Goddamn shiny objects.
May. 9th, 2005 10:15 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
squeequegIn theory, one of the best pieces of writing advice I've gotten is to examine how the authors I like write their stories.
I say "in theory," because I always get too damn distracted by the story itself.
Case in point: I'm attempting to rewrite a light space operaish story (space operetta? No, not enough puns), and so I'm rereading some of my favorite novels of the space opera-type. I go in with the noble intent of seeing how they construct a scene, how they mesh narratives together, how they work in description and science (or Science!) so that it isn't in indigestible lumps, how, in short, they make the story live.
I get about ten paragraphs in and I'm happily ensconced in the plot, my attention less on how it's done than on what happens next and isn't this so cool! Look! Zappy things!
I can occasionally step back and analyze some of the narrative, see how the structure works. But for close work, I'm in trouble. Maybe what I need to do is examine writers whose work I respect but don't get caught up in -- but then how can I learn how to write the stories I would love to read?
In other news, I've also discovered that attempting to rewrite a story when irritable and depressed does very little for the story. The space opera is much better now than when the group critted it; the Irish werewolf story not so much. At least it has a better opening now...maybe I can bludgeon it a bit tomorrow.
I say "in theory," because I always get too damn distracted by the story itself.
Case in point: I'm attempting to rewrite a light space operaish story (space operetta? No, not enough puns), and so I'm rereading some of my favorite novels of the space opera-type. I go in with the noble intent of seeing how they construct a scene, how they mesh narratives together, how they work in description and science (or Science!) so that it isn't in indigestible lumps, how, in short, they make the story live.
I get about ten paragraphs in and I'm happily ensconced in the plot, my attention less on how it's done than on what happens next and isn't this so cool! Look! Zappy things!
I can occasionally step back and analyze some of the narrative, see how the structure works. But for close work, I'm in trouble. Maybe what I need to do is examine writers whose work I respect but don't get caught up in -- but then how can I learn how to write the stories I would love to read?
In other news, I've also discovered that attempting to rewrite a story when irritable and depressed does very little for the story. The space opera is much better now than when the group critted it; the Irish werewolf story not so much. At least it has a better opening now...maybe I can bludgeon it a bit tomorrow.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-05-10 07:08 am (UTC)A script sup watches the monitor and checks for all things continuity - which hand did what, which prop went where, which glass was at what level, what line someone took a sip or a drag of the cigarette on, where the eyeline matches are....
I can do that for about 30 seconds before I'm into watching the actors. "Hey, neat story!"
Thanks for the humorous and articulate summation of this syndrome. Maybe we need a long German word for "the inability to absorb stylistic or technical information about art because the art has sucked you in." Anyone? Anyone?
no subject
Date: 2005-05-11 02:04 am (UTC)