[This message has been edited by Clove (edited December 18, 2009).]
Posted by pixydust (Member # 2311) on :
All writers need perspective and stepping back from your work is the only way to get it. Read and think. Make notes. Write a short story here and there. Then go back to the novel after a few weeks or months and see what you've learned to help you over the hump.
Posted by Miriel (Member # 2719) on :
I do the same sort of thing. If I'm badly stuck, or if I just finished a draft of a novel, I'll stop writing for a bit. I'll read a fiction book. I'll read a book about writing fiction. I'll spend a lot of time here, and critique a few short stories from F&F. Then, when I go back to it, I've remembered all sorts of things about writing, and have had time to let my subconscious just work through things. I know some people advocate writing every single day, but this is what works for me -- long stretches of writing followed by stretches of not-writing, doing writing-related things.
Posted by Elan (Member # 2442) on :
I came to a dead halt in my novel... I knew something was wrong, but wasn't sure what. I did what you are doing; I read. I knew my problem was characterization and dialog. I read a book titled "Dialog" by Gloria Kempton, and suddenly it began to click. I went back and rewrote the chapter where I started losing momentum. I cleaned up the problem areas and resubmitted it to my critique group, who agreed it was greatly improved.
We are all novices, to some degree, elst we would be taking money baths in all the dough that a publisher was throwing at us. You HAVE to pause from time to time to analyze your work. It's the only way to improve.
Posted by wbriggs (Member # 2267) on :
Money baths . . . mmmmm.
I like to do all that daydreaming before starting the work. But it sure does take a long time.
Posted by Valtam2 (Member # 3174) on :
I work in that exact way most of the time. I think and think and think and then write. Sometimes the thinking period is shorter, sometimes it's longer. I've written stories that I've thought about for a week or two, and I have stories still cooking inside my head that've been sitting there for years. They're almost ready to come out. Not yet, though. Maybe a bit longer.
Posted by Paul-girtbooks (Member # 2799) on :
Apparently Orson Scott Card spent two years thinking about Ender's Game -
- then wrote the first draft in two weeks!
Posted by Paul-girtbooks (Member # 2799) on :
Another thought -
As folks have said above, now and again you need to step back and get some perspective on the work, or just simply leave it alone for a while in order to let the subconscious work out a particularly knotty plot point.
To this end Stephen King works on several projects at once, thus enabling him to continuously produce even when he sets something on a back burner to percolate for a while. For example, if he hits a stumbling block during Book #1 he'll set it aside and work on Book #2 and then when/if that second book hits a stumbling block he'll go back to the first one, where he almost always finds that his subconscious has worked out whatever problem is was he was having with it when he abandoned it. More often than not, whilst all this is going on during the mornings and afternoons, he'll spend his evenings revising completed stories, i.e. short fiction, Book #3 etc.
Posted by ethersong (Member # 3216) on :
I second what Paul said about Stephen King. I find it so amazingly helpful to have like 3 or 4 different projects going so that if I get sick of one I can always work on or think about another one. Especially if you have one still in the planning stage cause then if you can't really get the words out at least you can think about the plot of another one.
I think it also helps to have a book and a video game to fall back on...as long as you don't get hooked and stop writing.
Posted by Johnmac1953 (Member # 3118) on :
Thats what I do too, I have a few projects running, so if I'm stuck on one...As has been said. That said, no method is fool-proof, personal preferences rule! Best Wishes John Mc...
Posted by pjp (Member # 3211) on :
I think a lot depends on the experience of the writer, and obviously their preferences.
Shortly before my 'introduction' to this forum, I'd writtern ~3000 words in an hour. I could've kept going, but I didn't like something about it. Prior to writing it, I spent some time thinking about it, but not a lot.
Mainly, I think it is just a matter of writing more, and learning more about writing (I've dug up and started my 10+ year old unread copy of Characters & Viewpoint). While I'm doing this now, I don't expect to have to do the same thing after I've writting 10k, 50k, 500k, words. Each progression teaches us something, so we're learning different things (hopefully anyway).
In an ideal world, I'd like to have multiple projects in progress at any given time.
Posted by hoptoad (Member # 2145) on :
Funny, with David, Micaelangelo had to work with a less-than-ideal stone and it is one reason it took so long.
He preferred working with pure white carrara marble without flaws or imperfections of grain.
This meant he preferred working in an ideal medium with which he could do anything.
All writers are challenged by the imperfections, 1 of their craft and 2 of their characters.
To display a 'perfect' idealised figure in writing, as Michaelangelo did in sculpture, would be to create a cartoon. Essentially, a writer has to use imperfections and less-than-ideal situations to create 'perfect' stories.
It is a different kettle of fish.
[This message has been edited by hoptoad (edited February 06, 2006).]
Posted by rcorporon (Member # 2879) on :
Asimov wrote about this a little as well. He said that if he was stuck, he'd go watch a movie, or take a drive, or something.
He'd let his subconscious work through the problems, and when he went back to the story, he'd often find that he had tons of new ideas to work with.
I think he called it the "Eureka phenominom."
Posted by Clove (Member # 3125) on :
.
[This message has been edited by Clove (edited December 18, 2009).]
Posted by yanos (Member # 1831) on :
Usually when you concentrate on a problem you focus too much on details without looking at the whole thing as a single entity. This often happens to those who post, rewrite, post, rewrite all in a matter of days.
Take a step back, chill out, and actually think about the whole story, including what you want, what your readers want, and what your characters want. After a couple of martinis or non-alcoholic equivalent everything should be in perspective.
Posted by hoptoad (Member # 2145) on :
I think this is realted to the subject of finishing a story too.
When you finish something I think it is good to let it sit for a while (overnight or for a couple of days). If it is ready to send it will still be ready to send tomorrow or in a couple of days. If it is not ready you have given yourself the chance to make those final adjustments.
It is easy to send off a short story in great haste because it is 'finished' only to regret it the moment the mail-box flap swings shut.
Sleep on it first.
PS: In revising a novel, I think you probably have a clearer picture of whether it is ready to be sent off or not.
Posted by CoriSCapnSkip (Member # 3228) on :
All I can offer is "a writer is always working."
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
Been meaning to mention...if the info in "The Agony and the Ecstacy" (the book, not the movie) was accurate, the block that Michealangelo carved his David out of was cut for somebody else, in a deal that fell through. And, I think, it was also contracted to be a David as well...
Contemplation and thought are fine, but commissions and deadlines will also help focus the mind...
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
I had heard that the piece of marble was considered useless because it had a huge, long flaw in it. But Michaelangelo just removed the flaw when he carved out the space between David's feet.
I checked on the web, though, and couldn't find anything to support that story.
Oh, well.
Posted by CoriSCapnSkip (Member # 3228) on :
I thought it was considered unusable because of something about its shape but whatever.
Posted by trousercuit (Member # 3235) on :
I had always heard that it was unsuitable for use because one side had a gigantic marble flaw jutting out of it that looked like Mick Jagger's face.
Don't tell me that's an urban legend, too.
Posted by Crotalus@work (Member # 2959) on :
Back to the original topic. Yeah, sometimes it is good to back away from a work. My subconscious will ALWAYS let me know when something isn't right, usually in the form of writer's block. But don't stop writing entirely. The very act of writing is necessary in order to improve. Get that novel's worth of drivel out of your system as quick as you can.
