In November 2011, I decided to use National Writing Month (NaNoWriMo) to focus on writing a short story. Which turned into a novella. Which turned into a novel. Which turned into a part of a series. But not all in one month, but over many months, and after changing my ideas so many times for that story itself and for the series, I’ve decided instead of overwhelming myself with big ideas, I was going to go back to focusing on something small again.
And by small I mean a full-fledged novel to be written in November (as much as I can, anyway). But just one story, and a stand-alone at that. Hopefully. The other started as a stand-alone short story after all…
However, I have a plan and a plot this time. In 2011, I was going in completely unplanned, discovery writing if you will. Which was kind of fun, and it led to a lot of changes. But this time, I know that to write approximately 50,000 words in one month, I’ll have to be focused. I’ve plotted what I can and written bits and pieces, and the rest will have to find me as I go. I already have the end in mind and I feel the two main characters are well established.
And I have to remember the first draft won’t be a masterpiece. And that’s OK.
I’m reading Bird by Bird by Anne Lamott right now, which has already been so encouraging for me when it comes to writing. I decided I wanted this to be the last book I read before launching onto this novel writing project, and that in November I might not even read anything. I have spent from February to the present so focused on reading and blogging that writing has taken more of a backseat than I have wanted it to. This is to help re-orient myself back to it. I’ve exceeded my reading goal for the year so it feels easier to move on to writing now. So now I just have to take it sentence by sentence, or as Anne Lamott puts it, bird by bird.
Anyone else participating in NaNoWriMo next month? If you’re a writer, tell me how you stay focused to plug away at your story!
I don’t talk about writing on here as much as I thought I might when I started this blog. There are reasons for this…
They’re not my most popular posts.
I’m not sure anyone really cares when I talk about my writing in vague terms.
I haven’t been writing much lately because of blogging.
I don’t regret blogging, as it has taught me a lot, it helps me find great books, and encourages me to keep finding and reading great books. I’ve also met some people I really like along the way! But I do need to do better with balancing my fiction writing and my blog writing. I think one of my greatest struggles is what Captain Picard hits on in that picture up there… I need to plot first.
I really want to be a “pantser.” I get so many exciting ideas for writing, and snippets of a story will just flash through my mind like a movie trailer. I sit down and try to encapsulate everything I just saw. I can write about the characters, a beginning, a few random scenes, but then I have no idea where to go, because I won’t sit down for an hour or however long it takes (probably longer) to plot the story out. I can’t seem to go forward with at least SOME direction.
What makes it worse for me is I have literally DOZENS of ideas, and I think most of them are actually really good. Recently, I decided I actually want to connect several of my ideas and make it one great big post-war (sorta dystopia but not entirely) universe. But it would involve a LOT of books. I can’t even imagine writing so many books in the same universe and it all being cohesive and good. The thought intimidates me. Instead of taking it book by book, chapter by chapter, I just freeze up. And I don’t want to be that way.
So, if you have any thoughts about plotting while writing or encouragement for me to not be terrified of big ideas, I’d love to hear them! And if you’re not a writer, do you have any suggestions based off of books you read as to how I might could attempt a big story arc involving many years and multiple characters?
I mentioned recently that my husband and I have been watching the TV show Fringe on DVD. I have noticed that in the last couple of weeks, I have found myself growing more fond of the names Peter and Olivia, both of which are names of main characters on the show. I never really disliked these names before, but I didn’t particularly love them either. They were just fine for me. But now I find myself liking them more as I come to like the characters.
But I think I have to be predisposed to like the name somewhat first in order for this phenomena to happen. When I read The Hunger Games, I found myself liking the name Peeta as I liked the character. I have never known a Peeta in my life, but of course it does resemble Peter. But on the other hand, I didn’t find myself growing to like the name Katniss. I think it’s the right fit for Katniss and I went from thinking it was a stupid name at first to an appropriate name for a character, but let’s just say it didn’t hold quite the same charm for me. And it wasn’t like I was going to name a baby Peeta but… let’s just say there was a period of time where if someone else decided to do it, I wouldn’t have judged them too harshly for it.
It’s interesting to me how our perceptions of names can change due to fictional characters with these names. There are some names that seem type-casted to fit a certain kind of character. I remember my senior year of high school when my yearbook/journalism teacher, whose first name was Chip, lamented that characters named Chip are always some lame sidekick. I have found with my name, Amy, the character is generally pretty self-centered and weak-willed, which makes me sad.
I’m going to throw your writing in the fire and then steal the guy you should have ended up with… (OK, I don’t actually hate Amy in Little Women, but she’s no Jo.)
As someone who is constantly creating new characters in my head, I think about names fairly frequently. Sometimes the idea of a story hits me first, and then I seek out the characters and the names of the characters that seem to fit best. But sometimes, seemingly out of nowhere, a character name just pops into my head that won’t go away and I know I have to write out that character. Their name is sometimes something I might have considered strange just yesterday, but today it is perfect for my character. Sometimes I think of traditional names (Catherine), trendier names (Harper), and sometimes names that I just have no idea where they came from (Noa, for a girl, like Noah without a H… this one happened recently). When I think of the name of a character first, it always feels like a perfect fit when I base everything else around that, even if it’s something I would never name a real-life baby. But I also can’t help but wonder how people reading the story will respond to it. I know I have read books where I felt the character never fit their name. But I suppose we all look at names differently… there’s no way to really control how someone feels about a name.
All this to say… what’s in a name? Does your perception of a name change if you read/watch about a fictional character with that name? Has a fictional character made you like a name more or less than you did before?
When you first crack open a book, be it one you anticipated before getting a hold of it, or whether you are browsing a bookstore and curious about the tone of the book, the first line of the book is your first impression of the writing in the book. I was thinking about this as I was thinking about next week’s Top Ten Tuesday topic (Best Book Beginnings/Endings) and when I read this article about Stephen King and his opening sentences. I know the first line isn’t everything, but it helps set the stage for the rest of the book. One of the examples given in the article I found really interesting…
They threw me off the hay truck about noon.
This is from James M. Cain’s The Postman Always Rings Twice, which I have never read, but I find that opening line fascinating. Sounds like this character is a drifter of sorts, since he’s hitching a ride on a hay truck. But what led him there? Why did he get kicked off? Already I have questions! And that’s a good thing! Here is another beginning that certainly catches your attention with the first several lines:
First the colors. Then the humans. That’s usually how I see things. Or at least, how I try.
*** HERE IS A SMALL FACT***
You are going to die.
This is the beginning of The Book Thief by Markus Zusak. You don’t know yet that the narrator is Death, but he has certainly caught your attention, you know he’s not human, and the stage is set for the tone and style that will carry on throughout the novel. And then one more I wanted to share, from The Scorpio Races by Maggie Stiefvater, which I have not read yet but is on the top of my TBR pile:
It is the first day of November and so, today, someone will die.
This too begs a question: why will someone die because it’s November 1? What happens on November 1? And of course, we also have the time of year, which is nice. I think that generally, it’s important to establish a character and a setting within the first paragraph.
As someone who does write, I do find beginnings hard sometimes, or at least a good, powerful beginning. I feel like I have improved since I’ve learned to eliminate all fluff in writing and get right to the action, the good stuff. If you ever read anything I write, chances are you won’t be waiting for something to happen in the character’s life; it will be happening quite quickly. It might not be the most earth-shattering thing ever, but it’s something important to the character. I have found that I have a low tolerance in both reading slow beginnings and writing them.
If I get bored writing a sentence, a paragraph, or a scene, I know it must be boring for the reader too. I believe that everything written should be something that either advances the plot/story forward, or that advances the character’s personal growth/character arc. That’s why it’s important to not just begin strong, but to have a strong middle and end as well. And it’s hard! But it’s important. And I think the first impression of a book says a lot to a reader who is just getting started on the adventure the writer has crafted.
What do you think? Does a book’s beginning make a difference to you? What kind of opening line grabs your attention?
I was listening to a podcast review of Star Trek: Into Darkness and I was a little surprised to hear some of the people on the show say they felt some of the characters were inconsistent from who they were in the 2009 film. Likewise, I have also heard some complain that Tony Stark was inconsistent in Iron Man 3 compared to how he was before.
I disagree with both of these viewpoints, but it did get me to thinking about consistency in characters in stories (primarily from movie to movie). Just when is the character experiencing a natural change in their arc, and when is it just out of character? Personally, I found Elizabeth and Will wildly inconsistent in the second and third Pirates of the Caribbean movies as to who they were in the first one. But I know people who disagree. Why do some of us accept certain character changes and some of us not?
Bones contemplates this for us…
The Consistency of the Story
I think part of it is how you view the story overall. For instance, I thought the second POTC movie was a ridiculous rehash of jokes from the first and that the third movie got way too serious. The first story was such a fun romp and I felt the next two films deviated from what made the first one so good. Since I did not enjoy the plots of the story and the twists that were happening, I felt that the characters themselves were taking actions that were not consistent with how I viewed them in the first movie.
In the 2009 Star Trek film, Kirk is cocky and confident, much like Tony Stark is in Iron Man, Iron Man 2, and The Avengers. With Tony, I think we start to see him change in The Avengers, when he makes the decision to sacrifice himself (though ultimately he makes it out fine) to save all the others. In Iron Man 3, he is wrestling with what he experienced in that moment: being worried about Pepper, shocked by the fact that aliens are real, etc. I could see the thread of what happened. And he still certainly had plenty of Tony Stark moments.
With the Star Trek films, I admit it’s not as clear cut. At the end of 2009, Kirk gets the Captain’s chair at an extremely young age and with virtually no experience. In Into Darkness, he appears to be much the same, taking big risks with the belief that it will always work out fine. He gets lectured that it won’t always be fine, but none of that means much until he (SPOILERS for the rest of this paragraph) sees Pike die. Pike is like a father to Kirk, so his death really rocks his world. He wants to hunt down the man responsible, but he also has to learn what risks are necessary and which ones are not. It’s hard to fit so much change in a two hour film without it feeling too forced, but at the end Kirk makes a decision like Tony does. Maybe there could have been better ways to develop these two plot lines, but for me, they were fine. But I also embraced the entirety of their stories.
If a story is filled with plot holes and weird twists that no one believes, people are not likely to buy into what the character is doing either.
The Consistency of Voice
I was listening to another podcast called “Writing Excuses” (what can I say, I’m a podcast junkie), and in a recent episode they were discussing why the writing in The Avengers worked so well. One of the main things they praised about the movies was the consistent character voice, and for ALL the characters! But they said there were even a couple of times that the voice was not consistent but it was so well-played it didn’t matter. The big example of this was with Thor’s line about Loki being adopted. They said it was OK with them, even though it didn’t sound like something Thor would say, because the joke was perfect, it needed to be shared, and Thor had to be the one to deliver it.
I think this goes with the next point…
The Consistency in Tone
I think the example of Pirates of the Caribbean works well for this. I did not feel the tone of the second and third movies were not consistent with the first. And going back to The Avengers, though Thor’s joke was not consistent with his individual character voice, it was consistent with the tone of the movie and the dialogue in general.
This might be why some struggle with Iron Man 3 or Into Darkness, because both movies are a little darker than their predecessors. I personally do not find them to be such large departures, and I find the overall tones still consistent, but there is some change. I mean, among Iron Man, Iron Man 2, The Avengers, and Iron Man 3, there are three different directors at work. But tone can change as the characters grow, it’s just a matter of balancing the change tone, character, and story in a way that is believable and trying to stay consistent in voice and other areas.
The Consistency in Back Story
It is extremely important for writers to remember what they (or other writers working on previous projects before them) have written about a character. Likewise, it’s important for the character to have actions that match up with their personal back story. Sometimes the writer may not know the back story for the character until a lot about the character has been written, but as long as it matches with the character’s behavior, that is fine. Kirk from the J.J.-verse is different from Roddenberry’s Kirk. This Kirk lost his father and thus grew up in a very different household. He had the same mother and he still lived in Iowa, but one major difference completely changed the way he was living his life. So when the 2009 and Into Darkness Kirk is more immature and more reckless than the original Kirk, it makes sense, because he didn’t have the same strong father figure.
When there’s a disconnect between a character’s past and their present, without a middle that connects the change between the two (which would be more backs story we would need), we find the whole character unbelievable.
But no matter how hard a writer tries to balance all of these things, not everyone is going to agree on what works and what doesn’t work. It is the nature of art.
What do you think? Who are characters that you believe show great consistency throughout their story arc? Who are some characters that you feel do not?
And by small I mean a full-fledged novel to be written in November (as much as I can, anyway). But just one story, and a stand-alone at that. Hopefully. The other started as a stand-alone short story after all…
Anyone else participating in NaNoWriMo next month? If you’re a writer, tell me how you stay focused to plug away at your story! 
