- Joined
- Feb 13, 2005
- Messages
- 6,876
- Reaction score
- 663
The most helpful thing
- Thread starter Galoot
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2005
- Messages
- 6,876
- Reaction score
- 663
Zornhau and Oswann hit on my "second most important learning experience."
Early on, I had trouble with the "murder your darlings/cut ruthlessly." I tried too hard to tell the story and the result was overkill. When it came time to edit, I kept telling myself there had to be a valid reason I created a character or installed a scene in the first place. Eventually, I learned that cutting was esstential, and that nothing was sacred.
Overwriting is like putting all those damn "Keep America Beautiful" billboards along scenic strectches of the Natchez Trace. The intentions are good, but in the end, you've only cluttered up a pristine landsacpe with a bunch of ugly signs that no one really needs.
Early on, I had trouble with the "murder your darlings/cut ruthlessly." I tried too hard to tell the story and the result was overkill. When it came time to edit, I kept telling myself there had to be a valid reason I created a character or installed a scene in the first place. Eventually, I learned that cutting was esstential, and that nothing was sacred.
Overwriting is like putting all those damn "Keep America Beautiful" billboards along scenic strectches of the Natchez Trace. The intentions are good, but in the end, you've only cluttered up a pristine landsacpe with a bunch of ugly signs that no one really needs.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 43,746
- Reaction score
- 8,654
- Location
- Los Angeles
- Website
- www.amazon.com
I have a different problem. I tend to "underwrite." I find myself having to pad and elaborate and expand on things after my first draft. I do cut stuff that becomes non-essential to the story, but as far as the main story goes, I find myself having to add dialogue, characterization, descriptions, and details for show vs. tell during subsequent drafts.
Edit
I won't argue with you. I've simply learned that, for me, when something is bad, editing and rewriting does little or no good.
It's something I first heard from Isaac Asimov many years ago. He said that he soon learned that when a story wasn't working, that when the first draft was bad, he could never rewrite it into a good final draft that was acceptable to him. In a sense, that validated the way I write,
Most of my first drafts are good, are nearly publishable, or publishable, as they stand, and need only one run through for editing. This is due partly to being a situational writer, due partly to my natural storytelling style, due partly due to journalistic training, and due partly to experience.
This in no way means I don't write lousy first drafts and lousy stories. I certainly do. I've simply learned that, for me, a lousy first draft is never, ever going to become a first class final draft. I can sometimes get such a draft or story to the point where it's publishable, but it still won't be up to my standards. So the bad first drafts and bad stories get tossed. Throwing them away and writing a different story is my most useful editing technique.
And I certainly agree about the art world. I'm not an artist, except for my own pleasure, but I love painting, primarily in oil and watercolor, and I've tried my hand at other forms. I've also taken some pretty advanced art classes. But that is not at all where my talent lies. As a famous philosopher once said, "A man has got to know his limitations."
Yet I've never forgotten an art professor's reply when I told him I didn't think I had the talent to be a great painter. He said, "In today's art world, lack of talent is an asset."
oswann said:
I won't argue with you. I've simply learned that, for me, when something is bad, editing and rewriting does little or no good.
It's something I first heard from Isaac Asimov many years ago. He said that he soon learned that when a story wasn't working, that when the first draft was bad, he could never rewrite it into a good final draft that was acceptable to him. In a sense, that validated the way I write,
Most of my first drafts are good, are nearly publishable, or publishable, as they stand, and need only one run through for editing. This is due partly to being a situational writer, due partly to my natural storytelling style, due partly due to journalistic training, and due partly to experience.
This in no way means I don't write lousy first drafts and lousy stories. I certainly do. I've simply learned that, for me, a lousy first draft is never, ever going to become a first class final draft. I can sometimes get such a draft or story to the point where it's publishable, but it still won't be up to my standards. So the bad first drafts and bad stories get tossed. Throwing them away and writing a different story is my most useful editing technique.
And I certainly agree about the art world. I'm not an artist, except for my own pleasure, but I love painting, primarily in oil and watercolor, and I've tried my hand at other forms. I've also taken some pretty advanced art classes. But that is not at all where my talent lies. As a famous philosopher once said, "A man has got to know his limitations."
Yet I've never forgotten an art professor's reply when I told him I didn't think I had the talent to be a great painter. He said, "In today's art world, lack of talent is an asset."
"Write what you know... and they don't."
Acceptance wise, it works for me every time. I'd love to write about many things... spaceships, strange lands, MY opinions, MY pet subjects. Most of the time I've discovered that tons of other people hold the same things dear and write about them, which makes my opinions pretty worthless. Not so when I stick to the motto above. We all know certain things that others don't but would love to know.
I learned it the hard way at high school while participating in a writing contest about our town. My wise father insisted that I wrote about the history of our town theatre -- him the leading actor and director, me his daughter, between us two, we knew all about it. Independent, I threw a fit and wrote a SF tale about our town in the future -- probably, like every other contest entry. I lost a writing contest for the first time in my life... and I keep asking myself what would've happened had I written about the theatre.
We all possess some insider knowledge -- use it!
Acceptance wise, it works for me every time. I'd love to write about many things... spaceships, strange lands, MY opinions, MY pet subjects. Most of the time I've discovered that tons of other people hold the same things dear and write about them, which makes my opinions pretty worthless. Not so when I stick to the motto above. We all know certain things that others don't but would love to know.
I learned it the hard way at high school while participating in a writing contest about our town. My wise father insisted that I wrote about the history of our town theatre -- him the leading actor and director, me his daughter, between us two, we knew all about it. Independent, I threw a fit and wrote a SF tale about our town in the future -- probably, like every other contest entry. I lost a writing contest for the first time in my life... and I keep asking myself what would've happened had I written about the theatre.
We all possess some insider knowledge -- use it!
Jamesaritchie said:
Ray Bradbury has said 90% of his writing has never been published.
This is because it was a first draft that didn't work. Either he gets it mostly on with the first draft, or he tosses it into the trunk and never looks at it again.
I used to believe a story could be made in the editing. I now feel the first draft is the foundation. If the foundation is bad, the whole structure is flawed from the get-go.
I still do lots of editing. My favorite part of writing is in the rewriting. I just know if it basically isn't there in the first shot, the percentage is already against it being there in the second shot, so better to cut your loses and move on to the next piece.
Nateskate said:
I am the biggest fan of editing. I take very little pleasure out of writing the first draft. Sometimes staring at the blank page and having to fill it up is like getting a tooth pulled for me.
However, once I've got the first draft set and I feel like the idea is there and it is brought out in the writing, then I really go to town with editing.
Mainly, this means taking a red pen to the prose and making it read clean. It also gives me the chance to restructure and bring out the voice of the work -- which I do through the language by sharpening the lyrical sections, using punctuation to add meaning or to direct the readers focus.
Very rarely do I have to flesh out the main idea of the piece, once I have a first draft. I might add a scene or two, or blow a scene up or diminish it... but very rarely do I have to fudge around with the meaning.
I you have a good foundation, the meaning is part of that, so by having to rethink the meaning, it is tantamount to saying the foundation wasn't quite strong.
Put your ego on hold
Listen to your editor. Really listen with an open mind. Almost anyone's work can be improved. Great editors help you go deeper. Good editors help you improve without altering your voice. Mediocre editors help move the story along by making you cut the flab and get your logical ducks in a row. Bad editors don't last long in professional publishing. Yes, sometimes you'll get advice you disagree with. Sometimes you are right to resist changes. But most of the time, if you separate yourself from your work, you'll find that an editor can improve it. Editors are a bridge from your mind to the mind of your readers. If an editor can explain WHY a certain change should be made, seriously consider the request. You can learn a lot about how to produce PUBLISHABLE work by asking about the rationale behind editor's requests for changes. Learn to accept criticism impersonally (maybe when I'm two hundred and five I'll get there
)
As for reading - read your work aloud. If you find you're not reading what is on the page, change the manuscript. Often you find yourself rewording to a more naturaly syntax and rhythm. What you've written may look beautiful to your eye, but clank to your ear. Never send out a piece you haven't read aloud.
Listen to your editor. Really listen with an open mind. Almost anyone's work can be improved. Great editors help you go deeper. Good editors help you improve without altering your voice. Mediocre editors help move the story along by making you cut the flab and get your logical ducks in a row. Bad editors don't last long in professional publishing. Yes, sometimes you'll get advice you disagree with. Sometimes you are right to resist changes. But most of the time, if you separate yourself from your work, you'll find that an editor can improve it. Editors are a bridge from your mind to the mind of your readers. If an editor can explain WHY a certain change should be made, seriously consider the request. You can learn a lot about how to produce PUBLISHABLE work by asking about the rationale behind editor's requests for changes. Learn to accept criticism impersonally (maybe when I'm two hundred and five I'll get there
)As for reading - read your work aloud. If you find you're not reading what is on the page, change the manuscript. Often you find yourself rewording to a more naturaly syntax and rhythm. What you've written may look beautiful to your eye, but clank to your ear. Never send out a piece you haven't read aloud.
Obviously BIC and writing every day are the most important ones, but one of the niftiest pieces of advice is Uncle Jim Macdonald's "Type up the first chapter from your favourite book" one. I've done this with several pages each of two novels, and one entire short story, and gained a whole new appreciation of some of the ways in which my favourite writers worked.
I'm going to take a few English papers next year to finish off my BA, and might well use this technique to help me with critical appreciation. It's dandy.
I'm going to take a few English papers next year to finish off my BA, and might well use this technique to help me with critical appreciation. It's dandy.
Can I also add:
Read modern examples of your chosen genre* by new** writers
*As I student, I read mostly secondhand novels. I wasted a couple of years trying to become "The Next Lin Carter". Enough said.
**Established writers get a certain licence not afforded to newbies. For this reason, you have to read successful new writers.
Read modern examples of your chosen genre* by new** writers
*As I student, I read mostly secondhand novels. I wasted a couple of years trying to become "The Next Lin Carter". Enough said.
**Established writers get a certain licence not afforded to newbies. For this reason, you have to read successful new writers.
> what is the one single thing which has most helped you become a better writer
Taking on things I'm not sure I can do.
Taking on things I'm not sure I can do.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2005
- Messages
- 1,426
- Reaction score
- 425
Yet I've never forgotten an art professor's reply when I told him I didn't think I had the talent to be a great painter. He said, "In today's art world, lack of talent is an asset."[/QUOTE]
Talent, experience, learning, perseverance, the list goes on. All of the assets that people who aspire to write well accept as tools of the trade. I won't change the debate but I'm glad you took the time to respond Mr. Ritchie.
Os.
Talent, experience, learning, perseverance, the list goes on. All of the assets that people who aspire to write well accept as tools of the trade. I won't change the debate but I'm glad you took the time to respond Mr. Ritchie.
Os.
I would have to say the small on-the-spot writing group I attend. The instant feedback on my instant work helps me to realize that, #1 I'm doing something I love and #2 I may be a little better at it than I thought I was.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2005
- Messages
- 218
- Reaction score
- 94
- Location
- Seattle, WA
- Website
- julianblack.blogspot.com
This may sound odd, but for me it's Slushkiller.
If you haven't yet read it, do so. Read all the comments, too. Then go back and re-read it periodically.
Teresa Nielsen Hayden and Friends haven't necessarily taught me how to write--I'll be working on that one for the rest of my life. What Slushkiller did, however, was teach me how to see my eventual manuscript from the editor's perspective, and ultimately the reader's.
I can write page after page of gramatically correct English prose, with proper spelling. According to Uncle Jim, this puts me far ahead of most slushpile authors. Slushkiller showed me just how far, and in doing so proved not only informative, but one of the most inspiring things I have ever read about writing. By the time I finished reading that thread, I felt much better about both my abilities as a writer and my chances of one day seeing my novels into print.
If you haven't yet read it, do so. Read all the comments, too. Then go back and re-read it periodically.
Teresa Nielsen Hayden and Friends haven't necessarily taught me how to write--I'll be working on that one for the rest of my life. What Slushkiller did, however, was teach me how to see my eventual manuscript from the editor's perspective, and ultimately the reader's.
I can write page after page of gramatically correct English prose, with proper spelling. According to Uncle Jim, this puts me far ahead of most slushpile authors. Slushkiller showed me just how far, and in doing so proved not only informative, but one of the most inspiring things I have ever read about writing. By the time I finished reading that thread, I felt much better about both my abilities as a writer and my chances of one day seeing my novels into print.
Julian Black said:
It does sound odd, but I found the thread comforting, too, for the same reasons. Of course, it's making sure that my technically perfect prose isn't "dull, flaccid and underperforming" that's the hard bit.
Sigh.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2005
- Messages
- 218
- Reaction score
- 94
- Location
- Seattle, WA
- Website
- julianblack.blogspot.com
Well, I've long since outgrown #8 (It’s nice that the author is working on his/her problems, but the process would be better served by seeing a shrink than by writing novels.). I think that describes just about everything I wrote before I hit 30. Thank goodness I didn't buy my first computer until I was 32.SJB said:
Reason #11.--Someone could publish this book, but we don’t see why it should be us--is the one that gives me the willies...
MacAllister
Tired and worried.
El Jefe
Administrator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
VPX
Super Member
Registered
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 22,039
- Reaction score
- 10,839
- Location
- Out on a limb
- Website
- macallisterstone.com
Ah. Ditto what Julian says about Slushkiller. I'd never submitted anything anywhere until I read that essay and the comments that follow. (Found AW from there, too.)
Of course, that may have been a good thing, you understand...
Of course, that may have been a good thing, you understand...
BIC is my personal favorite, but that's been taken. This one has sort of been hit upon, but I think it bears repeating...
Study good writing.
Now, that's a far cry from reading good writing.
Yeah, with reading comes a certain amount of osmotic absorption, but that's expressed in style and tone. What about the other areas? How about structure?
The novel on which I'm working--my first--has revealed some of my own limitations. Frankly, only a few months ago, I was crappy with time. The passage of it, the expression of it, all that stuff. I simply didn't know how to jump smoothly from one day to another or from one month to the next.
So, I picked up Dan Simmons's A Winter Haunting with the intention of studying it while I read it. I wasn't specifically looking for an elixir for my time problems, but darned if I didn't find it.
Right there in those pages, in those chapters, I saw how Simmons took Dale Stewart (his NASCAR driver-sounding protag) from one day to the next, how he muddied the chronological waters when the story called for nebulousness, how he flashed back and cross-cut without boring or confusing the reader.
The whole process is a bit like film editing, and being a Film Lit teacher, I never thought to put my cinematic knowledge to good literary use.
Anyway, the point I'm making is that Simmons taught me a great lesson. So does Elmore Leonard, every time I read his dialogue. Ruth Rendell is teaching me a hell of a lot about how to shift POV without jolting the reader out of the story.
Study great writing. It helps, even if it shows you how obtuse you've been for not learning a lesson earlier.
Study good writing.
Now, that's a far cry from reading good writing.
Yeah, with reading comes a certain amount of osmotic absorption, but that's expressed in style and tone. What about the other areas? How about structure?
The novel on which I'm working--my first--has revealed some of my own limitations. Frankly, only a few months ago, I was crappy with time. The passage of it, the expression of it, all that stuff. I simply didn't know how to jump smoothly from one day to another or from one month to the next.
So, I picked up Dan Simmons's A Winter Haunting with the intention of studying it while I read it. I wasn't specifically looking for an elixir for my time problems, but darned if I didn't find it.
Right there in those pages, in those chapters, I saw how Simmons took Dale Stewart (his NASCAR driver-sounding protag) from one day to the next, how he muddied the chronological waters when the story called for nebulousness, how he flashed back and cross-cut without boring or confusing the reader.
The whole process is a bit like film editing, and being a Film Lit teacher, I never thought to put my cinematic knowledge to good literary use.
Anyway, the point I'm making is that Simmons taught me a great lesson. So does Elmore Leonard, every time I read his dialogue. Ruth Rendell is teaching me a hell of a lot about how to shift POV without jolting the reader out of the story.
Study great writing. It helps, even if it shows you how obtuse you've been for not learning a lesson earlier.
Hayden
As a friend of mine says, "I don't think as much of Teresa Neilson Hayden as I probably should. I only pray to her twice a day, and only burn candles at her alter on Sunday morning."
Seriously. If there's anyone in this business a writer should listen to pretty much each and every time, it's her. If you think one thing, and she thinks another, the wisest thing to do is to wonder where you went wrong.
Julian Black said:
As a friend of mine says, "I don't think as much of Teresa Neilson Hayden as I probably should. I only pray to her twice a day, and only burn candles at her alter on Sunday morning."
Seriously. If there's anyone in this business a writer should listen to pretty much each and every time, it's her. If you think one thing, and she thinks another, the wisest thing to do is to wonder where you went wrong.
- Status