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 12:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-05-11 02:15 am (UTC)Stephen R. Donaldson's Gap series is sort of a paradigmatic space opera (hell, it's based on the Ring Cycle, for crying out loud), but I'm not always able to work my way through his novels.
Doyle and MacDonald's Mageworld series (
C.J. Cherryh's Foreigner and Cyteen series, though I'm really not sure if they qualify as space opera...see what I mean about genre trouble?
And I did like the first couple books of the Keltiad (Patricia Kennealy) though they suffer from a trait that irks the hell out of me usually: you can tell the villains and heroes straight off by how nice they are to the protagonist.
Now that I come to think of it, those are all series, and I'm not even sure if I'm categorizing them right. Any advice/recommendations?