Kring has recently published her first novel, and the article had a lot of thoughtful comments about the process. She wrote about attending a workshop and being told that she wrote from an 'emotional distance.' The instructor told her: “If you want to be a writer, you have to learn to spill your guts on paper.”
One of the things I've noticed here on Hatrack is that the stories that DON'T hook me often don't hook me because the writer is keeping too much emotional distance. I've also noticed the same thing while doing critiques; the writer tells of some scary or horrifying event yet the character has no emotional reaction to it.
Here on Hatrack we talk a lot about the importance of POV, tense, and dialog. I think the need to engage the reader emotionally is of equal importance.
When I write, I feel it's sort of like improv acting. I visualize myself in the situation, and try on the emotions. Then I describe them. But it's not always enough to describe the reaction; I've critiqued stories where the character's physical reaction is described but still there is no indication of distress going on inside his or her head.
I'm curious as to what other people do to engage the reader emotionally, and how much attention you put into this detail? How do you grab people by the heartstrings? How do you spill your guts on paper?
EDIT: My post was lengthy and boring. I felt I should spare you the displeasure of reading though it, so I cut it in half...well, maybe a little more than half.
[This message has been edited by Valtam2 (edited August 27, 2006).]
Similarly, it's a common saying for film and tv that if you show a person crying, the audience doesn't have to cry because it's being done for them.
In my opinion, one should describe as little of the physical reaction as possible. Instead, go with the circumstances, the thought process, the emotional reactions, etc. The reader will fill in the proper physical response. If you have developed your character well, the reader will know how that character would respond physically to such events/feelings.
Then you can hint at the physical stuff afterwards, for example: "blah blah blah emotional scene blah blah blah. But now it was time to get on with things. She wiped the tears from her eyes, threw away the mascara-stained kleenex, set her jaw and marched back into the dining room, determined not to show the rest of the family how their words had stung her."
quote:
I'm curious as to what other people do to engage the reader emotionally, and how much attention you put into this detail? How do you grab people by the heartstrings? How do you spill your guts on paper?
I agree wholeheartedly that you have to be willing to bare your soul to engage the reader. How to do it? That's hard.
I have done it by using 1st person POV (which many people cannot stand) and by being brutally honest with myself.
And more POV.
The only way I got to that point was the moment when I stopped worrying about the reader and started writing for ME.
I was doing book reviews for a free newspaper at the time, and it suddenly occurred to me that if no one was reading them it didn't matter what I wrote.
Interestingly enough, I heard Jasper Fforde speak a few weeks ago and he had a very similar sort of experience...which makes me think there's something to it.
The only way I got to that point was the moment when I put a knife into my stomach.
I would recommend just using a computer to write, though. A lot less messy that way.
[This message has been edited by wbriggs (edited September 07, 2006).]
I've found it to be an interesting dilemma for me (well, and all writers period, I suppose) to do what this thread calls for. Frankly, I'm not sure if I've accomplished it. I'm especially having difficulty with a certain character who's supposed to be stoic and emotional at the same time (heh, try that one for size, would you? )
Anyway, I don't know if it really is good practice or not, but I've tried it anyway and don't see any reason to abandon it. What I've found myself doing more and more is to simply go out and do something (a walk in the park, for example) and just write down what I think, and kind of form it into a very short personal story (I've never written one longer than exactly two pages, single-sided and single-spaced, for example). I guess you can say they end up being "personal reflection" or "slice of life" stories. Like I said, I don't know if it's good practice or not, but at the very least it lets you see your own inner workings long after the thoughts have exited your head.
I'd like to add one comment here, and it's that you have to be careful when dealing with emotion. Why should the reader care that Bob is sad when they don't even know who he is yet?
What I mean is, you don't come out and say "Bob was sad." You don't even say "Bob wiped the tears from his face", as common creative writing show don't tell doctrine suggests to inexperienced writers.
Instead, you tell the reader why Bob is sad. After that, it's all about the POV. If Bob is a character who's really in touch with his emotions, go ahead and describe them (hopefully a lot better than the two examples above). But maybe he's not sure how he feels. Maybe he's bottling things up (which of course to him feels like he's just not feeling anything at all).
And anyway, I like to avoid flowery descriptions of emotion unless I've really earned them. It's too easy to lapse into melodrama, and that's a death knell at the beginning of a story.
By the way, hello, Hatrack.
If it's from Bob's POV, I expect a clue as to whether he's upset, annoyed, or ecstatic at such news. If it's the cop's POV, I expect him to wonder at the emotions Bob is displaying.
[This message has been edited by Elan (edited September 22, 2006).]