Writing secrets for beginners

I've taken a couple classes, read tons of books and I can say that the practical stuff, the stuff I really want to know about, is hard to find. I can't put my finger on exactly what it is, but there are things I call tricks that help you organize what you want to say and put it down on paper so that the story moves. They are so basic, that I wonder why writing teachers don't teach them first, before all the other stuff.

It's very difficult for a beginner writer to organize their thoughts and know when to say enough. We who are just learning the art, tend to think that we can drop hints like bread crumbs, so that the reader can guess what we're trying to say. Maybe talented writers can get away with this, but, it doesn't help the beginners. What we end up with is long prose which loses the reader's interest. So, I've condensed the first trick down to this:

(1) See-Think-Do. Or STD, which everyone can remember. You can do it in any combination, but, generally, the character sees something, it triggers some thought, and then he causes him to do some action. I am a beginner and just figured out a big problem with my writing was that I was inconsistent with STD. Generally, the "Do" part of the formula, wasn't consistent with the "think" part. My writing got better when I realized that something had to drive that character to make the decision he made, so I learned to lay the foundation better, making a clearer story. I always introduced something innocuous early on to prepare the reader for what was to come, and hopefully, get him to make the same decision the character would.

(2) Condensing. Whole chapters are written about this in style books. How to combine a whole lot of information without ending up with a run-on sentence, but none of them are written for the story teller. Something as basic as, it's okay to put a sentences thusly:

She lookED into his eyes, fightING against her better instincts to give him a sharp uppercut.

It's basic, but beginner writers over-process, over-analyze sentence structure. Unless someone tells you it's okay to do, you can sit there for days wondering if the structure is wrong because "fighting" might refer to the word "eyes." It's dumb, I know, but that's what happens when no one gives you feedback. And if you look closely, you have two elements of STD in that sentence. See and think.

(3) Clever adjectives. No one told me this, I just spotted it myself. It's part of condensing. Find adjectives that are two for one. Double meanings. Words that can assign something physical as well as emotional. Like, She looked into his STEEL blue eyes, fighting against the urge to give him a sharp uppercut.

Anyways, I know there are lots of talented writers out there that can do all this without even thinking about it, but, I was hoping you could share with us beginners,some of the favorite ways you use to grammatically word smith your stories for setting, character development, etc. For example, there was something I vaguely remember somewhere about parallel sentence combinations, where you put two sentences which seem to be going in one direction, but the third is a total contradiction. This can also be applied to a smaller element like "Mary Beth was tall, blond and doomed for failure."

liked to have seen in a writing book for story tellers? A verb lexicon would be phenomenal. Oh, and I assume everyone knows about lexipedia.com

and unfortunately, I haven't read all the way through any of the few writing books I do have. Most of my technique has been simple observation of the writing of others and what I remember from school/university.

I agree with what you posted in your OP, so I can't think of anything to add ;)
But, a higher reply-count gets more looking at the thread and posting, too :D

of what I was looking for, until recently. Basically, if I can't break it down to style, it's not a helpful process for me. That's why I liked the Twilight books. It was so apparent, you couldn't miss it.

I've been in writing workshops for about 3 years. The workshop itself is terrific and is focused on "technique", which means exactly the sorts of things you are asking about. The workshop founder and several of its instructors are alumni of the Iowa workshop who resettled in Brooklyn, and supposedly their focus is on the Iowa system. I will also add some of the things I've learned personally struggling with text on the page or from other sources.

The first thing I would say, though, does not come from the workshop, but from a book on screen writing -- Syd Field, "Screenplay." I have no interest in writing a screenplay, but readers have been influence by movies and we sometimes need a screenplay-like narrative structure to keep their attention.

So here is his basic idea -- a story consists of (I'm paraphrasing):

1. An INTERSTING CHARACTER,
2. pursuing a GOAL,
3. who encounters and struggles with OBSTACLES,
4. and who eventually either ACHIEVES his goal or FAILS.

I realize this sounds like a really rigid rule. It is a rule that is intended to be broken. I now break it all the time. But you should at least be aware of it and break it strategically. It is the basis of stories going back to pre-biblical times (Gilgamesh) up to the very latest movies and novels. The fact that the character has to struggle against the obstacle to reach his goal creates TENSION. The events of the character's actual struggle against the obstacle creates the NARRATIVE DRIVE. The fact that the character is interesting is what makes the reader CARE about the character's goal and his struggle.

It doesn't have to be an adventure. For example, it could be a family of quirky characters who need to get together for one last Christmas, but who are prevented from doing so by the father's Alzheimer's, reluctant spouses and their own dysfunction, but who do eventually in an unexpected way, reunite (The Corrections). It can be as simple a story as two waiters with different, contrasting personalities, who want to close up their cafe, but who are prevented from doing so by an old man who has insomnia and keeps them from closing until very, very late each night (A Clean Well Lighted Place).

But what this rule means is that a story ordinarily should not be a guy in his room ruminating about various random ideas. It should not be a wizard just doing strange things with objects. It should not be about you getting really, really drunk, having fun, and passing out. If it's a love story, it should not be about two people who are already perfectly happy and in love as the story starts and who don't change; something has to keep them from getting together or if they are together temporarily breaks them apart (like class differences in Love Story, or racial differences in West Side Story), and it's even better if the story is told from the perspective of one character whose goal is to achieve the love of another character.

In workshops you will quickly see that there are many, many people trying to write, who are capable of doing the mechanics (decent sentences), but who have no idea of what a story is.

Once you know what a story is, you can violate the rule -- for example, you can play with the readers' expectations of what the story is about and then show that the story is actually about something else. A Clean Well Lighted Place seems to be about waiters wanting to close up their cafe, being prevented from doing so by the old insomniac, but in a twist ending, it turns out it is about one of the waiters also having insomnia (and hence being sympathetic to the old man) because he has lost his faith in God.

So that's the very, very first thing I would urge everyone to think about. One of my instructors would start every workshop of every story with the question, "in 100 words or less, what is this story about." I strongly believe that this harsh question, reducing the story to its basic structure, is crucial and forces you to think about the elements that Field laid out. Who is trying to do what, and why, and does he get to do it?

I'll chime in with more, especially from the workshop guidelines.

A lot of what you say can be summed up by what I've read in some how to books: A story needs conflict. What I really liked about your synopsis, is how you described what a story is NOT about.

Quote:
But what this rule means is that a story ordinarily should not be a guy in his room ruminating about various random ideas. It should not be a wizard just doing strange things with objects. It should not be about you getting really, really drunk, having fun, and passing out. If it's a love story, it should not be about two people who are already perfectly happy and in love as the story starts and who don't change; something has to keep them from getting together or if they are together temporarily breaks them apart (like class differences in Love Story, or racial differences in West Side Story), and it's even better if the story is told from the perspective of one character whose goal is to achieve the love of another character.

I wonder, is it possible to write a story about someone who isn't so readily likeable, yet, have the reader want them to succeed? Or do you have to flesh out every nuance to make excuses for their shortcomings?

like night and day. Her lead characters are too good and mine are not too bad but they're all lacking.

I like my leads to be varying degrees of stupid and extremely self-centered. (I hope my work isn't too auto-biographical.) When I have them reveal glimmers of human compassion, it's like a shooting star--a quick flash and poof, it's gone--because goodness is special.

I call them cartoon characters, but I actually flesh them out more than that. It makes it easier to give them faults if I don't think of them as real people. I also set my stories in mid-20th century and play with some aspects of reality (during the Vietnam War there never really was a phenomenon called 'old pud') while being obsessively accurate about others.

I know I have a niche audience--me. I write because I like to make myself laugh at human absurdities, and if my vehicles includes cartoon characters and slightly alternate realities, so be it.

:hi:

You sucked me in, Val!! And (gag) goodness no. Just because my name is Ineeda Shave, you shouldn't jump to conclusions.

the Anita Shreve reference. Oops! I'd put it back, but it's beyond the editing period. I never know how long that is. Two hours? One?

It's one hour. You'll have to contact the moderators if there is something of a personal nature that needs to be removed.

Thanks for your insightful posts. Very good points.

went from lurker to poster in this group.

Way back when, she knew Anita Shreve, so she plays with a pseudonym of Ineeda Shave. I just teased her about it but then deleted it but she had already responded and… Oh, details can be so tedious, can't they?

That is very helpful.

short story. In it I wanted to include a few phrases from very famous and not so famous works, but sparingly, happening in my main characters train of thought. I put these fragments in italics, usually with ellipes to indicate a thought process. For instance, in lovemaking with "what is your substance, whereof are you made..." which is of course from a Shakespeare sonnet. Later I use a fragment from Emily Dickinson "And I, and silence,...Wrecked, solitary, here" during my character's crisis point. While these quotes are entirely a propos the character's feelings at the moment, do you think they help or distract the reader get the full impact.

Secondly, what do you think of using foreign words, again in italics? I had a writing course where I did this in a poem, which was judged correct by my professor since the character speaking them was herself French. But in my short story I use a fragment, 3 words actually, in Italian (from an opera) where the character is not Italian. Here the subject is a propos, but the person thinking them is not. However, neither am I Italian, but I know many arias.

Would love to hear what you have to say...

Dropping quotes would be good in fleshing out the character, as in your french character. And you might even get away with doing it once if there is no foreign connection. You can always have the character think about why he thought of it. The STD approach I mentioned. There's action in the story, or he sees something, it reminds him of the quote and maybe you can mention why he remembered it, and then he says it?

You can do the same with Shakespearean quotes. Just a quick thought reference?

today I exported the novel to RTF to print...

And I opened the file before doing this and it was an UH OH moment

Part of chapter one, somehow, went missing

Good thing I religiously backup and have major edits as backups

So I could go back to a previous copy and find the damn thing... copy and paste, walla

So have backups

But actually your STD approach is good.

read, read, read.

You can learn from the good writers and the bad writers.