Wednesday, March 24, 2010
The slow burn of love
I'm pretty early in a new manuscript, and I'm trying to create the all-important tension between my characters. The attraction, the little spark, the inner essence that makes you look at a stranger and yet feel intimately connected.
In my concentration and effort on creating this tension, I <i>might</i> have gone a touch overboard. Not a lot overboard, nothing in the purple prose category. No quivering bosoms or quivering pelvic muscles or . . . well, quivering anything. But when I sent the latest chapter to my thesis adviser (my very male, very non-romance-reading thesis adviser, I might add), he didn't get it.
His actual comment: "I'm not buying the sexual tension between your hero and heroine. It's too explicitly stated and too self-aware, I think."
That got me thinking. Especially the self-aware part. We tend to know everything about our characters. We talk to them, live with them crammed in our heads, give them interviews and free-write times and whatnot to get to know them better. But one of the things I've learned about my characters is that they don't always know themselves so well.
And there are all sorts of things they'd never admit, even in their thoughts.
So how do we as authors show a character's emotions without our characters being therapeutically self-aware? Cause let's face it, how many of us go around analyzing our emotions? Looking for the causes? If I'm fighting off attraction for someone, I'm not analyzing my resentment toward my father and articulating my fear of commitment. No, I'm just fuming about how much I hate the guy and being snippy when forced to be in his presence. Or maybe it's because my last boyfriend left me for a hotter version, or my mother was mean, or my third grade teacher called me a loser in class, or . . .
You get the picture. We strive to understand our character's motivations. Why are they acting the way they are acting? Why does she turn into a bitch when her mother sends a Christmas card? Why does he back off when kids are mentioned?
But I'll betcha, that while we can answer those questions, our characters can't.
Now, the fact that this professor found my the sexual tension to explicitly stated was more an issue of genre. Everything is stated more explicitly in romance *g*, and we're not the genre he usually reads. But characters being too self-aware holds true for all genres.
How about you? Are your characters introspective to the point of needing a therapist's couch? Or are they quiet about the why's of their motivations? Are you a self-aware person? Do you analyze your emotions and their causes, or just go with it?
In my concentration and effort on creating this tension, I <i>might</i> have gone a touch overboard. Not a lot overboard, nothing in the purple prose category. No quivering bosoms or quivering pelvic muscles or . . . well, quivering anything. But when I sent the latest chapter to my thesis adviser (my very male, very non-romance-reading thesis adviser, I might add), he didn't get it.
His actual comment: "I'm not buying the sexual tension between your hero and heroine. It's too explicitly stated and too self-aware, I think."
That got me thinking. Especially the self-aware part. We tend to know everything about our characters. We talk to them, live with them crammed in our heads, give them interviews and free-write times and whatnot to get to know them better. But one of the things I've learned about my characters is that they don't always know themselves so well.
And there are all sorts of things they'd never admit, even in their thoughts.
-----------------------------------------------------------
So how do we as authors show a character's emotions without our characters being therapeutically self-aware? Cause let's face it, how many of us go around analyzing our emotions? Looking for the causes? If I'm fighting off attraction for someone, I'm not analyzing my resentment toward my father and articulating my fear of commitment. No, I'm just fuming about how much I hate the guy and being snippy when forced to be in his presence. Or maybe it's because my last boyfriend left me for a hotter version, or my mother was mean, or my third grade teacher called me a loser in class, or . . .
You get the picture. We strive to understand our character's motivations. Why are they acting the way they are acting? Why does she turn into a bitch when her mother sends a Christmas card? Why does he back off when kids are mentioned?
But I'll betcha, that while we can answer those questions, our characters can't.
Now, the fact that this professor found my the sexual tension to explicitly stated was more an issue of genre. Everything is stated more explicitly in romance *g*, and we're not the genre he usually reads. But characters being too self-aware holds true for all genres.
How about you? Are your characters introspective to the point of needing a therapist's couch? Or are they quiet about the why's of their motivations? Are you a self-aware person? Do you analyze your emotions and their causes, or just go with it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Books by the Crew
89 comments:
HA! I've been in and out of therapy for so many years...worked in a metaphysical bookstore (which actually prompts one to be intensely self-aware) and analyzed myself into a black pit of despair.
And out.
So, with my characters, I usually have them more able to analyze the other than themselves. Because, IMHO, that is the way it really is out there. Or out here. Or wherever I am at the moment.
And usually, I have them pop off with some wonderfully relevent psychological observation that floors the other...usually totally unaware that they've just stated something the other person knew but never admitted and now...they have to.
It's quite fun being an over-analyzer of oneself, when writing characters. Since all my characters are really me...
This is a very good blog, Hal. I've struggled with this a lot. I've been in therapy and read so many relationship and self-help books I could probably write another one. So when I go to write I use words that the normal person (especially the normal male person) wouldn't toss around (none of which I can come up with this early in the morning LOL). So I find myself trying to un-psycho babble my characters.
Although, watching a lot of the sitcoms these days they all throw around a bunch of psycho babble phrases. It is just that sometimes it works and sometimes your characters feel too self-aware! LOL
I tend to be an overanalyzer in real life, which could probably be annoying for real people -- LOL -- but it works for writing romance.
Part of the fun of reading romance is watching the characters fumble around as they try to figure out why they're falling for someone they THINK is not their type. And if they don't have a motivation that makes sense to the reader, they won't be sympathetic -- which leads to the character being required to analyze.
OMG. Who gave me the microphone before I had a full carafe of coffee?
*stumbles toward the espresso machine for a brain infusion*
Chance - what a good idea, the characters being able to analyze the other characters. I love it! I always enjoy that interplay between characters, when one forces the other to admit something about themselves.
So I find myself trying to un-psycho babble my characters. Exactly, Irish! I recently read a thriller where the hero was actually in therapy, and all sorts of cool stuff came out while he was talking to the therapists . . . and then I realized that my characters sound like that without the therapist *g*
And I agree that *generally*, men are much less self-aware than we are. Or at least, they read fewer self-help books!
Donna - that's my problem. I forget to have the characters fumbling around, trying to figure it all out. I know what their motivations are, I want to make sure the reader knows those motivations, but I don't necessarily want the character to get it. Does that make sense? So how do you keep the character fumbling, while making sure the reader "get it"?
Hal, it totally makes sense! It's just kinda hard to do! LOL I'm kind of struggling with that same thing with some suggested edits right now.
I wonder if people (even characters) can THINK they are being self-aware and analyzing, BUT they come to the wrong conclusion--about themselves, and about the other character.
I'm not sure I'm being clear. LOL But this is really helping me figure some stuff out!
Good! I think I know what you mean. Characters can think they're acting out of a certain motivation, be completely convinced of that, and yet in the end, it was a different motivation entirely.
I'm not coming up with romance examples, though. Anybody else have this happen or seen it pulled off well?
I can't come up with any romance examples just yet either. (My brain cells seem to erase overnight.) I know I see people in real life like this all the time. LOL
Like they'll say, "I don't have to be right all the time", but they fight to the death to win every argument. Or "I'm not high maintenance", but it takes a village and a half to take care of their emotional needs. LOL
Hal, great blog!
Writing first person allows me to stay in one mind, but my one mind isn't particularly comfortable with analyzing emotion in herself or others. It's like she see it, feels it, recognizes it, and steps over it. I'm hoping she will grow a bit once she realizes she still has family out there.
And well, Jules and I always talk about this. I'm one of those people while I recognize I have emotion and feel emotion, I won't allow myself to think about it until I can control it. I need control. Emotion is not really something that can be completely controlled, so I have to control it until it can't be controlled anymore. I am the Ranger of real life. lol
This is a great blog and good topic, Hal. I've been following the blog of another author lately and she's sort of doing the blog as a soul searching/life transition thing. So basically, it's been like group therapy. I've learned so much about myself, it's scary.
I can over-analyze in my head, but I'm usually just jumping to conclusions. The only thing I've really learned is that I don't know myself at all. :)
I go the same route as Chance. One character points things out to the other. In fact, I read a great example of this last night. I'm in the middle of Lani Diane Rich's THE COMEBACK KISS and the heroine has basically been twisting herself into a pretzel for the last ten years out of fear she'll lose custody of her younger sister. It's made her uptight and she's lost her spark for life.
The hero (whose known her almost all their lives) points this out to her. Explains she's not the same person and she's doing more harm this way. She couldn't see it for all the fear.
Now, after it's been pointed out, then the character has to ruminate on it and either grow or change in someway. And THAT'S where I haven't figured things out yet. :)
LOL Donna! Exactly. I had a friend who swore she wasn't high-maintenance. She took an hour to do her hair to go play softball. Uh-huh. Not high-maintenance at all.
Great blog Hal!
But, um, I don't know if my characters are too introspective. I don't think so. But I think this is something someone else has to find for you.
I've read all your stuff, though. And personally, I don't think your characters are too introspective. In fact, I know Jo isn't. I always find myself over-analyzing her. :) It's taken me months to try to figure her out. LOL!!
Free group therapy, Ter? Nice! LOL!
What an awesome example. I think how the character responds to new information about themselves is critical. It shows a lot -- do they grow? Change? Ignore it? Fight back? There's all sorts of possible reactions, good and bad.
.It’s like she sees it, feels it, recognizes it, and steps over it.
Yes, Sin! This is what I want to show. I'm trying first person, and I don't know how well it's working. I tend to over-analyze my own emotions, so ignoring them doesn't make sense to me. But like you, Jo is desperate for control. She's been in jail where she's had no control over anything *but* her emotions, and not much is going to make her give that up.
Thank God someone brought up this topic. There are novels I read where they do the self-aware "I'm so hot for you because you're breathing in my vicinity" that I go, "Oh, COME ON!" because it is so ridiculous. I have never been so aware of the hot annoying Mr. Darcy guy next to me that I thought, "My thighs feel achy and wet"--because honestly I'd think I'd have a different problem altogether if I thought my thighs were wet. Nor do I think about my aching CORE and his proximity to it that's making it happen.
However, that aside, I do analyze a lot. A LOT. To the point I'm even going, "Hells, you're thinking about this way too much." I'm figuring out THEIR motivation, I'm thinking about my motivation...the whole bit.
Now I don't buy candy bars and think, "I'm eating to comfort myself because I'm unhappy I'm fat, although I know eating the candy will only make me fatter and more unhappy." Not at the time. At the time, I think, "I want some fcking chocolate, back off biotch." And then later after I'm in sugar shock, I think those things. I spend a lot of time analyzing stuff. I don't know why. I don't have a psyche degree; and I only took a couple classes in psychology. I'm basically a Dr. Phil.
Third person is impossible. I literally don't know how you all comprehend and write it so well. In first person, it's easier to float over emotion because you don't have to really put much consideration into others emotional states. You just have to focus on the one.
Kiki is a little like Jo. She's desperate to control everything around her, has to contain and control to keep her life neat. Yet, she keeps everyone at a distance. It's easy to deflect emotion if you never let anyone get close to you. I see Jo like that. Any sort of emotion she might feel, she immediately squashes out of her own fear. She won't recognize it as fear, she recognizes it as weakness that can be exploited.
Thanks Marn! It's taken me forever to figure her out too. But on the bright side, I'm making forward progress again! Sort of. lol.
I'm not sure if he was saying they're too introspective in general, or simply too self-aware about the attraction they're feeling for each other. They both seem more likely to deny and ignore, rather than self-analyze, you know? I don't know. I'll probably just leave it all for now, and try to thin some if it out after I finish the first draft.
She won’t recognize it as fear, she recognizes it as weakness that can be exploited. Ohhhh, yes! Yes, this is good! Exactly what I need! I hadn't thought of it like that.
I love that you're the real life Ranger *g* Even when I was writing Ranger, I made him super introspective and aware of his emotions. LOL! Opps :)
As for my characters, yes, they're introspective. In GOGU, Livie was a more interesting version of me--so she analyzed everyone all the time. Which is why she liked Ben because she analyzed him in such a way that she thought she understood things about him that no one else saw. (You see the flaw there, right?)
Adam and Eve are pretty introspective, but I'm not sure they get far enough to figure out why they're acting this way. It's not like they can blame their parents, right? Mostly they go, WHY did I do this? And SHE makes me crazy! or HE is a jackass!
Lucy is not very introspective as in he feels bad and wants to figure out why he's doing something. He knows why. He got the short end of the stick, so everything he's doing from here on out is because he's going to even things up a bit. His introspective is all about how he's going to accomplish his goals, how to get people to play to his rules.
honestly I’d think I’d have a different problem altogether if I thought my thighs were wet.
LMAO!!!! I have to agree completely. I don't really sit around thinking about how turned on I am because I'm next to a cute guy. I mean, I'd be very aware there was a super hot guy next to me, but I wouldn't have a quivering core or . . .well, just ewwww. LOL!
I was a social work major in undergrad, so I took a bunch of pysch and counseling classes, so I act like an amateur psychologist half the time. Which works well for me if I'm trying to figure out why I turned into a crazy bitch and yelled at my husband for no reason (usually because I was letting him make all the decisions without realizing it, until I started screaming about wanting my independence back *g*).
But you're right - we always analyze all that later, after the emotion itself has passed. It's almost impossible to analyze anything while we're still emotional.
Which is why she liked Ben because she analyzed him in such a way that she thought she understood things about him that no one else saw. (You see the flaw there, right?)
Uh, yeah. that usually ends badly for girls :) Hopefully it didn't so much for Livie!
I wonder if people (even characters) can THINK they are being self-aware and analyzing, BUT they come to the wrong conclusion–about themselves, and about the other character.
Yes, I'm sure this very much is true. Usually people who are in therapy and are self-aware, tend to be unassuming to the point of no self-esteem at all. So if you're analyzing someone's behavior in conjecture with yourself, you're going to base it on the logic that the other person thinks of you the way you think of yourself. And I don't think most people think of me the way I think of myself. I'm told anyway that other people think nicer things. *LOL*
Oh, by the way, I found the liquid Hershey's coffee creamer at the store yesterday. Chocolate caramel.
OH MY GOD!
thanks to whoever brought that up - best thing ever!
you’re going to base it on the logic that the other person thinks of you the way you think of yourself. And I don’t think most people think of me the way I think of myself. I’m told anyway that other people think nicer things.
I have this problem too. Well, I have low self-esteem to start with (gee, thanks mom!), so I always assume everyone else thinks the worst of me too. I'm finally starting to realize that no one is paying enough attention to me to think poorly of me. LOL!
There was a cool article on Nathan Bransford's (an agent) blog yesterday about this exact thing, how the people who think the highest of themselves are usually the worst, and those who think poorly of themselves are usually the best.
http://blog.nathanbransford.com/2010/03/do-you-lack-confidence-in-your-writing.html
(which is awesome news for those of us who think our writing sucks! That means it's actually really good!)
LOL. Yet, I find Ranger extremely hard to write. In my mind, Ranger feels emotion. He just knows he can't show too much of it. I have all these wonderful theories of him in my head of why he could never commit to Steph and all these emotional tangles he's weaved himself into with her. He can't give her up, he can't walk away, yet he knows he can't have her.
The only issue with writing a first person POV closed off from emotion is that eventually they have to find that emotion, they have to realize while they don't want to feel it or deal with it, you can't live life like that. So it's a teeter totter of balance. Do you leak it out slowly like a torture method or do you open the flood gate and deal with it once and not talk about it again?
I’m finally starting to realize that no one is paying enough attention to me to think poorly of me.
*LOL* EXACTLY! It's like being in Step Class and you're worried everyone is going to laugh because you look like an ass, and you finally realize everyone is too obsessed trying to keep up with class to see what jackass thing you're doing. Well, unless you fall down and break your face--that would get the attention of everyone else. But they wouldn't think you're a jackass--they'd think, "Poor girl. She can't walk and chew gum. Is she okay?"
how the people who think the highest of themselves are usually the worst, and those who think poorly of themselves are usually the best.
I don't think I suck all the time.
Still I think the take-away here is that a person who thinks they suck, realizes there is room for improvement and will take constructive criticism and apply it to their writing.
A person who thinks they fart Shakespeare will not take any sort of criticism and assume people just don't get their vision. (Oh, hell, that's exactly my attitude about Lucy! *LOL* Damnit, people just don't get it!)
I think you have to be both. I think you have to be strong enough not to compromise on the real battles, but even stronger about realizing where you can compromise, where you can improve.
He can’t give her up, he can’t walk away, yet he knows he can’t have her.
This is exactly why I love those characters, even though I can barely stand the books anymore. That's the kind of angst that I adore. Ahh, Ranger.
I think you have to be both. I think you have to be strong enough not to compromise on the real battles, but even stronger about realizing where you can compromise, where you can improve.
Yes! Though I'm never quite sure where that line is - lol!
Hellie - yes!! It took me a long time to figure that out in the pole dancing class. I kept staring at myself in the mirror, thinking I wasn't sexy, and how everyone else was probably thinking the same thing. . . nope, they're all staring at themselves, not me. I never even notice there's anyone else in the class, and I'm sure as hell now analyzing their level of grace!
I love the discussion here -- although it's messing with my head a little! LOL I'm trying to write a new love scene with my heroine, and she's slightly neurotic, tends to overanalyze -- so it's making it tough now that *I* am worried about her thinking too much while she's getting wild with the hero.
I'll be back in a bit!
While I'm the complete opposite, Donna. I think I need to learn how to put a little more thought process into my sex scenes. I don't think there is enough "thought" in there. I need to take sex scene ed or something.
Hal, ITA. The type of angst that happens between Steph and Ranger used to kill me. Like the convo in the truck in EOT about not being the ring type of guy. He knew what he was saying to her, Steph realizes what he's saying to her, yet neither of them can turn their back on one another. It's sheer torture to think about in my mind while I'm reading it and especially at the end. Gah, you can't tell me he wouldn't walk to the end of the Earth and kill every mofo for her. You just can't.
I suppose what that all really means is that there has to be an element of want in a relationship to make the tension believable. You just can't hand it over on a silver platter. You can't just think about how much you want to be with someone. You have to show it in a way the reader understands. Wanting someone you can't have is the worst kind of torture. Especially if you have to be around them every day. Work in tight spaces with them. Conversate with them like you're friends.
And have to be ready to walk away from them in the end because it's the right thing to do, not because you want to, but it keeps them safe regardless of what they want. It may be selfish, and it may hurt them but it's better than the alternative.
I go off to handle a minor crisis and y'all get all deep and shit.
Hal - You're welcome on the creamer. :)
The bit about people who are high maintenance never know they are high maintenance reminds me of the scene in WHEN HARRY MET SALLY. She tells her she's the worst kind, high maintenance but thinks she's low maintenance. She tries to argue with "I just want things the way I want them." Which of course he answers with, "Exactly." LOL!
I think the way to show the "I want you but I can't have you but I can't leave you" is by making their actions and their words contradict. Like in BET ME by Crusie, Cal and Min keep saying they are not going to date because they aren't right for each other. But then he keeps walking her home. And finding excuses to see her or be around her. And she does the same thing.
So even though they are saying one thing, they keep doing another.
and I agree entirely. Ranger would do anything for Steph, do absolutely anything to protect her.
But he'll never marry her.
ou just can’t hand it over on a silver platter. You can’t just think about how much you want to be with someone. You have to show it in a way the reader understands.
Sin - yes! That's exactly what I need to do. For these two, it's a new attraction, but it's entirely inappropriate and they both recognize that. So they're both trying to ignore it (which of course, doesn't work).
awesome example Donna! I love that idea, contradicting their words and actions. I found that book hilarious, with them both trying to stay away, but neither one able to do it. And the snow globe.....*melt*!
Marriage would ruin Steph anyway.
*scrolls up*
When did Donna become the Bo'sun?!?!
LMAO!!
Bo'sun -- I know! I love getting credit for someone else's awesome ideas! LOL
Yeah, I love the actions speaking louder than words moments in books. *LOL* Good stuff. Good call, Bo'sun.
And I love that line from WHMS. *LOL*
Oh geez. Bo'sun, not Donna.
How in the world did I get those two words confused???
I'm not sure, but I'm taking it as a compliment. Seeing as she has pending good news from which I am light years away.
LOL!
I'm addicted to WHMS. I'm considering buying it.
SUCH a good movie!
Great blog, Hal!
So how do we as authors show a character’s emotions without our characters being therapeutically self-aware?
I love all the discussion on ways to do this. I guess I'd say that in the big picture though that I think it's okay for a character to be unapologetically (or even apologetically because that can be one of those funny and sad at the same time effects) "therapeutically self-aware." It's part of the reading experience I look for to have that slow down of reaction and introspection and maybe therapy in itself since, you're right, we don't, or can't, analyze our every move in "real time" as much as we might need. So we want to do so with characters we relate to, which is usually more enjoyable or comforting in a story than a self help book. :)
Melissa! I've missed you!!!
I agree. I do find a lot of comfort with characters who are hyperly self-aware and are thinking all the time. *LOL* Bridget Jones anyone?
And there was this awesome sex scene in Crazy For You (Jennifer Crusie) where we're in the heroine's POV, having sex, and she's thinking "Oh this is great" one minute and "what am I doing" the next, back and forth, lust vs logic...and then the hero does something BRILLIANT and well, it's worth reading.
Hot sex, but also believable sex. And lots of introspection. *LOL*
Hey Melissa! I've missed you too! How's school going?
I do agree that for some characters, introspection can really add something, and I love characters whose thoughts run so much like mine, complete with all the insecurities and neurosis *g* And it's *always* more comfortable to analyze a beloved character than ourselves through a self-help book!
Bridget Jones is the perfect example. I love those movies. (I listened to the second book on audio, but I can't remember now if I liked it better than the movie).
Hellie - I haven't read that one, but I read Faking it, and she has a scene that sounds a little similar, where the heroine was so distracted she kept forgetting she was supposed to be into the sex :)
You're right - that kind of introspection is hilarious!
But the fun thing about a character who can analyze themselves is how often they are wrong. And the other guy gets to point this out. Therapy isn't written in stone and often it leads to change. So...you start off with an understanding of who you are and why you do things a certain way and slowly, that changes how you do things a certain way but you continue to think you are doing things the first certain way and state it as such...
I'm dizzy...
Someone who is really self-aware is aware that things change all the blooming time!
I really enjoy writing characters that are fictional and can have more self-awareness and talk about it, think about it, make pithy observations about each other...because they are fiction!
When my Emily casually makes an observation to Captain Silvestri that though his curse of bad luck might be considered fortunate, it's really a misery. It took him nearly 50 years to come to grips with that fact. She got it the second time she met him.
Distance from a psychological/emotional problem often gives perspective that is missing from the up-close-and-this-is-mine-perspective.
As I wrote before, I love dropping those casual observational bombs into a relationship.
Wow, major typo... Curse of good luck... Pardon me, haven't had my coffee yet.
I've miss you all too, but usually can't drop in until late (except today - darn spring cold!). I'm always lurking, though. Well, that doesn't sound right. LOL School is going good - I've now switched from a history major to biology. Yeah, this is all my verson of a mid-life crisis. :)
I was kind of thinking about Bridget Jones too as an example of hyperly self-aware. Hal, was the book in first person? The little that I've been experimenting with first person has made me think first person almost has to be hyper self aware.
Hi everyone -- I'm still here -- writing a scene, checking your comments, going back to add some more stuff to the scene based on the great info here!
I agree that writing 1st person requires a lot more self-awareness on the character's part, which is fun. The character has to GUESS what the other character is thinking/feeling/etc., which is where some interesting misinterpretation comes in. LOL
Okay -- back to it.
Let me clarify - I'm not trying to say that no characters should be self-aware, or we shouldn't use introspection.
But all characters aren't super self-aware, just like all people aren't. My current heroine, Josephine, has all sorts of guilt and baggage going on, and there are parts of herself, and things in her past, that she won't even acknowledge, let alone ponder on. Yet I'm trying to write her in first person and it's . . . well, it's a challenge *g*
Chance, you're right, so often when we're sure about something about ourselves, we're totally wrong. That can make for some awesome humor!
My guess is the introspection needs to come at certain times. Like anything else, it needs to move the story along. It's going to a) show the character is conflicted and how and b) show a shift in their thinking or show them refusing to change.
If the introspection isn't doing either of these things, it probably needs to go.
Ohh, nice Ter.
I've noticed that when I get stuck, and am not fully sure what will happen "next" that I tend to just start filling up pages with rambling introspection. That's definitely the kind that's got to go!
This reminds me of a link I saw yesterday. Y'all have to check this out. It's more about writing drama for television, but much of it works for writing our books as well.
http://www.movieline.com/2010/03/david-mamets-memo-to-the-writers-of-the-unit.php
You know, Hal, I've finally figured out that when I am really struggling with a scene, and it won't come no matter how hard I try, it's because the scene is wrong. It either has to go or needs to be changed completely.
This week I had a scene I wrote a long time ago I was trying to make work. I had the suspicion the scene accomplished absolutely nothing, but I was stubborn. When I admitted to myself it had to go, I started meditatin' on how I could change it so I didn't eliminate the pages completely.
Once I knew how to alter it, which was as simple as giving the heroine a goal for the scene, it flowed like crazy.
Wish I'd learned this lesson a couple years ago!
But all characters aren’t super self-aware, just like all people aren’t.
Not all people are dukes or "spunky virgin Regency misses who want to seduce a rake to get out of a marriage"--but it sure seems like everybody must be one or the other.
Bo'sun slam-dunked that one. Go, Bo'sun...
This is why my scenes are going so slowly. I'll try to write on something, but it feels like I'm pulling TEETH. And I know it's because deep down I know it's the wrong scene I need, but I don't know what else to put there.
I don't know if I need to be "thinking" more or "brainstorming with others" more.
So far, I've learned a scene has to ruminate for at least 24 hrs, maybe more. Which means it's probably better if I think about more than one scene at a time or this could really take forever.
I really didn't want to scrap that scene and just delete the pages. It was like all day there were a few brain cells working on it, even while I was doing other things. In the first version, a secondary character showed up at the heroine's house for no reason. WTF was I thinking?
In the new version, the secondary shows up because the heroine called her in a panic and there's an actual purpose for the scene. Amazing how that made it easier. LOL!
Have a purpose! Who'd a thunk?!
I think we have difficulty finding purpose for secondary characters. *LOL* It's hard enough finding the purpose for the primary ones. And having to figure that stuff out in the beginning is overwhelming.
I guess you can just write it however, and then do a major rewrite, but that never appeals to me either. And apparently there are writers that doesn't appeal to either--who just rewrite as they go until they get what they want.
Ah, I'm sure some will be rewritten. Okay, A LOT will be reworked at least. But you can tell when a scene isn't working at all of just needs some spit and polish and maybe a little editing for less is more kind of stuff.
My problem was *I* had a purpose for the scene. "I want this scene to reveal X, Y, and Z." My characters did not have a purpose. Major lessoned learned.
Ter, that article is great!
I have the EXACT same problem. The worst scenes are always the ones that something is "off." I'm in the wrong POV or there's no purpose, or I've started rambling....
I was doing that this morning. I knew I needed a scene when Josephine was kidnapped, but every time I started it, it was boring. Which is really a problem, as a kidnapping should be at least someone action-packed and exciting *g*
I was totally starting it wrong every time. Once I figured out the right way to start, the words just popped out. Whew! I'm so relieved - I've been stuck on this damn scene for days.
Congrats on getting the scene to work, Hal. That's exactly what I mean. It's like trying to approach something from eight different angles and you can't find the damn door. Then, you step slightly to the left, and there you go. Staight shot right in.
Huh, that could have dirty undertones but y'all know what I mean. LOL!
deep down I know it’s the wrong scene I need, but I don’t know what else to put there.
Yes! I do this exact same thing! Gah, it's so annoying. Even as a big-time plotter, I only know the outline of what needs to happen, not the specifics of every scene (that'd be impossible to figure out ahead of time) so the nitty-gritty still trips me up every time.
Straight shot right in.
*snort* Sure, we know what you mean *wink, wink*
You guys have been SO inspiring today! I've gotten a ton of writing done today, and I've analyzed some character things that were eluding me, but now they are so clear.
Whew. I'm exhausted though! LOL
I liked your point, Bo'sun, about YOU having a purpose for the scene, but the characters needed one. Yikes -- that's so true -- but what a great reminder.
And Hal, I'm the same about writing introspection scenes -- ultimately they should end up in the "outtakes" portion of the DVD. LOL I think I do it because it helps me to figure out what's going on by letting the characters go on and on. Or at least that's what I tell myself. LOL
Ter - I've been there too, when I want something specific to happen, but it's only happening because I (as the author) want it, not because the characters need it. Not good :)
Go Donna go!
I do the same thing -- if I can't figure out what to write next, I just let the characters ramble, and eventually (hopefully!) something shakes loose. I have a "scrap file" where those scenes go to live later. I love the idea of calling them "outtakes"!
Uh, so, Ter, I copied the phrase "straight shot right in" and pasted it.
Unfortunately, I was in the middle of grading and just copy and paste the same comments over and over. I thought I was pasting something about the role of political leaders in ethnic conflicts. . . nope, I pasted "straight shot right in" in reply to the kid's answer.
Good thing I caught it! LOL!
LMAO!!
Go, Donna, Go!
Now, have a drink, hon. You're working too hard.
Wow, that would have made you a very popular professor...
God, I don't think I've ever had a straight shot right on moment. I must meander...
Somehow, that does not surprise me.
I can't believe how on topic this blog has stayed today. It's actually been productive...rather than philandering and prolific. *LOL*
*holding up mug* Cheers!
That was "AND yet,"
I'm jamming out to Michael Buble at my desk. Totally distracted.
I yet, we still managed to mention Ranger.
I say everytime someone mentions Ranger, we drink. LOL!
I'm so disgusted with that series, I can't even enjoy Ranger anymore. It depresses me.
As if we're not drunk enough on this ship to add a drinking game for whenever Ranger is mentioned.
Did someone mention drinks? :)
Tomorrow's blog is dedicated to the Glittery Hooha...so we can break out the special glasses and drink some hooha's ta Ranger early! Why not?
(The drink you filthy minded pirates!)
woo hoo!
I'll bring my sippy cup! LOL
And I admit, mostly the glitter.
Post a Comment