Steven James's Blog, page 178
August 14, 2013
See You Next Year
Just a note to tell you that I need to put the Ask the Author posts on hold for a few months. It’s crunch time for my next book, Checkmate, so I’m going to concentrate on it for now and get back to blogging early next year. To keep you enlightened until I return, here are several books on writing I recommend:· On Writing by Stephen King· Scene & Structure by Jack Bickham· Writing the Breakout Novel by Donald Maass And my own writing book, Story Trumps Structure, will be released next spring. I wish you all the best in your writing endeavors.
July 30, 2013
To Blog or Not to Blog
A few of us were invited by The Big Thrill to comment on whether or not it's beneficial as an author to spend time blogging.
Check out what we have to say and, please, respond with your own thoughts.
"Does blogging provide discipline and organization--or is it a distraction?"
Check out what we have to say and, please, respond with your own thoughts.
"Does blogging provide discipline and organization--or is it a distraction?"
July 11, 2013
The Seven (Bad) Habits of Highly Effective Writers
Steven is out of town, so I (his office manager) am taking over the Ask the Author post for the day. I won't be answering any of your questions, but I do want to direct you to an article that every aspiring (and published) author should read.
One of the best ways to become an effective writer is to learn through other authors' blunders and gaffes. So here's your chance. Click on the link to the Suspense Magazine article Steven was asked to contribute to called "The Seven (Bad) Habits of Highly Effective Writers." I think you'll find it highly enlightening.
(Permission was granted to link to the article by its author, Anthony J. Franze.)
Steven will return to answer more of your questions after he's past the three book deadlines that have chomped at his heels the past two months.
Until then, Happy Writing!
One of the best ways to become an effective writer is to learn through other authors' blunders and gaffes. So here's your chance. Click on the link to the Suspense Magazine article Steven was asked to contribute to called "The Seven (Bad) Habits of Highly Effective Writers." I think you'll find it highly enlightening.
(Permission was granted to link to the article by its author, Anthony J. Franze.)
Steven will return to answer more of your questions after he's past the three book deadlines that have chomped at his heels the past two months.
Until then, Happy Writing!
May 6, 2013
Does every scene have to have conflict? Can you have a scene that simply shows more character development, or simply hints/builds towards things to come later in the story?
These two are interrelated questions and focus on an important question—what is a scene? There are a lot of different theories out there, and words of advice. Here is my take on it.
I believe that in a scene something must be altered. This can be the status of the character; the physical, emotional, or spiritual condition; or the understanding of what is happening.
Some people teach that you can use a scene simply to reveal characterization, but I think those scenes fall flat.
Think of a scene as a mini-story. And what is a story? It’s the introduction of a character who faces a conflict that escalates into a climactic conclusion that provides the audience with a satisfying resolution. All while giving the reader a powerful, emotional experience.
The building blocks of a novel are scenes, and the cement that holds them together are interludes. A scene consists of action—such as you might see on a theater stage. If you can see the actions onstage in the novel, it’s a scene. If you cannot, it’s probably an interlude.
The scenes in a novel are strung together by interludes during which the characters process what just happened and make a decision that leads to the next scene. The reader is invited to join the character as she thinks about what just happened, the emotions that it evoked, and then the new direction for the story. Just remember, in a scene, a person or a situation must be altered. If nothing is changed, it’s an unnecessary scene.
Assignment: The detective chases the villain through the streets but doesn’t catch him. Frustrated, she goes back to her hotel room and while she’s taking off her shoes, she rubs her feet and remembers the chase. While doing so, she realizes that the villain was limping as he ran. That motivates her to drive across town and accuse her friend, who recently sprained his ankle, of the crime. Her friend is angry and shows her that he’s limping on the left leg rather than the right one. He’s so offended that she would accuse him of the terrible crime that he says he never wants to see her again. He slams the door in her face and she returns home, dejected.
Identify the two scenes in the paragraph above.Identify the interlude.
Also, notice how, in each of the two scenes, the character struggles, fails to get what she ultimately wants (to catch the bad guy), but moves closer to solving the mystery by eliminating possibilities.
So, look at your scene and ask if there is conflict, or just talking heads. Ask if there is an ending that drives the story forward, or one that just falls flat. Ask if something meaningful is altered, and if not, change the scene or delete it (because it is probably not necessary).
April 8, 2013
I am currently editing my first book...What is your editing process? What do you recommend other writers to do when editing?
Two images come to mind when I think of editing: farming and watching my daughter comb her hair.
First, farming.
When I’m working on a story I often imagine that the first time through a scene I’m breaking up the soil. Sometimes the ground is fertile and it’s easy to churn it up, but more often than not it’s unyielding and I have to really work at it to break up the ground. I’m not trying to get things right, just prepare the path for the story seeds to fall into place. So, I’m not trying to force things into place, just trying to get a sense of what the scene might be about.
Some people write descriptions first, but most of the time for me it ends up being dialogue. I hear it play out in my head; I write what I hear, and then I have to work at it later to fill in the descriptions and the narration so I can see the scene as well as hear it.
Next, hair brushing.
My oldest daughter has long hair. As she’s brushing it, the first time she won’t be able to pull the brush all the way through. Rather, she’ll brush it until she comes to a snag or tangle and then, instead of yanking hard to get it out, she’ll start over at the top, gently brushing through all of the hair until that spot to begin to work out the knots.
Whenever I’m stuck or having a hard time with a scene, I’ll go back and reread the previous part of the story, brushing through it until I come to the snag. Usually I’ll be able to untangle a little bit more of the story.
Then, I start brushing through it again.
And little by little the snags come out.
I’m not sure if it’s true, but I heard that Ernest Hemingway would reread his book through from the first word each morning before he would write another word. I can definitely see the practical wisdom in brushing through the whole story like that to get to the tangles.
Whether you’re breaking up the ground as you work on a scene early in your writing process, or you’re brushing out the tangles as you edit it, trust the process. The farmer trusts that his fields will grow when he cultivates them, my daughter trusts that she’ll be able to smooth out her hair, if she’s patient.
Break up the ground. Untangle the tale. Trust the process. And you’ll be on your way to finishing your story.
February 26, 2013
I have two stories in the same story world, 3000 years apart. One is done and needs revising (chronologically first), and one has been rewritten several times but I plan to start from scratch this time (story is much more definable and developed). Would yo
Two issues pop to mind for me: openings and context.
You mention that the two stories are in the same story world; I’m not sure if that means they appear in the same novel, or if you’re talking about two separate books.
In either case, without being familiar with the context of your stories, it’s not possible to decide which one needs your more immediate attention. Remember that stories need escalation of conflict and tension, so, if one of the stories builds up to a more intense climax, that one should come last, chronologically. You always want to save the best for last, the plot must always thicken, never thin.
I’m not sure if Tolstoy actually said this, but there’s a story in writing circles that he once said, “The first thing they read is the last thing you write.” Here’s the point: You’ll only know how a story needs to begin when you know how it ends. If it ends with a person deciding to move from Cincinnati to LA, you know that, at the beginning, this has to be their struggle. So, when you get done, you would go back and recast the beginning so that it is tied in inextricably to the end of the story.
Too many writers spend inordinate amounts of time on their openings, their hooks and so on. They go to “first page critiques” sessions with other writers and bring their work to their local writers groups and keep polishing something that they might not even use in the end. Instead, it’s vital that we work through our stories, flesh them out, see where they lead, and then, once we know where they’re going, head back to the beginning and start them off aiming in that direction.
Whichever story you decide to develop first, let it inform your work on the other story—whether that involves making promises and foreshadowing (if you write the one that comes 3000 years before the other), or if it means fulfilling your promises (if you write the later story first).
Finally, I would suggest that you follow your passion. You might be more excited about one or the other. I’d go with that one. Let that give you momentum and fuel for the long hours of writing you will undoubtedly need.
You mention that the two stories are in the same story world; I’m not sure if that means they appear in the same novel, or if you’re talking about two separate books.
In either case, without being familiar with the context of your stories, it’s not possible to decide which one needs your more immediate attention. Remember that stories need escalation of conflict and tension, so, if one of the stories builds up to a more intense climax, that one should come last, chronologically. You always want to save the best for last, the plot must always thicken, never thin.
I’m not sure if Tolstoy actually said this, but there’s a story in writing circles that he once said, “The first thing they read is the last thing you write.” Here’s the point: You’ll only know how a story needs to begin when you know how it ends. If it ends with a person deciding to move from Cincinnati to LA, you know that, at the beginning, this has to be their struggle. So, when you get done, you would go back and recast the beginning so that it is tied in inextricably to the end of the story.
Too many writers spend inordinate amounts of time on their openings, their hooks and so on. They go to “first page critiques” sessions with other writers and bring their work to their local writers groups and keep polishing something that they might not even use in the end. Instead, it’s vital that we work through our stories, flesh them out, see where they lead, and then, once we know where they’re going, head back to the beginning and start them off aiming in that direction.
Whichever story you decide to develop first, let it inform your work on the other story—whether that involves making promises and foreshadowing (if you write the one that comes 3000 years before the other), or if it means fulfilling your promises (if you write the later story first).
Finally, I would suggest that you follow your passion. You might be more excited about one or the other. I’d go with that one. Let that give you momentum and fuel for the long hours of writing you will undoubtedly need.
I have two stories in the same story world, 3000 years apart. One is done and needs revising (chronologically first), and one has been rewritten several times but I plan to start from scratch this time (story is much more definable and developed). Would yo
Two issues pop to mind for me: openings and context.
You mention that the two stories are in the same story world; I’m not sure if that means they appear in the same novel, or if you’re talking about two separate books.
In either case, without being familiar with the context of your stories, it’s not possible to decide which one needs your more immediate attention. Remember that stories need escalation of conflict and tension, so, if one of the stories builds up to a more intense climax, that one should come last, chronologically. You always want to save the best for last, the plot must always thicken, never thin.
I’m not sure if Tolstoy actually said this, but there’s a story in writing circles that he once said, “The first thing they read is the last thing you write.” Here’s the point: You’ll only know how a story needs to begin when you know how it ends. If it ends with a person deciding to move from Cincinnati to LA, you know that, at the beginning, this has to be their struggle. So, when you get done, you would go back and recast the beginning so that it is tied in inextricably to the end of the story.
Too many writers spend inordinate amounts of time on their openings, their hooks and so on. They go to “first page critiques” sessions with other writers and bring their work to their local writers groups and keep polishing something that they might not even use in the end. Instead, it’s vital that we work through our stories, flesh them out, see where they lead, and then, once we know where they’re going, head back to the beginning and start them off aiming in that direction.
Whichever story you decide to develop first, let it inform your work on the other story—whether that involves making promises and foreshadowing (if you write the one that comes 3000 years before the other), or if it means fulfilling your promises (if you write the later story first).
Finally, I would suggest that you follow your passion. You might be more excited about one or the other. I’d go with that one. Let that give you momentum and fuel for the long hours of writing you will undoubtedly need.
You mention that the two stories are in the same story world; I’m not sure if that means they appear in the same novel, or if you’re talking about two separate books.
In either case, without being familiar with the context of your stories, it’s not possible to decide which one needs your more immediate attention. Remember that stories need escalation of conflict and tension, so, if one of the stories builds up to a more intense climax, that one should come last, chronologically. You always want to save the best for last, the plot must always thicken, never thin.
I’m not sure if Tolstoy actually said this, but there’s a story in writing circles that he once said, “The first thing they read is the last thing you write.” Here’s the point: You’ll only know how a story needs to begin when you know how it ends. If it ends with a person deciding to move from Cincinnati to LA, you know that, at the beginning, this has to be their struggle. So, when you get done, you would go back and recast the beginning so that it is tied in inextricably to the end of the story.
Too many writers spend inordinate amounts of time on their openings, their hooks and so on. They go to “first page critiques” sessions with other writers and bring their work to their local writers groups and keep polishing something that they might not even use in the end. Instead, it’s vital that we work through our stories, flesh them out, see where they lead, and then, once we know where they’re going, head back to the beginning and start them off aiming in that direction.
Whichever story you decide to develop first, let it inform your work on the other story—whether that involves making promises and foreshadowing (if you write the one that comes 3000 years before the other), or if it means fulfilling your promises (if you write the later story first).
Finally, I would suggest that you follow your passion. You might be more excited about one or the other. I’d go with that one. Let that give you momentum and fuel for the long hours of writing you will undoubtedly need.
I have two stories in the same story world, 3000 years apart. One is done and needs revising (chronologically first), and one has been rewritten several times but I plan to start from scratch this time (story is much more definable and developed). Would yo
Two issues pop to mind for me: openings and context.
You mention that the two stories are in the same story world; I’m not sure if that means they appear in the same novel, or if you’re talking about two separate books.
In either case, without being familiar with the context of your stories, it’s not possible to decide which one needs your more immediate attention. Remember that stories need escalation of conflict and tension, so, if one of the stories builds up to a more intense climax, that one should come last, chronologically. You always want to save the best for last, the plot must always thicken, never thin.
I’m not sure if Tolstoy actually said this, but there’s a story in writing circles that he once said, “The first thing they read is the last thing you write.” Here’s the point: You’ll only know how a story needs to begin when you know how it ends. If it ends with a person deciding to move from Cincinnati to LA, you know that, at the beginning, this has to be their struggle. So, when you get done, you would go back and recast the beginning so that it is tied in inextricably to the end of the story.
Too many writers spend inordinate amounts of time on their openings, their hooks and so on. They go to “first page critiques” sessions with other writers and bring their work to their local writers groups and keep polishing something that they might not even use in the end. Instead, it’s vital that we work through our stories, flesh them out, see where they lead, and then, once we know where they’re going, head back to the beginning and start them off aiming in that direction.
Whichever story you decide to develop first, let it inform your work on the other story—whether that involves making promises and foreshadowing (if you write the one that comes 3000 years before the other), or if it means fulfilling your promises (if you write the later story first).
Finally, I would suggest that you follow your passion. You might be more excited about one or the other. I’d go with that one. Let that give you momentum and fuel for the long hours of writing you will undoubtedly need.
You mention that the two stories are in the same story world; I’m not sure if that means they appear in the same novel, or if you’re talking about two separate books.
In either case, without being familiar with the context of your stories, it’s not possible to decide which one needs your more immediate attention. Remember that stories need escalation of conflict and tension, so, if one of the stories builds up to a more intense climax, that one should come last, chronologically. You always want to save the best for last, the plot must always thicken, never thin.
I’m not sure if Tolstoy actually said this, but there’s a story in writing circles that he once said, “The first thing they read is the last thing you write.” Here’s the point: You’ll only know how a story needs to begin when you know how it ends. If it ends with a person deciding to move from Cincinnati to LA, you know that, at the beginning, this has to be their struggle. So, when you get done, you would go back and recast the beginning so that it is tied in inextricably to the end of the story.
Too many writers spend inordinate amounts of time on their openings, their hooks and so on. They go to “first page critiques” sessions with other writers and bring their work to their local writers groups and keep polishing something that they might not even use in the end. Instead, it’s vital that we work through our stories, flesh them out, see where they lead, and then, once we know where they’re going, head back to the beginning and start them off aiming in that direction.
Whichever story you decide to develop first, let it inform your work on the other story—whether that involves making promises and foreshadowing (if you write the one that comes 3000 years before the other), or if it means fulfilling your promises (if you write the later story first).
Finally, I would suggest that you follow your passion. You might be more excited about one or the other. I’d go with that one. Let that give you momentum and fuel for the long hours of writing you will undoubtedly need.
I have two stories in the same story world, 3000 years apart. One is done and needs revising (chronologically first), and one has been rewritten several times but I plan to start from scratch this time (story is much more definable and developed). Would yo
Two issues pop to mind for me: openings and context.
You mention that the two stories are in the same story world; I’m not sure if that means they appear in the same novel, or if you’re talking about two separate books.
In either case, without being familiar with the context of your stories, it’s not possible to decide which one needs your more immediate attention. Remember that stories need escalation of conflict and tension, so, if one of the stories builds up to a more intense climax, that one should come last, chronologically. You always want to save the best for last, the plot must always thicken, never thin.
I’m not sure if Tolstoy actually said this, but there’s a story in writing circles that he once said, “The first thing they read is the last thing you write.” Here’s the point: You’ll only know how a story needs to begin when you know how it ends. If it ends with a person deciding to move from Cincinnati to LA, you know that, at the beginning, this has to be their struggle. So, when you get done, you would go back and recast the beginning so that it is tied in inextricably to the end of the story.
Too many writers spend inordinate amounts of time on their openings, their hooks and so on. They go to “first page critiques” sessions with other writers and bring their work to their local writers groups and keep polishing something that they might not even use in the end. Instead, it’s vital that we work through our stories, flesh them out, see where they lead, and then, once we know where they’re going, head back to the beginning and start them off aiming in that direction.
Whichever story you decide to develop first, let it inform your work on the other story—whether that involves making promises and foreshadowing (if you write the one that comes 3000 years before the other), or if it means fulfilling your promises (if you write the later story first).
Finally, I would suggest that you follow your passion. You might be more excited about one or the other. I’d go with that one. Let that give you momentum and fuel for the long hours of writing you will undoubtedly need.
You mention that the two stories are in the same story world; I’m not sure if that means they appear in the same novel, or if you’re talking about two separate books.
In either case, without being familiar with the context of your stories, it’s not possible to decide which one needs your more immediate attention. Remember that stories need escalation of conflict and tension, so, if one of the stories builds up to a more intense climax, that one should come last, chronologically. You always want to save the best for last, the plot must always thicken, never thin.
I’m not sure if Tolstoy actually said this, but there’s a story in writing circles that he once said, “The first thing they read is the last thing you write.” Here’s the point: You’ll only know how a story needs to begin when you know how it ends. If it ends with a person deciding to move from Cincinnati to LA, you know that, at the beginning, this has to be their struggle. So, when you get done, you would go back and recast the beginning so that it is tied in inextricably to the end of the story.
Too many writers spend inordinate amounts of time on their openings, their hooks and so on. They go to “first page critiques” sessions with other writers and bring their work to their local writers groups and keep polishing something that they might not even use in the end. Instead, it’s vital that we work through our stories, flesh them out, see where they lead, and then, once we know where they’re going, head back to the beginning and start them off aiming in that direction.
Whichever story you decide to develop first, let it inform your work on the other story—whether that involves making promises and foreshadowing (if you write the one that comes 3000 years before the other), or if it means fulfilling your promises (if you write the later story first).
Finally, I would suggest that you follow your passion. You might be more excited about one or the other. I’d go with that one. Let that give you momentum and fuel for the long hours of writing you will undoubtedly need.
I have two stories in the same story world, 3000 years apart. One is done and needs revising (chronologically first), and one has been rewritten several times but I plan to start from scratch this time (story is much more definable and developed). Would yo
Two issues pop to mind for me: openings and context.
You mention that the two stories are in the same story world; I’m not sure if that means they appear in the same novel, or if you’re talking about two separate books.
In either case, without being familiar with the context of your stories, it’s not possible to decide which one needs your more immediate attention. Remember that stories need escalation of conflict and tension, so, if one of the stories builds up to a more intense climax, that one should come last, chronologically. You always want to save the best for last, the plot must always thicken, never thin.
I’m not sure if Tolstoy actually said this, but there’s a story in writing circles that he once said, “The first thing they read is the last thing you write.” Here’s the point: You’ll only know how a story needs to begin when you know how it ends. If it ends with a person deciding to move from Cincinnati to LA, you know that, at the beginning, this has to be their struggle. So, when you get done, you would go back and recast the beginning so that it is tied in inextricably to the end of the story.
Too many writers spend inordinate amounts of time on their openings, their hooks and so on. They go to “first page critiques” sessions with other writers and bring their work to their local writers groups and keep polishing something that they might not even use in the end. Instead, it’s vital that we work through our stories, flesh them out, see where they lead, and then, once we know where they’re going, head back to the beginning and start them off aiming in that direction.
Whichever story you decide to develop first, let it inform your work on the other story—whether that involves making promises and foreshadowing (if you write the one that comes 3000 years before the other), or if it means fulfilling your promises (if you write the later story first).
Finally, I would suggest that you follow your passion. You might be more excited about one or the other. I’d go with that one. Let that give you momentum and fuel for the long hours of writing you will undoubtedly need.
You mention that the two stories are in the same story world; I’m not sure if that means they appear in the same novel, or if you’re talking about two separate books.
In either case, without being familiar with the context of your stories, it’s not possible to decide which one needs your more immediate attention. Remember that stories need escalation of conflict and tension, so, if one of the stories builds up to a more intense climax, that one should come last, chronologically. You always want to save the best for last, the plot must always thicken, never thin.
I’m not sure if Tolstoy actually said this, but there’s a story in writing circles that he once said, “The first thing they read is the last thing you write.” Here’s the point: You’ll only know how a story needs to begin when you know how it ends. If it ends with a person deciding to move from Cincinnati to LA, you know that, at the beginning, this has to be their struggle. So, when you get done, you would go back and recast the beginning so that it is tied in inextricably to the end of the story.
Too many writers spend inordinate amounts of time on their openings, their hooks and so on. They go to “first page critiques” sessions with other writers and bring their work to their local writers groups and keep polishing something that they might not even use in the end. Instead, it’s vital that we work through our stories, flesh them out, see where they lead, and then, once we know where they’re going, head back to the beginning and start them off aiming in that direction.
Whichever story you decide to develop first, let it inform your work on the other story—whether that involves making promises and foreshadowing (if you write the one that comes 3000 years before the other), or if it means fulfilling your promises (if you write the later story first).
Finally, I would suggest that you follow your passion. You might be more excited about one or the other. I’d go with that one. Let that give you momentum and fuel for the long hours of writing you will undoubtedly need.
