowledge you impart unto us
I've been on both sides of number 7 -- jumping into the writing with no concrete plan and either I recognize a direction pretty quickly, or writer's block sets in when the initial creative dash wears off. The best part? Taking time to actually WRITE DOWN a plan (i.e. outline) before starting doesn't even help me in this regard.
It's not about the ideas, it's about the execution - thank you, that's sobering to hear; in a good way.
On the Seat-of-your-pants writing approach, however - one has to remember that Stephen King was getting *a ton* of rejections before Carrie got published. So it's very likely that this approach does work, but one has to practice a lot for it to work.
This is a video I can see myself revisiting often. Seems pretty simple pitfalls that writers would naturally fall into.
Thanks for the tips. Much appreciated.
Personally, I attempt to use tropes either to subvert them (yawn) or also as a shorthand. If I can convey a large amount of information in a very simple way, then trope it is.
Your #7 is completely personal style.
This is advise for inexperienced writers. He explains aplenty that SK can do that _because he has experience_ .
Ouch, #1 is me all the way. That hurts XD
I'm definitely a #1 and #7.
Big mistake: Not putting down the finished MS first draft before beginning editing. Walk away, work on a new MS or something else for at least a month, then come back.
Cannot be stressed enough! Taking time away avoids creative exhaustion (burnout) and provides time to find new ideas.
For example, in one of my mental worldbuilding settings I eliminated one of its 'stock fantasy species' (gryphons) because (1) the same setting has feathered dragons (which could get confused with gryphons already), and (2) I've spent more time ruminating on winged manticores and determined they integrate better with specific characters and backstories.
Hollywood seems to have forgotten this.
Agreed pretty much entirely with this. Some points...ehh...I have various other opinions on, but... Still really enjoyed and learned from the video, David! Keep spouting your wisdom upon us simple authors and readers.
Re: ideas vs execution: I think you hit on why the Star War prequels failed: Lucas had some great ideas, but couldn't execute them without a lot of help from others. The Disney sequels seem to have gone the other way: some quality execution, but no ideas to speak of.
I'd like to write a story (although I don't know if it'll be a serialized web comic or just a book) I'm not an experienced writer, how should I plan it out? How do I world/character built the right way or how to start?
There is no wrong way to start this endeavor. You will learn more through your first writing attempts then you could possibly gain listening to me prattle on, so give it a try.
I would start with a simple story treatment. A couple of characters and what they do. What are their goals and who is trying to stop them. How are they going to succeed and where are they going to fail.
Then start writing the prose and see what happens.
@@DVSPress That's true, I get too invested in the "right way" sort of thinking school gets you into, haha. Yeah, I think some simple short stories to test some waters first and prototype the character would be the best way, and just see what i can pull out of it.
David, could you do a video about how to write an engaging and fun quest for an rpg game (I'm thinking of Skyrim or Fallout 4)?
Kraven83 The elder scrolls and the fallout series are very different. For the quest to be engaging it will likely have to tie into the lore and story. If the quest could be put into either game then it may be bland and predictable.
Think outside the box but keep it close so you can pull what you need from it
Have you read Shad M. Brooks' (channel Shadaversity) novel "Shadow of the Conqueror" yet? If so, I'd like to see a review from you, and I think he'd appreciate some feedback as well. I thought he did a pretty good job at world-building, establishing a magic system and making fleshed-out characters. :D
If I read it, it's because I want to read it. I probably won't give "Feedback" - I'd rather just enjoy the story.
@@DVSPress Fair enough. He's picked up some good traits from Brandon Sanderson for sure.
I guess planning isn't for me. something about following a predetermined path kills the fun, so I end up losing interest and abandoning the project. even if I push through and finish it, the quality is never as good as when I improvise. when just let everything play out naturally, without trying to funnel the events into a specific sequence, the descriptions are richer, and everything just flows better.
Do the same concepts apply to short stories? Those could be a good start for new writers, am i right?
If you like to read short stories, then writing short stories is fine. Most writers I meet, however, want to write novels, and the two things are very different beasts and require different approaches. Some short stories contain no dialogue, for example, and this is fine for that format, but terrible for a novel.
Short stories can give you good practice with dialogue and prose, which will transfer to writing novels. The bigger lessons about characters and plot, not so much.
How many of us wannabe writers just want to entertain? I always hear about the self insert fantasy or the soap box or the big brain running amok. Anyone else out their who just wants to take folks for a ride then bump fists afterward? Is that not enough to form a foundation for a novel?
That sound be the foundation of every novel 👊
It's good to have a plot and characters in mind to go with that energy.
I forgot to make a main character active. I had to gut a book and stitch it back together to fix that mistake.
It's okay for a MC to be reactive sometimes, especially at the beginning of a story. Luke Skywalker doesn't start out with a mission to overthrow the empire, after all.
@@DVSPress This was the middle of book 3, otherwies it would be more forgiveable. It made for a better book though.
good point on the political ideologies in books there are so many authors right now that love to preach at the reader and its so annoying
I can relate to several of these, but am sort of struggling with #2 in a peculiar way.
I'm in a wheelchair due to having essentially no legs and only 1.5 arms (congenital thing). I'm working on a sci-fi/space opera-ish story set in a different universe. I've been planning on having one of my main characters also be missing some appendages. The same ones, actually.
On the one hand, given our anatomical similarities, as well as him being interested in philosophy like I am, this could feel like an author-insert character. On the other hand, he's not the only protagonist, he's not going to be a Mary-Sue type, and I think the whole no-legs angle could make for interesting storytelling (or at least "flavor" or "color," since his disability will not be essential to any particular plot point).
So I'm torn.
I can relate (although in a lesser severity, an operation on my spine years ago)
I guess the Question(s) you can ask yourself is:
What difference would it make, if the character doesn't have this "specific similarity to myself"?
Would something similar also work? Or is there an underlying theme, that can be explored (additionally / independently) that complements the story?
What about this is relatable to the intended reader/audience?
Is it a relevant part of the character arc? Or does it help / make the story flow better (maybe a moment when the char imparts experience on another character)?
I, for myself, wouldn't copy my own life experience directly - instead there is a character which has (for example) lived through an accident which caused brain damage, or the character is stubborn and restless when sick, another might struggle with his/her own body image because of scar tissue or self-confidence issues
Having a character that is disabled like you doesn't necessarily mean an author insert as I am talking about it. I mean something that is more like a power fantasy or primarily about a fantasy of yours - like if you make your main character a best-selling author who is secretly a spy.
Disabled characters can be very interesting. Disability was actually on my list of ways to Make a protagonist likeable.
@@DVSPress Got me thinking. I agree, it's not an insert, more like a "tricky subject"
In my irl experience there is a risk of a halo effect, where people really focus on the impairment, would surely be worth a surprise, when a character succeeds in a task which might seem "impossible" but s/he has a strategy/ace to deal with it.
Also: Pity isn't Sympathy, People that are "shocked" by the revelation of disability might (want to) emotionally detach themselves
Just have to say your profile picture makes you look kin of like Mable from Gravity falls from that episode where she wore a suit
1:41 I keep hearing people say this, but I disagree and think it’s the other way around: 1984 is ONLY remembered because it had good ideas, and NOT because it had an interesting plot or characters. The “story” is simply a vehicle for Orwell to express his political ideas. From a literary standpoint, the story itself is forgettable and it’s only redeeming qualities are it’s ability to weave the message into the setting and it’s simplicity. People only talk about the ideas and themes when discussing the book and rarely ever mention the characters by name. The plot is just a setup for Winston’s eventual betrayal, and characters themselves are one dimensional. Only three characters are named and they are all one dimensional. Consider their motivations:
Winston is simply an audience surrogate whose only motive is to find out information about the world on the readers behalf and not get in trouble while doing it. He has no other interests or goals. He DOES have a backstory (albeit a vague one), but that only highlights the fact that none of the other characters do.
O’ Brien is a mustache-twirling bad guy whose sole motivation is to serve the party. Making him conflicted about his actions or forced to obey orders he disagrees with to save himself or his family would have fleshed him out, but we get none of that. The Fire Chief in Fahrenheit 451 was a better O’ Brien-type character because it’s implied that he used to love the thing he now fights against.
And then there’s Julia, whose despite being one of only three characters who has a name, has zero personality outside of wanting to have sex with Winston. That’s her only motivation. When Winston tries to strike up a conversation that isn’t about sex, she brushes him off. She has zero agency and never says or does anything that fundamentally alters the plot in any way. She’s so irrelevant that she could literally be replaced with a pillow and nothing would change because the story is entirely a struggle between Winston and the Party, which O’ Brien is the personification of.
Big Brother is a personification of an otherwise faceless organization, NOT a character. We don’t even know if he even exists or is just a fictional character/mascot like Uncle Sam or Mickey Mouse, but most people make the mistake of seeing him as a person (such as a stand-in for Stalin) when he is really just an idea. - In my opinion, the personality cult around him isn't even the most important idea in the book (Orwell wrote an entire appendix about Newspeak but doesn't even give us a single quote from B.B.), but 90% of discussion around the book acts like it is.
It also falls victim to point #1, wherein the book is consumed with worldbuilding such that it even stops halfway through to deliver a lecture about how the party functions instead of weaving it into the plot like a good author would.
I've had two main takeaways from my creative writing classes - write what a character feels and not just what is happening (character-driven stories), and plot is always about motion (internal or external). But this is creative writing and not literature. As far as literature class is concerned, they're supposed to teach critical thinking, aren't they? This basically means that you learn how to analyze literature but not how to write it. This is the same as how hearing, reading, speaking, and writing a language all use different skills. I'd expect a literature class to help with writing but definitely not to make your writing better.
Can anyone give me examples of what he means by prepping before writing. Is it like a check list or specific steps to build up towards
I don't remember exact titles, but browse through his Storycraft playlist; you should find plenty in there. If you have time, check out his Writestreams too.
In this case, I think he's referring to having an outline of the story to help you pull through the writers block. It should be easier to carry on if you at least have broad strokes of what comes next than if you have naught.
@@1COMODIN9 I will check those videos out thank you.
I'm trying to figure out how to keep my writting productive and this video was very informative.
I have a lot of loose ideas and concept characters I want to make a story for but I just dont have the disciple or knowledge to make an intresting story. I can never seem to finish a though and I think its because I dont understand the guidelines.
I'm going to start with a few short sentence summaries and pic the best one, then I'll choose a theme I want to explore and hopefully I can make characters fit in somehow.
For anyone reading, any tips for preparing/prepping would be much appreciated
Thank you
The biggest mistake I can think of that is not on the list is over explaining magic or technology systems. For example, Paolini's "Inheritance Cycle" ended up with a decent first book however about half way through the second book we learn everything about the magic system so it becomes boring. Or "Voyager" where all the technobabble results explanations that obviously make no sense and are continuously contradicted. Neither one used an info dump to do it.
If you contrast that to books like "Lord of the Rings" or "The Dragon Riders of Pern" the magic system is never explained and anything that magically happens is fantastic and even if it is commonly done it remains extraordinary. Another example from film is "Farscape" where literally nothing is explained almost to the point where the setting boarders on a bizaro world but because we do not and cannot understand the world so we just have to trust it and it becomes very difficult to say what is and what is not possible.
Yes over explaining fantastical systems can rob some of the mystery and fantasy from a story. What I think of is the vampire Chronicles books after the third one. All of the origins were explained so there was really nothing else to learn about this mysterious vampire society.
I generally describe myself as a pants-er but anything over 20k words I need to start making notes character bios and so on or it all becomes impossible to remember.
What does he mean about execution, like a character taking action and connecting Event's
Execution just means what the actual final product looks like. To use an example, the broad-summary idea of Lord of the Rings is pretty much just "A group of friends and a wise wizard go on a journey to destroy an evil artifact."
What made LOTR so good to so many people was the execution; exactly how the personalities, character-arcs/growth, the flow from one event to the next, etc. was presented to the audience.
Using painting as another example, two artists could paint a representation of the exact same landscape, but if one artist has badly-done lines/messy paint-application while the other artist's painting is vivid and clear, people are going to prefer the second painting even though they were both painting the same thing.
TL;DR: It's not just what you do; most of the work (and success) lies in how you do it.
@@Brawl847 ok I think I'm starting to understand like I can have all these cool characters, location and scenes but how they play out is the meat of it all. And like you mention there would be different techniques to make those aspects shine, dynamic characters and exciting dramatic events that connect to each other in some sort of harmony beyond just: this happens then this happens.
@@romanruano1369 Exactly; you've got it. The tricky part is that there really isn't a definitively *RIGHT* way to go about it. You can learn how *NOT* to do things by looking at stories that aren't good and finding out why people didn't like it, but you'll still have to figure out your particular schtick; your 'style' of making things play out in an interesting way. Your story's sense of humor, how characters dress/behave, how graphic or kid-friendly the content is, etc.
Speaking from experience, it won't come quick; I've been writing for nearly a decade, and I'm only just now really starting to realize what my style truly is. The best route is to just write and rewrite, keep moving forward, and eventually you'll look back and start to notice how you tend to do things.
Another good bit of advice I wish I knew from the start is to not get paranoid and shut yourself off from entertainment (movies, tv, etc.) out of fear that you'll subconsciously plagiarize everything you see. While straight-up _plagiarism_ is terrible, you can still look at how another writer executed a story/scene/character/etc. that you like and see if it inspires you to try doing things a certain way in your stuff.
you keep saying these are mistakes new authors make but I've been seeing this stuff with Brandon Sanderson's latest works and Michael J. Sullivan.
Editing and Revisions are the most important things you need to face. Any writer who thinks their stuff is good after the first draft is a delusional idiot and their stuff sucks. Editing, cutting out as much crap as you can after you've written it, is a painful and necessary thing; it's something every writer has to sit down and do with an almost callous seriousness, their story will be better for it. And revisions, many many many revisions, are required to truly make a story good; you are the master of the future and past, you can play revisionist history as much as you need to to make yourself seem like a brilliant writer who had all the steps planned out -- so do that, go back and iron out all the wrinkles and plant all the seeds that will come to beautiful fruition -- don't think that the work you just hammered out is even worth showing to another human being, if you can be bothered to polish it at all then it isn't worth anyone's time to read. Writers who refuse to edit, and don't think that their story needs any revisions, are the worst writers of the most lazy, sloppy, pathetic, festering drivel ... and writers who mindlessly rely on auto-correct/spell-checker, and never bother to look up word definitions and synonyms, are also pathetic and awful. It's either the arrogance, ignorance, or laziness, but those notions/beliefs/habits are possessed by the worst (and most stubborn) writers.
How could I learn to be a better writer, without wasting money on a school?
Learn by doing.
Just try. Don't worry about being good at the start.
If you want to write, just write. Aspiring neurosurgeons can't approach their craft that way...
The truth is, most literature classes make up a bunch of bullshit that the author never intended.
So...
1 it's not important what you say but how you say it.
2 it's not important what you say but how you say it.
3 Don't write what you know, write what normies want to read.
4 If you are writing a book, write a book, not a screen play. Make sure to tell the audience what the characters are feeling, not show them.
5 Less is more.
6 Get out your cookie cutter and follow the formula. Also, Don't use every cookie cutter you have in your drawer.
7 It's not how you say it but what you say.
Got it.
8 Your creative writing/literature degree was a waste of time and money.
When I think of "normies" I think of something like batman versus superman. So, no, don't right to those guys.
Yeah Creative Writing Programs are worth shit!
You can really tell where the emphasis is on writing today: brevity. None of this "advice" explains how great authors like Tolkien wrote, because according to this he committed most of the "mistakes."
If you want to make a quick sale or "climb the ladder," this constitutes worthy advice. If not, this constitutes suggestions only.
THEY KILLED WARCRAFT 3! *throws chair*
Hunter S Thompson said he learned to write by copying The Great Gatsby over and over, word for word. Also, Steven King is the single most overrated writer in the history of writing and no advice given about him or from him should be taken.
"Steven King is the single most overrated writer in the history of writing and no advice given about him or from him should be taken."
This, a thousand times.
The funny thing is that most of the authors I come across in forums etc. turn out to be Pantsers. More than that, many claim that their characters live in their head and they are the ones who write the book and that the author has no idea what's going on or where the story is going or how it will end. I've read so many posts where the author says they were totally amazed at what happened in the story because the characters did something totally unexpected.
Lol, that's denying that you have a process, the opposite of what DVS does, which is teaching about it.