mrissa: (helpful nudge)
Apparently I feel like living dangerously this morning, so here's a meme from [livejournal.com profile] swan_tower:

Tell me about a story I haven't written, and I'll give you one sentence from that story.

As she says, at least one sentence. Maybe more.

I haven't been having problems with short story juices flowing, so this is possibly a particularly bad idea. But it also looks like fun, and hey, we like fun. Fun gets us good places.

One of the rules people always list for writing is that you must finish what you write. This is great as long as it's not a straitjacket. If you're aiming at an audience, you must finish at least some of what you write, sure, definitely. But I think some novice writers--and some experienced writers who are in a slump or a transition phase--hear that "rule" and subconsciously translate it to "you must finish every story you start before going on to another." I have--look, I write kind of a lot of short stories. You know that because I'm 34 years old and have sold 91 of them. I don't think it's immodest to say that's kind of a lot. But I have a ton of half-finished stories sitting around and even more smaller seeds. Sometimes things have to germinate. Sometimes things are what Mike Ford called nurse logs. It's a jungle back in there. The last few weeks, though, things have been calling out to get finished, a few at a time, and that's satisfying too.

(Of the trudging along on the novel, let us not speak.)
mrissa: (question)
Over on FB, one of you--under their legal name, so I will not cross-identify--was talking about having difficulty finding plot for ideas for which they had world and character. I offered to make a helpy post about plot. And awhile ago I gave another of you--in a locked post, so again, won't say who--a series of questions to try to spark plot ideas from what that person said was world ideas. So I'm putting some of those here and also some additional ones.

Here's the thing: all happy writers plot alike, but--wait, no. Even happy writers plot differently. Some achieve plot. Some have plot thrust upon them. So if you run across things that are meant to spark plot, and you want to run screaming from those questions or ideas, that's good! It tells you something useful about yourself! It tells you: holy crap, don't do it that way. Because seriously, there is no reason you should do it that way. This is all conscious-brain trouble-shooting. This is totally not how I even do it. This is just how I attempt to help someone who says, "Hey, I am having a problem." Some brains take this approach to this kind of problem and want to curl up and gibber. I have one of those kind of brains! I keep it in the basement in the [livejournal.com profile] timprov. So seriously, if all of this sounds hideous to you and like the least fun and functional way of plotting ever, put your trouble-shotting plot methods in the comments, or commiserate in the comments, and maybe that'll help somebody too.

1. Even if the world is neat, someone is usually unhappy there. Who? Why? Are they convinced they would have been better off in a past era, a different country, an alternate way of doing things not yet achieved? Or are they focused on what's wrong with their milieu and not on the alternatives?

2. What has changed for the world or characters recently? What is hard about this for the people living there or living with each other?

3. What can't be sustained about the situation? What is hard about this?

4. Who is considered very odd within this setting? Who is the absolute rock of the [village, city, school of marine biologists, whatever]? How does this setting allow them to interact/prevent them from interacting, and do they balk at the usual things and make their own stuff work for themselves as individuals or is their relationship typical of their roles?

5. Of the characters you have, who thinks that what they really want is not achievable, and what are they going to settle for instead? Are they right? Are they constructive/destructive/something else?

6. What stuff is cool stuff that you like? This could be "love triangles" (oh please do not let it be love triangles, I am so very tired) or "giant squids" or "the bit where a crucial piece of a mystery becomes clear to somebody." Sometimes if you don't have a plot, seeing how you can combine the things you already have (story elements or nouns or verbs, whatever, I'm not picky) can result in one. "I like screwball comedies, I could do one of those," you might say, or else, "Well, if I don't have a mystery, I'm going to have to do some pretty crazy things to have a batty old lady who solves mysteries...hmm," or, "If there is going to be wombat research, it should probably be plot-relevant wombat research somehow or the reader will waste a lot of time trying to figure out what it has to do with anything. Unless I have made it Deeply Symbolickal, and managing that is its own special trick."

Anybody else?
mrissa: (ohhh.)
I have been kind of flailing--not specifically about fiction, but about stuff, and it was sort of carrying over into my work on fiction even when it really was suboptimal to have it do so. (It. It it it. English is sometimes suboptimal in structure with this it-ness.)

Last week I started doing a thing when I sat down to work on my current project. I asked myself explicitly, "What can I do to make this more fun for myself?"

I don't know, guys--I don't know what-all you're dealing with, what problems you have, what your approach is, all that. But for me and right now? This is the stuff. I mean, I hope that at some point the fun becomes more automatic. Like, I hope at some point I have done all this stuff to make it more fun for myself and I sit down one morning at the desk and go, "What can I OOH OOH I KNOW THIS ONE PICK ME PICK ME." And then again the next day. That would be great.

But in the meantime, here is what the Method of Fun did for me on Friday: it made my protagonist way more active earlier in the book, it clarified her relationship with an extremely important character, it clarified why that character is one of the good guys even when he's not getting along with the protag, it added hijinks to what is supposed to be a very hijinky book (shut up, English language, hijinky is a word now), and it fleshed out a bit of plot that was in semi-handwave mode. ("And then they figure out that X is sort of sketchy." Now he actually does sketchy things! Lots of them! Where the protag and her friends can see! In specific chapters, even!)

And also? I had fun.

And that was just Friday.

Earlier in the week the Method of Fun gave me two thousand words in 45 minutes.

And also I had fun.

So here's what I mean about the Method of Fun: it's not like the Method of Fun is giving me fun but is making my protag passive and putting handwave bits in, or making me feel all warm and fuzzy but not get anything done. And I think when I am flaily--maybe this happens to you, too, maybe not--I sometimes get into this mode where I feel like I R Srs Rthur, This R Srs Storee, and if I try the Method of Fun--if I try even thinking about what will be fun for me instead of Srs Rthur Srs Storee--I will end up fingerpainting on the kitchen floor.

And when I feel like that I should maybe go fingerpaint on the kitchen floor, because possibly the fingerpainting will be a fun and useful outline of Chapter 12. And even if it isn't, getting the hell over myself cannot hurt.

Possibly this is useless to the rest of you. But I was just going to put it down where I could look at it: Method of Fun. This is my new thing. Go, Method of Fun.

July 2025

S M T W T F S
   1 2345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 4th, 2025 11:52 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios