Showing posts with label Fiction. Show all posts
Monday, August 10, 2015
New This Fall!
Seven Bridge Writers� Collaborative
Advanced Fiction Writing
With Rich Marcello
Wednesdays, September 16 � November 18, 2015
6:00 � 9:00 p.m.
The Parlor, The First Church of Christ, Unitarian
725 Main Street, Lancaster, Massachusetts
Course Fee: $200.00
Application Deadline September 9, 2015
Week One: The Anatomy of a Scene
Week Two: The Fictive Dream
Week Three: Point of View, Voice, and Time
Week Four: Plot, Tension, and Raising the Stakes
Week Five: Characters
Week Six: The First and Last Chapter
Week Seven: Dialogue Versus Narrative Summary
Week Eight: How to Build a World
Week Nine: Common Issues
Week Ten: Putting It All Together
Prerequisites: Some level of previous experience writing fiction, either through class work or seminars or self-study. Each student must submit a sample of his or her writing, preferably a scene between six and ten double-spaced pages, as part of the application process for this class.
Rich Marcellois the author of three critically acclaimed novels. The first, The Color of Home, was published in 2013 by Langdon Street Press, and melds together honest generative dialogue, poetic sensory detail, and �unforgettable characters who seem to know the complete song catalog of Lennon or Cohen.� The second, The Big Wide Calm, was published in 2014 also by Langdon Street Press. The US Review of Books stated, �Marcello�s novel has a lot going for it. Well-written, thought-provoking, and filled with flawed characters, it meets all of the basic requirements of best-of-show in the literary fiction category.� The third, The Beauty of the Fall, will be published in 2016. Faulkner Award Winner Mark Spencer commented, �Few novels are as intelligent and relevant as The Beauty of the Fall. Almost none is as eloquent, compelling, heartbreaking, and ultimately, uplifting.�
Please submit an application (found here) with writing sample and course fee (check only please) to: Paula Castner, 55 Fire Road 10, Lancaster, MA, 01523, no later than September 9, 2015. Class size will be limited.
Monday, May 11, 2015
The Other Senses
When writing a story, using the senses to make scenes more vivid and visceral is simple and obvious advice. You want the reader to feel like they�re right there with the characters, experiencing what they�re experiencing.
Using what the characters see, hear, smell, touch and taste will further reader engagement, but these are not the only senses people have. There are in fact a host of other senses that are often overlooked or are so abstract that it isn�t clear how to convey them on the page.
A simple google search will produce a list of senses other than the big five, but it isn�t enough to be aware of them, or to be able to define them. You want to be able to capture the feeling in a way that the reader will relate to, and relate to strongly.
The kind of senses I�m referring to are things like balance, hunger, time, unease, fear, pain, temperature. Everyone is familiar with these sorts of feelings, but it�s hard to describe. In fact it�s much easier to simply state it. I�m hungry. You know exactly what I mean and what it feels like to be hungry. But this kind of statement won�t put you in my place. It won�t make you feel hungry.
However, if I describe the kind of food I�m hungry for, the ridiculously indulgent cream cake sitting in my fridge, then I can not only make you feel hungry too, I can actually make you want to go open the fridge, even though it won�t do you any good because you aren�t here (and even if you were good luck getting any before I stuff it all in my face).
This is what you what to achieve with all senses, to make the reader have a mirroring physical response, and there are a number of ways to do this.
That�s not to say you shouldn�t use the big 5 sense also, but because they are used so often by so many writers, it can be hard finding an original way to put it. Somebody always seem to have already found the perfect phrase, and a bunch of other people have re-used it ad nauseam.
You can, of course, still have the hairs rise on the back of a character�s neck, or a cold bead of sweat trickle down their back, and the reader will have some kind of sensory empathy, but not as strong as they might have 50 or 100 years ago.
That�s one of the big advantages of considering the lesser known senses. They�ve been employed less frequently and so offer more opportunities for fresh ways to draw readers in.
So, here are a few different techniques you can use to accomplish this.
The most direct method is to go on the body. You literally describe the sensations evoked in you when you experience a particular event or stimulus and the reader feels it too, whether a nervously bouncing leg or a cold bead of sweat. But, as mentioned above, it�s hard to avoid cliches and some senses don�t really have this kind of physical component. What are the physiological sensations associated with time passing, for example?
Often, a more effective method is to use the scene to recreate the stimulus itself. Like in my hunger example, making saliva pool in the reader�s mouth can be more powerful than describing the saliva in the character�s, and it�s also one of the few times over-describing something can be a good thing.
You should also pay close attention to the words you use. Strong verbs, similes, alliteration can all affect how well a reader slips into the same mind state as a character. It takes a little thinking about, but it should quickly become second nature to go through your options and realise that jagged or scraping are more evocative words to use when describing pain than simply painful or very painful. Similarly Where, what, why? can convey confusion better than Where am I?
With similes and metaphors you have to watch out for clich�s since all the best ones seem to have been already written (multiple times) but if you can come up with a good one it can be very effective. Much like recreating the stimulus for a sense reaction, a related stimulus that has the same reaction will still put the reader in the right state of mind just as well.
The biggest problem comes with the really abstract senses. It�s hard to capture the way you feel when you�ve been writing for what seems like ten minutes and you look up and two hours have passed. And, to be honest, the absolute best way to recreate that kind of feeling is to pay attention next time it happens to you and make notes. There really is no substitute for personal experience when it comes to trying to present a fresh perspective on a universal feeling.
However, what you may find is that your observations seem very familiar. People react in similar ways and focus on the same things, in particular the small things. There�s nothing wrong with this, a small detail can very often pinpoint a feeling very accurately.
When you�re on top of a ladder feeling unsteady, the things you notice within yourself, the shakiness in your hand or the wobbly sensation running up your legs, are pretty much what everyone feels, and while that�s good in terms of being relatable, it�s not so good when you�re the umpteenth writer to make that exact same observation.
My point being it�s not just about noting the first thing that comes to mind, because chances are that�s going to be too obvious and predictable. You should also consider going outside of yourself.
When you�re on top of that ladder, once you become aware of the immediate sensation in your body, think about your surroundings, the consequences, the possible options to save yourself should you fall.
An image of yourself smashing your nose into the concrete floor below or a filthy gutter you could grab onto, hoping it won�t be wrenched away from the roof, can give just a good idea of losing balance as swaying left to right uncontrollably.
You can even go further out, using the environment to suggest a particular state of mind. So a spooky story set on a dark and stormy night can help establish a mood that in turn makes it easier to convey the character�s sense of unease.
Hmm, a dark and stormy night, I wonder if anyone�s used that phrase before. I should trademark it asap.
If you found this post useful please give it a retweet. Cheers.
Monday, April 20, 2015
Integrating Tone into Dialogue
Dialogue is a key part of any story and it�s usually what readers find most engrossing. They might skim long descriptions, but when they get to someone speaking that�s where they�ll get pulled back in.
What people say and how they say it not only tells the reader what�s going on, it also sets mood, gives an idea of character and provides a natural back and forth that will naturally keep readers engaged.
It helps to keep the flow going when characters are talking, and being able to convey how characters are saying things without explicitly stating it is a very useful skill.
Here�s a basic example of what I mean: �Go to Hell!�
You know how that�s being said without my having to put he said angrily in the narrative. Hearing how the character speaks in the moment is a powerful tool, but it�s easier for some emotions than others.
Anger, like in the example above, is pretty straightforward. Exclamation mark, swear words, all caps�these are pretty easy to work in and for the reader to pick up on. Other emotions and tones aren�t so obvious, but there are a number of techniques that can help.
The best place to see all the different approaches is to read plays and screenplays. These are very dialogue intensive media with a specific culture of putting the bare minimum of descriptors when it comes to what is being said.
Reading the scripts of plays and movies that you like or that are of the same genre that you write can be very illuminating, but it�s also very time consuming. You can�t just read them like you would a normal story, even though you may find yourself doing just that. You have to stop yourself from being swept along�which can be quite difficult since that�s exactly what it�s designed to do�and go over the same section repeatedly until you see exactly what�s being transmitted and how.
This is quite tedious and not for everyone, but if it�s something you find interesting, as I do, then it will prove to be very revealing. In the meantime, here are some things I�ve picked up.
It�s helps if we see the thing that causes an emotion. For example, if a mother is irritated by a child focused on their iPhone when she�s trying to tell him something, then that�s a lot easier to convey than the same woman still in a bad mood because of that child a chapter later when she�s at the shops.
Having the trigger in the same scene means you can establish the cause of the emotion, assuming you can clearly set up the situation (who doesn�t find being ignored by someone glued to their phone irritating?), and the reader will simply transfer their feelings onto the characters.
Using specific verbs that suggest a particular mind set also helps. If she takes the phone from him, it tells you a lot more if she snatches it or rips it from his hands.
This is particularly useful when you have a set of short question and answer type dialogue where you don�t want to break it up with descriptions of people�s raised eyebrows and tightened jaws.
Once the phone is grabbed, the tone of the conversation between mother and child is clearly defined and doesn�t need to be restated after every line.
One strong action, whether a pat on the back or a surreptitious look in someone�s shopping bag, can establish the tone for any length of interaction.
Another method to control the tone is to use tempo. If a character is asked a question and then gives a long answer, that has a different effect to a character who is asked a question, gives a partial answer, has to be prompted for more, and so on.
Who talks more, who interrupts, who holds back, these things give an indication of a character�s state of mind and attitude without having to say Dave paused and looked out of the window to tell the reader what�s going on if you vary the tempo and line length.
If you found this post useful please give it a retweet. Cheers.
Monday, April 6, 2015
Bad Emotions Made Good
When writing a story you may find that the good guy has access to a limited range of emotions compared to the bad guy.
Basic emotions (happy, sad, angry, etc.) are easy enough to evoke, but more complex or darker feelings tend to be more difficult to justify.
For example, if the hero�s best friend wins the lottery, a good guy would react how? If he�s a decent human being, probably by being pleased for his friend.
If a friend of the villain�usually a not so wholesome individual�wins the lottery, then the response can be more varied. Pleased (because he plans to �share� in the wealth), jealousy, resentment, maybe even plans to steal the money. These darker thoughts are often more interesting and offer more ideas for where to take a story.
While making your main character evil but still likeable is a very hard thing to achieve, that doesn't mean you can�t give them (and the reader) the chance to experience the darker side of their personality.
The main character in a story has to appeal to the reader. They�re going to be stuck with them for quite a long time so making the despicable probably isn�t going to do you any favours.
But we all do questionable things and show poor judgement at times. Part of being human is making mistakes, often hurting others in the process. Exploring that side of person is a big part of fiction, and if handled well can be very satisfying.
The truth is though that readers often respond better to characters who do nothing bad, are never in the wrong and behave honourably. They might find themselves in trouble or accused of wrongdoing, but through no fault of their own.
It�s part of human nature to consider one�s own feelings of being unfairly treated as entirely justified, while other people�s are childish and petty. And in fiction we can easily relate to people who are suffering in similar unfair fashion.
Should you, however, wish to delve into the dark side of your characters a little more there are ways of keeping them likeable. These techniques can, like any, be abused. Used to their extreme they can even allow characters to do horrible things while seemingly still being on the side of good, but if used sparingly they can allow you to add depth to both your characters and your stories.
First and foremost it helps to make characters aware of their own shortcomings. That doesn�t mean they get to avoid them, but when they do behave less than perfectly, simply acknowledging that what they did wasn�t all that great can make them more human.
So, for example, if our hero whose friend wins the lottery feels envious and pissed off that he�s sitting in his studio apartment eating noodles (again) while his buddy is out having the time of his life, then addressing this emotion, maybe by talking to someone about it, makes him less of a bad friend and more of a regular human being struggling with feelings we all struggle with.
In effect he becomes two people, both a bad guy and a good guy, in the same person. The conflict between these two creates tension and drama, and it gives the reader someone to root for.
In addition to this, it also helps to raise the stakes to help justify those feelings. If our hero needed money badly, but it was his friend who got the windfall, you can understand his disappointment. Taken to it�s extreme, though, this can also allow you to take a character into very murky waters.
If a terrorist has planted a bomb that will kill thousands, is it okay to torture him? And to feel no remorse while doing so? This is a common trope in thrillers where it�s almost seen as the duty of a character to act inhumanely if the stakes are high enough, even to revel in it.
And readers will more often than not buy into this logic because a writer has the advantage of getting to show the methods used actually working�the disaster is averted, the kidnap victim is found�and out leave out any of the collateral damage.
At this point I'd like to take a moment's silence for the all those construction workers and janitorial staff who died on the Death Star and Death Star 2. Never forget.
Another method is relativism. If the hero is surrounded by people who are much worse than him, then his behaviour can seem quite honourable.
A bank robber who plans to steal a lot of money may not seem the likeliest of heroes, but if he is in a gang of vicious thugs and he tries to prevent them from hurting people then he becomes more likeable by comparison.
This is, of course, a very dubious line of thinking. If a man is a professional thief chances are he isn�t all that pleasant, but in fiction you can present characters in a flattering light even when they�re doing terrible things.
In cases like this it also helps to give them a good reason to behave badly. If the money is for grandma�s operation, the bank thief is seen as someone doing what he�s got to do, rather than just a greedy a-hole who can't hold down a job.
Again, it also helps if he is aware that he�s doing something bad and regrets it. You often see this through the �one last job� trope. The more reluctant he is, the less we blame him for breaking multiple laws and biblical commandments.
It�s very easy to end up in very clich�d territory here, as every character who is meant to be sympathetic has an excellent reason for doing what he�s doing, usually involving a dying relative. But there are other reasons out there. Probably.
You can also have a character have a change of heart. If someone who does bad things decides to change his ways and even uses his nefarious skills against his own kind, that is seen as a respectable pursuit.
The classic example of this is the hitman who refuses to follow orders and kill his target (usually a child or a woman) and then goes on the run, killing those trying to kill him and his new best friend. He�s still a psychotic murderer, but now he�s using his talent for shooting people in the face for good. Hooray!
But the dynamic works for less extreme scenarios. A character who decides to fix whatever problems they caused (even by questionable methods) can be quite appealing, especially if they have to become an outcast to do so.
Monday, March 30, 2015
Getting Characters Out of Work Mode
Most characters have a profession�doctor, cop, assistant in a cupcake store�and in the course of doing their job they will slip into work mode. They will talk and act in the way you expect someone in that position to talk and act. The problem is that this can make them come across as stereotypical.
This is especially true for secondary characters who might not appear often other than to perform a job related task, but it can also be true for main characters where every time they have to do their job they start acting in a very specific manner�a politician uses a lot of meaningless double-speak, a doctor uses a lot of medical jargon, a cop becomes focused on factual questions and answers.
This makes it clear what they do for a living but little else.
What a character says and how they say it not only tells the reader what kind of a person they�re reading about, but also helps to set mood and tone for a scene. There�s a lot you can do through dialogue beyond asking and answering questions and imparting information.
If a character acts one way when in work mode, and then they behave another way once they�re off stage, it can make them seem like two separate people. Like a story about an actor and the role he�s playing, but in a story you want the reader to be able to connect fully with the character as a whole.
While a good professional should be able to divorce their feelings from the job they do, it doesn�t make for very good storytelling, nor does it add any depth to the portrayal of the character. In fact it can end up doing the opposite.
Often it isn�t obvious because there�s only one character of that sort in the scene. So one politician acting like a politician might seem reasonable.
�If elected, I promise I will do everything in my power to get that bridge built.�
Sounds like the sort of thing a politician would say. But if you imagine another politician in the same room, would they be two distinct personalities? Even if they held diametrically opposite views.
�If elected, I promise I will do everything in my power to stop that bridge being built.�
Despite the content of what they�re saying being different, the structure is the same. Both are making statement that sound like promises but are in face totally non-committal, which certainly tells you they are both politicians but not who they are beyond that.
Once they come off stage it�s a lot easier to have them express themselves as individuals, but it�s a wasted opportunity not to use all appearances to give a character depth.
The problem is that all politicians do tend to sound the same. They�re all trained in the same techniques to do the job effectively. The same with cops and teachers and librarians. This is doubly true if the only function of the character in your story is to come in, perform their job, and then leave. How can you avoid making them stereotypical when they only appear for a paragraph or two?
Using the technique of imagining if there was someone else of the same profession in the scene is a good place to start. Would it be easy to differentiate between them? This won�t fix the issue, but is a good way to spot the problem.
Also consider what happened to the character in the previous scene. A politician who�s just been told there�s been a death threat made against him will act differently to one who�s been told he�s ahead in the polls.
Having a character simply at work so the reader can see what they do has very little value, even if their job happens to be quite exciting.
If you want to establish a character�s job in an authentic manner, how many words do you need to do that? Is a politician who gives a long speech full of empty promises going to be more convincing than one who makes one campaign promise he obviously has no intention of keeping?
The more isolated a scene is from the rest of the narrative the easier it is to let the character switch to work mode, so making sure the character is in touch with previous events, mentally and emotionally, helps a lot.
For minor characters, consider what they were doing prior to their appearance, even if we never see it. You don�t have to give them a detailed backstory, but any residual emotion will help add nuance.
Having one character interrupt another is a good way of shifting the dialogue from formulaic to dramatic. If a cop is asking a witness questions in a standard cop-like manner, and the witness wants to know where he got that pen because she had one just like it which went missing and is he sure that�s not her pen, then that can throw the cop off his even keel. Characters act in a particular way because they are prepared. If you can throw things at them that they aren�t prepared for they will have to go off script. Using another character to provoke a response is one way, but any sort of unusual activity in a standard scene will give the characters a chance to act like themselves rather than the job.
Even though it�s important to have a character behave in a way befitting his job and status, it�s far more important to engage with the reader and have them connect with the character on a deeper level. The best way to do that is not to focus on what makes them a typical member of a community, but to find the traits that are unique to them and typify their personality, and then find ways to draw it out of them.
If you found this post interesting please give it a retweet. Cheers.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
