Some lessons I'm learning along the writing path:
1. Create a Master Plan Document: This is a living, breathing, evolving document. It contains a Daily Writing Log, plus my plot outline, key pivot points, and a brief summary of each chapter.
2. Keep a Daily Writing Log: For the sake of simplicity, I put it at the top of the Master Plan. The log documents each writing session by date and time. Nothing elaborate here, just a few quick notes of what I hope to accomplish and how my thinking/writing is evolving. It's a narrative history of how the book is being created. I can easily find my place because in all caps and in big, bold, bright red lettering I put the words, THIS IS WHERE I AM NOW. I just scroll down until I see red (so to speak) and then add the next entry.
3. Keep Track of Changes: As the story unfolds, the chapters in my Master Plan change, but rather than obliterating the old, I merely add the new information along with the date I made the change. By doing this, I'm creating and preserving the history of how the story evolved.
4. Create a New Folder for Each Draft: "Fast Track," my first novel, had 14 Draft Folders. My new book, "Bluff," to be released later this year, contains 8 Draft Folders. For my current novel - still untitled - I'm only on Draft #1.
5. Give Each Chapter a Name: Each Draft Folder contains the individual chapters - a separate file for each chapter. Numbering them keeps them in their proper order (1.1, 2.1 etc. For the second draft, the numbering sequence is 1.2, 2.2 etc.) But just as important as numbering, is giving your chapters titles. I don't mean a title that will ever see the light of day in your book - it's merely a memory prod so you know at a glance what's contained in the chapter. This way, you don't have to keep opening files later to find what you're looking for. (NOTE: Chapter numbers and titles may change from draft to draft because you'll probably be making lots of alterations, including reordering the sequence of things and breaking big chapters into several smaller ones.)
Final Thoughts:
I find that it's more efficient to write the novel straight through rather than continuing to loop back to make each sentence perfect. Why? Because it gives me a sense of accomplishment -- a realization that I can actually do it. It's purely psychological, the thinking being, "if I've already 'finished' the book, then the rest of my time is spent merely tweaking it."
Knowing up front that the first draft will suck takes the pressure off. The first draft serves mainly as exploration. As I write my third novel, I'm discovering that while my Master Outline has given me the story's scaffolding - the big picture - by writing individual chapters I'm, in effect, zooming in for a close-up in which new, and often unexpected, characters sashay on stage.
Some of the chapters consist almost entirely of dialogue - almost no tags, no action, no description. That will come in subsequent drafts. For now, I'm just writing as fast as I can what I see in my head.
My way of staying organized is certainly NOT the only way, so I think we'd all benefit to hear what works (and doesn't work) for you.
Thanks!
JD
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Monday, May 18, 2009
Writing for the Ear; Writing for the Eye
Recently, I spoke to the Colorado Independent Publishers Association (CIPA) in Denver. They bombarded me with great questions about the creative process, but one question stands out: What are the differences and similarities between writing for television and writing a novel?
As many of you know, my day job is a copy editor on CNN's "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer." And I've been a broadcast journalist for 40 years. (I hear those wisecracks about old age. Stop it!!) About 15 years ago, I added fiction to my writing repertoire. (I hear you media-basher cynics and your snarky remarks about fiction and journalism. You stop it, too!!)
Anyway..... the woman's question got me thinking that there are really more similarities than differences between writing for the ear (broadcast copy) and writing for the eye (print).
Broadcast copy has to be simple and lean because the listener only gets one chance to hear and understand. Unless you have TiVo, you can't tap on the TV screen and tell the anchor, "What did you say? I missed what you said. Could you repeat it, please?" The copy has to be clearly understandable the first time.
Print copy, obviously, can contain more nuance, details, and complexity. But the more I think about it, I see that a lot of my fiction writing closely parallels the broadcast style. For example, I'm writing the first draft of my third novel now. I'm finding that for most scenes, I write the dialogue first -- no action, no description, just two people talking -- a staccato, back-and-forth hot potato of word play. It's just like writing broadcast copy for an anchor because the anchor's copy is meant to be conversational, the way real people talk to each other.
It's only after I lay down my dialogue bed that I loop back and add action, description, and narrative. Yet even then, I apply the same principles that I've used over the years in broadcasting: keep it simple and keep it tight.
Some literary authors are great at writing lush, emotive descriptions. I wish I could do that, but I know my limitations. And I think I know that many readers these days don't want to get bogged down by convoluted sentences.
So.....perhaps novel writing isn't as different from broadcast writing as one might think. Your thoughts?
As many of you know, my day job is a copy editor on CNN's "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer." And I've been a broadcast journalist for 40 years. (I hear those wisecracks about old age. Stop it!!) About 15 years ago, I added fiction to my writing repertoire. (I hear you media-basher cynics and your snarky remarks about fiction and journalism. You stop it, too!!)
Anyway..... the woman's question got me thinking that there are really more similarities than differences between writing for the ear (broadcast copy) and writing for the eye (print).
Broadcast copy has to be simple and lean because the listener only gets one chance to hear and understand. Unless you have TiVo, you can't tap on the TV screen and tell the anchor, "What did you say? I missed what you said. Could you repeat it, please?" The copy has to be clearly understandable the first time.
Print copy, obviously, can contain more nuance, details, and complexity. But the more I think about it, I see that a lot of my fiction writing closely parallels the broadcast style. For example, I'm writing the first draft of my third novel now. I'm finding that for most scenes, I write the dialogue first -- no action, no description, just two people talking -- a staccato, back-and-forth hot potato of word play. It's just like writing broadcast copy for an anchor because the anchor's copy is meant to be conversational, the way real people talk to each other.
It's only after I lay down my dialogue bed that I loop back and add action, description, and narrative. Yet even then, I apply the same principles that I've used over the years in broadcasting: keep it simple and keep it tight.
Some literary authors are great at writing lush, emotive descriptions. I wish I could do that, but I know my limitations. And I think I know that many readers these days don't want to get bogged down by convoluted sentences.
So.....perhaps novel writing isn't as different from broadcast writing as one might think. Your thoughts?
Friday, May 1, 2009
Plan a Little; Write a Little
Writing a novel is a little like journaling. At least it is for me because my novels are written in the first person -- and so are my journal entries.
For the past few weeks, I've been plotting book three in my Lark Chadwick mystery-suspense series. I know what I want to happen at all the main pivot points and I know how it will end; I've given a lot of thought to the sequence of events and the characters; I've met the killer, the red herrings, and the love interest(s).
But there's so much about the story I still don't know. Again, it's just like journaling: I have desires and plans for the future, but life can only be lived one day at a time.
Yesterday, I couldn't wait any longer for all the details of the novel to take shape in my mind -- I felt compelled to begin the first draft. I've written two chapters so far. To be honest, they suck. But that's okay. I can loop back and touch things up later. Right now, I NEED to get something concrete written down.
The interesting thing I've discovered is that the act of writing helped crystallize my thinking -- just like when I tackle a vexing problem in my journal. The idea for how to end each chapter came to my conscious mind mere seconds before I wrote it, just as the answer to a vexing problem in life sometimes comes to me during the act of writing down the details.
Perhaps this happens because when we merely ruminate on things, our minds flit willy-nilly, but the act of writing takes all those amorphous thoughts and laser-focuses them to the tip of the ballpoint as it glides across the paper or the tips of our fingers as they tap (or, in my case, pound) the keyboard keys. Writing forces the mind to slow down and zoom in for a close-up. Writing allows thoughts that had been lurking just below the surface of our consciousness to materialize.
So, maybe writing is like living: Plan a little; write a little -- plan a little; LIVE a little. Maybe. We shall see.
Your thoughts?
For the past few weeks, I've been plotting book three in my Lark Chadwick mystery-suspense series. I know what I want to happen at all the main pivot points and I know how it will end; I've given a lot of thought to the sequence of events and the characters; I've met the killer, the red herrings, and the love interest(s).
But there's so much about the story I still don't know. Again, it's just like journaling: I have desires and plans for the future, but life can only be lived one day at a time.
Yesterday, I couldn't wait any longer for all the details of the novel to take shape in my mind -- I felt compelled to begin the first draft. I've written two chapters so far. To be honest, they suck. But that's okay. I can loop back and touch things up later. Right now, I NEED to get something concrete written down.
The interesting thing I've discovered is that the act of writing helped crystallize my thinking -- just like when I tackle a vexing problem in my journal. The idea for how to end each chapter came to my conscious mind mere seconds before I wrote it, just as the answer to a vexing problem in life sometimes comes to me during the act of writing down the details.
Perhaps this happens because when we merely ruminate on things, our minds flit willy-nilly, but the act of writing takes all those amorphous thoughts and laser-focuses them to the tip of the ballpoint as it glides across the paper or the tips of our fingers as they tap (or, in my case, pound) the keyboard keys. Writing forces the mind to slow down and zoom in for a close-up. Writing allows thoughts that had been lurking just below the surface of our consciousness to materialize.
So, maybe writing is like living: Plan a little; write a little -- plan a little; LIVE a little. Maybe. We shall see.
Your thoughts?
Friday, April 10, 2009
Building a Novel
I’ve begun writing my third novel. Actually, to be more accurate, I’ve begun sketching it. The writing comes later.
I wish I could sit down and simply write it straight through, letting it come together in flashes of insight and creativity as I type. Nuh uh. That’s not how it works – at least not for me.
When I constructed “Fast Track,” my first novel, I used a blueprint set forth in “The Weekend Novelist” written by Robert Ray. For my second novel, “Bluff,” due to be published later this year, I used as a guide Ray’s “The Weekend Novelist Writes a Mystery.” Both of Robert Ray’s books are practical and helpful and I highly recommend them. (You can find them easily on Amazon.)
For Book Three (still untitled), I’m trying to come up with my own plan. Here’s where things stand right now in the creative process:
It began several years ago when I first got the idea. It started with just one character and his situation. (Not gonna go into detail about the substance – this entry is about process). For years, the idea merely banged around in the back of my head. It wasn’t until about a month ago that I began to write down my thoughts in a document I cleverly titled “Initial Thoughts.”
In my “initial thoughts” document, I just started typing up my thinking about the story in a sort of stream-of-consciousness way. I guess you could call it thinking out loud with your fingers. That document includes rough ideas about plot, characters, and settings. My goal is to mine my mind to find out what the story is about and how it will be structured.
I’ve also created a “scenes” document. This began with the six key scenes that comprise a well-structured story (an opening hook, pivot point #1, midpoint, pivot-point #2, climax, and the wrap-up). At this stage, I’ve made decisions about how I want the story to begin, and two key plot twists to get me to the midpoint. That’s when things get hazy.
Garry Dinnerman, my screenplay agent, gave me some sage advice recently that applies to novel writing, as well: “When you get stuck, figure out how you want it to end and work backwards from there.” So that’s what I’m doing now: I know how I think the book should end, I just need to figure out how to make it happen.
One key bit of insight I’m getting as I build the book is the dynamic relationship between character and plot. I’m discovering that character affects plot and vice versa.
Sometimes, in my writing session, I sketch a character. Other times I’ll think about plot. This is where my journalism training is helpful because I follow my curiosity by simply asking questions to get to know the character or situation better. (Anyone who knows me knows what it’s like to be on the receiving end of my inquisitions – you have my deepest sympathy and apologies, plus the warning that I’m not likely to mend my ways anytime soon.)
The better I get to know a character, the more likely it is that some bit of plot action will emerge. And, as I think about what should happen in one of those key scenes, the reporter in me begins to “work the story” by asking the basic journalistic questions: Who? Where? What? When? Why? How? Answering those questions fills in plot details and also can yield new characters. It goes back and forth.
The more I sketch the story, the more eager I am to begin writing. That’s a good sign. But I’m not there yet. I’ll know I’m ready to write when the urge becomes overpowering. That will be when I can see the sketch whole. The big picture will still be missing lots of details, but I’ll be able to fill those in during the writing of the first draft and then add embellishments during the revision process.
So, that’s where I am and that’s where I’m going. Watch for future updates on the journey. Your comments or suggestions are most welcome.
You can also find me on Facebook and on AuthorsDen.com (http://www.authorsden.com/ae/mytitles.asp?AuthorID=38787)
I wish I could sit down and simply write it straight through, letting it come together in flashes of insight and creativity as I type. Nuh uh. That’s not how it works – at least not for me.
When I constructed “Fast Track,” my first novel, I used a blueprint set forth in “The Weekend Novelist” written by Robert Ray. For my second novel, “Bluff,” due to be published later this year, I used as a guide Ray’s “The Weekend Novelist Writes a Mystery.” Both of Robert Ray’s books are practical and helpful and I highly recommend them. (You can find them easily on Amazon.)
For Book Three (still untitled), I’m trying to come up with my own plan. Here’s where things stand right now in the creative process:
It began several years ago when I first got the idea. It started with just one character and his situation. (Not gonna go into detail about the substance – this entry is about process). For years, the idea merely banged around in the back of my head. It wasn’t until about a month ago that I began to write down my thoughts in a document I cleverly titled “Initial Thoughts.”
In my “initial thoughts” document, I just started typing up my thinking about the story in a sort of stream-of-consciousness way. I guess you could call it thinking out loud with your fingers. That document includes rough ideas about plot, characters, and settings. My goal is to mine my mind to find out what the story is about and how it will be structured.
I’ve also created a “scenes” document. This began with the six key scenes that comprise a well-structured story (an opening hook, pivot point #1, midpoint, pivot-point #2, climax, and the wrap-up). At this stage, I’ve made decisions about how I want the story to begin, and two key plot twists to get me to the midpoint. That’s when things get hazy.
Garry Dinnerman, my screenplay agent, gave me some sage advice recently that applies to novel writing, as well: “When you get stuck, figure out how you want it to end and work backwards from there.” So that’s what I’m doing now: I know how I think the book should end, I just need to figure out how to make it happen.
One key bit of insight I’m getting as I build the book is the dynamic relationship between character and plot. I’m discovering that character affects plot and vice versa.
Sometimes, in my writing session, I sketch a character. Other times I’ll think about plot. This is where my journalism training is helpful because I follow my curiosity by simply asking questions to get to know the character or situation better. (Anyone who knows me knows what it’s like to be on the receiving end of my inquisitions – you have my deepest sympathy and apologies, plus the warning that I’m not likely to mend my ways anytime soon.)
The better I get to know a character, the more likely it is that some bit of plot action will emerge. And, as I think about what should happen in one of those key scenes, the reporter in me begins to “work the story” by asking the basic journalistic questions: Who? Where? What? When? Why? How? Answering those questions fills in plot details and also can yield new characters. It goes back and forth.
The more I sketch the story, the more eager I am to begin writing. That’s a good sign. But I’m not there yet. I’ll know I’m ready to write when the urge becomes overpowering. That will be when I can see the sketch whole. The big picture will still be missing lots of details, but I’ll be able to fill those in during the writing of the first draft and then add embellishments during the revision process.
So, that’s where I am and that’s where I’m going. Watch for future updates on the journey. Your comments or suggestions are most welcome.
You can also find me on Facebook and on AuthorsDen.com (http://www.authorsden.com/ae/mytitles.asp?AuthorID=38787)
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Heading to the Inca Trail
Lest you think I'm a total slug, I actually have been busy and productive since my last post in April, I just haven't been busy doing a whole lot of writing!
A big chunk of time was spent teaching a journalism class at American University in Washington, DC. Twenty-five students from around the country -- most of them juniors and seniors -- came to DC to intern at various media outlets (BBC, MSNBC, ESPN, etc). The emphasis of my class was on writing. Students learned (and I'm pleased to report they really did learn) how to write for both print and broadcast. My teaching philosophy is that you "learn by doing," so students wrote a LOT (which means much of my summer was spent reading and editing the hundreds of pages they wrote). Every week, they had to take a lengthy wire story and boil it down to a crisp, 20-second broadcast story. In addition, there were weekly guest speakers whose appearances were treated like a news conference: students were required to ask questions and then write the story in newspaper style. Guest speakers were: Washington Post reporter Michael Ruane; the ever-feisty veteran White House Correspondent Helen Thomas; journalist/teacher/author Alicia Shepard ("Woodward & Bernstein: Life in the Shadow of Watergate"); and my fellow CNN colleagues Zain Verjee (State Dept. Correspondent) and Alex Wellen (Online Producer).
Following the exhausting (but fulfilling) summer journalism teaching experience, my wife Cindy and I escaped to a secluded cabin on a pond in Maine for what amounted to a two-week second honeymoon (our first was 29 years ago). We were virtually cut off from e-mail and the internet. GLORIOUS! (However, I did manage to squeeze in a few book talks and signings, just to keep limber). Cindy used her Mac to put together a magnificent slide show which, if I ever get the time (and technical prowess), I'll post it here for you.
A week from today, I leave for Peru where I'll hike the Inca Trail to Macchu Piccu, one of the newest "Seven Wonders of the World." This came about earlier this year as I was in the midst of the fourth major revision of my second novel (working title: BLUFF). A murder takes place along the Inca Trail, but the more I researched the place online, the more I realized that in order to make my writing more vivid, I'd have to go on location. I'm excited, but a tad apprehensive, too, because I'm a lot older than when I did stuff this rigorous in Army basic training in 1970. So...... your prayers are earnestly coveted and deeply appreciated.
I'll "see" you when (Lord willing) I get back.
JD
A big chunk of time was spent teaching a journalism class at American University in Washington, DC. Twenty-five students from around the country -- most of them juniors and seniors -- came to DC to intern at various media outlets (BBC, MSNBC, ESPN, etc). The emphasis of my class was on writing. Students learned (and I'm pleased to report they really did learn) how to write for both print and broadcast. My teaching philosophy is that you "learn by doing," so students wrote a LOT (which means much of my summer was spent reading and editing the hundreds of pages they wrote). Every week, they had to take a lengthy wire story and boil it down to a crisp, 20-second broadcast story. In addition, there were weekly guest speakers whose appearances were treated like a news conference: students were required to ask questions and then write the story in newspaper style. Guest speakers were: Washington Post reporter Michael Ruane; the ever-feisty veteran White House Correspondent Helen Thomas; journalist/teacher/author Alicia Shepard ("Woodward & Bernstein: Life in the Shadow of Watergate"); and my fellow CNN colleagues Zain Verjee (State Dept. Correspondent) and Alex Wellen (Online Producer).
Following the exhausting (but fulfilling) summer journalism teaching experience, my wife Cindy and I escaped to a secluded cabin on a pond in Maine for what amounted to a two-week second honeymoon (our first was 29 years ago). We were virtually cut off from e-mail and the internet. GLORIOUS! (However, I did manage to squeeze in a few book talks and signings, just to keep limber). Cindy used her Mac to put together a magnificent slide show which, if I ever get the time (and technical prowess), I'll post it here for you.
A week from today, I leave for Peru where I'll hike the Inca Trail to Macchu Piccu, one of the newest "Seven Wonders of the World." This came about earlier this year as I was in the midst of the fourth major revision of my second novel (working title: BLUFF). A murder takes place along the Inca Trail, but the more I researched the place online, the more I realized that in order to make my writing more vivid, I'd have to go on location. I'm excited, but a tad apprehensive, too, because I'm a lot older than when I did stuff this rigorous in Army basic training in 1970. So...... your prayers are earnestly coveted and deeply appreciated.
I'll "see" you when (Lord willing) I get back.
JD
Thursday, April 5, 2007
Timelines
Wouldn't it be great if the novel was written smoothly and perfectly the first time? Reading someone else's work always seems to lull me into thinking that their writing process was effortless. But any writer will tell you that couldn't be further from the truth.
As I slog through the process of revising my second novel, I'm struck yet again that most of the writing process is actually rewriting.
In draft 3 of BLUFF, I made some major structural changes. I added a lot of details and I rearranged the order of several key scenes. But now, as I begin to work through things, I've discovered glaring time problems:
As I slog through the process of revising my second novel, I'm struck yet again that most of the writing process is actually rewriting.
In draft 3 of BLUFF, I made some major structural changes. I added a lot of details and I rearranged the order of several key scenes. But now, as I begin to work through things, I've discovered glaring time problems:
- haziness about when things happen
- mix ups in the sequence of events
- arbitrary decisions I made earlier which now threaten to slow the pace or derail the plot
Thankfully, the organizational groundwork I laid down in draft 3 is now paying off in draft 4. The wisest thing I did back then was to create a list of scenes. It's an elastic document that expands and contracts as I note various details: title, subplots, action, problems, number of pages, a cumulative word count, etc.
Now, as I deal with those pesky time problems in the current rewrite, I've begun to nail down when events take place, noting them in the scene outline and adjusting them in the manuscript. I ran into several major timeline roadblocks in the second half of the story that I've slowly been untangling. I suppose I could go into detail for you, but that would be boring and could inadvertently give away plotting secrets.
The point is that taking the time to be organized has, I believe, streamlined the rewrite by making it easier to navigate quickly throughout the work and make the necessary updates.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Simmering
For the past month, I haven't looked at the third draft of BLUFF.
It's been simmering.
But last week, I read it straight through. In many ways, it's like seeing the story fresh for the first time.
There's a lot I like about it. A lot.
But there are weak places, too. Plenty of them.
I'd say the biggest improvement from draft two to draft three is the major structural rearranging I did. In addition, being able to flit back and forth among the various chapters really sped up and simplified the writing/rewriting process. (See previous posting.)
The story is still too spare, though.
A writing book I'm finding helpful is "Revision: A Creative Approach to Writing and Rewriting Fiction" by David Michael Kaplan (Story Press). There's even a brilliant chapter entitled "Adding What is Essential." It's just what I need.
The next step in the rewrite process, then, will be to read portion's of Kaplan's book as I continue to rewrite what I hope will be my second book.
Watch this space.
JD
It's been simmering.
But last week, I read it straight through. In many ways, it's like seeing the story fresh for the first time.
There's a lot I like about it. A lot.
But there are weak places, too. Plenty of them.
I'd say the biggest improvement from draft two to draft three is the major structural rearranging I did. In addition, being able to flit back and forth among the various chapters really sped up and simplified the writing/rewriting process. (See previous posting.)
The story is still too spare, though.
A writing book I'm finding helpful is "Revision: A Creative Approach to Writing and Rewriting Fiction" by David Michael Kaplan (Story Press). There's even a brilliant chapter entitled "Adding What is Essential." It's just what I need.
The next step in the rewrite process, then, will be to read portion's of Kaplan's book as I continue to rewrite what I hope will be my second book.
Watch this space.
JD
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)