Graeme Rodaughan's Blog: Writing The Metaframe War Series - Posts Tagged "technique"
Show - don't tell
Nothing kills narrative flow faster than exposition.
For any author - when you find yourself telling your reader what is happening - scrub that sentence and start again.
Let your characters display who they are by their actions, by their choices and by their own words.
Let your characters come alive and live in the imagination of your reader - do not let your writing get in the way of an immersive and emotionally rich reading experience.
Replace, "she was sad", with "she wept". The first tells, the second shows.
The reader is certainly intelligent enough to fill in that the character is sad when they read that they are weeping in a sad context.
Exposition strips the reader of the opportunity to emotionally, intellectually and imaginatively engage with the narrative.
Exposition leaves no room for the reader and is a sign of at best ignorance and at worst disrespect of the author for the reader.
Show - don't tell.
For any author - when you find yourself telling your reader what is happening - scrub that sentence and start again.
Let your characters display who they are by their actions, by their choices and by their own words.
Let your characters come alive and live in the imagination of your reader - do not let your writing get in the way of an immersive and emotionally rich reading experience.
Replace, "she was sad", with "she wept". The first tells, the second shows.
The reader is certainly intelligent enough to fill in that the character is sad when they read that they are weeping in a sad context.
Exposition strips the reader of the opportunity to emotionally, intellectually and imaginatively engage with the narrative.
Exposition leaves no room for the reader and is a sign of at best ignorance and at worst disrespect of the author for the reader.
Show - don't tell.
Psychopaths, exemplars and character construction
As a culture we have a vast representation of psychopaths as the villains within literature and movies - from Hannibal Lecter to Gordon Gecko - and who am I buck such a trend.
So before constructing my bad guys and black hats, I did a little research.
The first book to read to get an insight into the topic is Snakes in Suits
which provides an excellent and accessible introduction to the topic.
Follow up with Richard Hare's (he helped write the book and defined "Psychopathy" as a concept) at http://www.hare.org/
Add some wiki sites on psychopathy, narcisstic personality disorder and the psychopathic personality and you are well on your way to being able to describe a psychopath whether you have met one or not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychop..., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narciss..., and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychop...
However - there was a very real gap in the available research material. People have done amazing and extensive work examining and measuring psychopaths and yet - where was the understanding of the reversal of psychopathy.
For example, Hare invented the PCL-R checklist which is a measure of psychopathy from 0 to 40. Score 5 and you're normal. Score 10 and you're basically a bastard. Score 20 and you're the scheming boss from hell, score 30 you're Ted Bundy, score 40 and you're the Anti-christ.
The PCL-R checklist summarises the basic charteristics of the psychopath here http://nowandfutures.com/large/Hare_P...
The personality characteristics that I found useful from a character construction perspective where detailed as "Factor 1: Aggressive narcissism"
1. Glibness/superficial charm
2. Grandiose sense of self-worth
3. Pathological lying
4. Cunning/manipulative
5. Lack of remorse or guilt
6. Shallow affect (genuine emotion is short-lived and egocentric)
7. Callousness; lack of empathy
8. Failure to accept responsibility for own actions
Hmmm - it is no accident that most of these are present in my major nemesis character "Chloe Armitage."
But note this, 5 is normal. If you can go from normal (5) to a score of 40, it begs the question - what's at -40 on this scale.
There was no word in the dictionary for anti-psychopath, so I looked around for a word to fit and found "Exemplar" as in exemplary and I decided that would do.
So how is an Exemplar the opposite of a Psychopath - well simple - let's just reverse the polarity of the descriptors and see what we end up with.
1. Glibness/superficial charm becomes depth and authenticity.
2. Grandiose sense of self-worth becomes the presence of a realistic grounded sense of self worth and the ability to relate to the self worth of others.
3. Pathological lying becomes persistent honesty, and integrity of thought, word and deed.
4. Cunning/manipulative becomes open, transparent dealing, seeking genuine mutual benefit.
5. Lack of remorse or guilt becomes active capacity for remorse/guilt, pursuit of redemption of self and others, and active avoidance of unworth acts.
6. Shallow affect (genuine emotion is short-lived and egocentric) becomes capacity for deep and life orientating emotional experience. Persistent emotional responses. Emotions based on both external and internal events.
7. Callousness; lack of empathy becomes active and life orientating compassionate responses to the suffering of others. Empathic experience of the joys and sorrow of others.
8. Failure to accept responsibility for own actions becomes active seeking of responsibility and accountability for both self and others. Willingness to establish open and transparent boundaries on responsibility and accountability.
So - looks like a solution - fantastic, just make the villains psychopaths and the heroes exemplars and it will all work in the story.
Not so fast. Ever tried to relate to someone who is the epitome of good or evil (well hopefully never), or try to write a character who is pure good or pure evil.
It doesn't work; the character is unrelatable, no light and shade, no humanity - and disastrously predictable, boring and deadly to the story.
Since the goal is reader engagement - give the villians a little light and the heroes a little dark.
Nuance is king.
So before constructing my bad guys and black hats, I did a little research.
The first book to read to get an insight into the topic is Snakes in Suits
which provides an excellent and accessible introduction to the topic.Follow up with Richard Hare's (he helped write the book and defined "Psychopathy" as a concept) at http://www.hare.org/
Add some wiki sites on psychopathy, narcisstic personality disorder and the psychopathic personality and you are well on your way to being able to describe a psychopath whether you have met one or not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychop..., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narciss..., and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychop...
However - there was a very real gap in the available research material. People have done amazing and extensive work examining and measuring psychopaths and yet - where was the understanding of the reversal of psychopathy.
For example, Hare invented the PCL-R checklist which is a measure of psychopathy from 0 to 40. Score 5 and you're normal. Score 10 and you're basically a bastard. Score 20 and you're the scheming boss from hell, score 30 you're Ted Bundy, score 40 and you're the Anti-christ.
The PCL-R checklist summarises the basic charteristics of the psychopath here http://nowandfutures.com/large/Hare_P...
The personality characteristics that I found useful from a character construction perspective where detailed as "Factor 1: Aggressive narcissism"
1. Glibness/superficial charm
2. Grandiose sense of self-worth
3. Pathological lying
4. Cunning/manipulative
5. Lack of remorse or guilt
6. Shallow affect (genuine emotion is short-lived and egocentric)
7. Callousness; lack of empathy
8. Failure to accept responsibility for own actions
Hmmm - it is no accident that most of these are present in my major nemesis character "Chloe Armitage."
But note this, 5 is normal. If you can go from normal (5) to a score of 40, it begs the question - what's at -40 on this scale.
There was no word in the dictionary for anti-psychopath, so I looked around for a word to fit and found "Exemplar" as in exemplary and I decided that would do.
So how is an Exemplar the opposite of a Psychopath - well simple - let's just reverse the polarity of the descriptors and see what we end up with.
1. Glibness/superficial charm becomes depth and authenticity.
2. Grandiose sense of self-worth becomes the presence of a realistic grounded sense of self worth and the ability to relate to the self worth of others.
3. Pathological lying becomes persistent honesty, and integrity of thought, word and deed.
4. Cunning/manipulative becomes open, transparent dealing, seeking genuine mutual benefit.
5. Lack of remorse or guilt becomes active capacity for remorse/guilt, pursuit of redemption of self and others, and active avoidance of unworth acts.
6. Shallow affect (genuine emotion is short-lived and egocentric) becomes capacity for deep and life orientating emotional experience. Persistent emotional responses. Emotions based on both external and internal events.
7. Callousness; lack of empathy becomes active and life orientating compassionate responses to the suffering of others. Empathic experience of the joys and sorrow of others.
8. Failure to accept responsibility for own actions becomes active seeking of responsibility and accountability for both self and others. Willingness to establish open and transparent boundaries on responsibility and accountability.
So - looks like a solution - fantastic, just make the villains psychopaths and the heroes exemplars and it will all work in the story.
Not so fast. Ever tried to relate to someone who is the epitome of good or evil (well hopefully never), or try to write a character who is pure good or pure evil.
It doesn't work; the character is unrelatable, no light and shade, no humanity - and disastrously predictable, boring and deadly to the story.
Since the goal is reader engagement - give the villians a little light and the heroes a little dark.
Nuance is king.
Levers of Suspense
Anyone who has read my work would understand that I am keen on delivering suspense to the reader.
I'm all for a heart pounding, page turning, edge of the seat - what the hell is gonna happen next - reading experience.
So how is it done?
First some references from some movies that excel at suspense to illustrate the points that I will make.
[1] The Dallas Dies scene from Alien (1979)
[2] The Ripley - Elevator scene from Aliens (1986)
[3] The Clarice Starling - Pitch Black scene from The Silence of the Lambs (1991)
My analysis of suspense is that it draws on the following "Levers of Suspense"
[1] Expansion of Care Factor
[2] Expansion of Risk/Threat
[3] Contraction of Space
[4] Contraction of Time
[5] Contraction of Sensory/Situational Awareness
First we will establish a baseline, which will indicate - No Suspense - and then show how the above levers come into play to create suspense.
Imagine a character who you have no reason to care about, in a safe environment, with lots of space, no time pressure, and an abundance of situational awareness - yes, you're right - that's about as boring as it can be.
So with the baseline set - let's explore what we can do to really create a suspenseful narrative.
Lever 1: Care Factor: From our references, Dallas as ship's captain, man's up to his duty to confront the alien and save his crew and his ship. He takes responsibility, is brave, and put's his life on the line for others. It's a great package and creates a high level of Care Factor.
Ripley, (one of my favourite heroes) puts her life on the line to save a lost child. It is about as noble as you can get and creates enormous Care Factor.
The Care Factor Lever: Have your characters act for a noble and/or great purpose that is bigger than they are. Ensure that the audience can relate to them and empathize with them.
Lever 2: Risk/Threat: From Alien, we start with the face hugger, apparently only one crew member is at risk, then we discover it has acid for blood and the ship and the crew are at risk, then later the real beast pops out of Kane's chest - and everyone is at immediate risk, then it grows big and the risk is worse, then the AP goes "rogue" and the risk gets worse again.
In Aliens, Riply blows away a couple of guardian aliens and decimates the hatchery and then escapes, then she has to confront the Queen without weapons.
The Risk/Threat Lever: Risk/Threat is step by step expanded during the narrative until the final resolution. This can be repeated as an ebb and flow design where you peak with each chapter, and each chapter is a ramp up of risk and threat, until the final climax.
A side distinction - Risk & Threat. Risk is expanded by increasing what can be lost by the heroes. Threat is expanded by increasing the capabilities of the villians, or reducing the capabilities of the heroes (lost weapon, out of ammo, etc).
For Ripley, losing her own life is a risk, losing the life of a child that she has come to love is a greater risk.
Being attacked by aliens is a threat, being attacked by the Queen of the aliens without any ammunition left is a greater threat.
When building Risk/Threat into your narrative, I recommend working backwards from the end. Reserve your highest Risk/Threat situation for the Climax, and work back from there, reducing the level of Risk/Threat as you go back to the narrative setup.
Keep an eye on each character - what do they want most in the world - is it at risk and when is it at risk?
Lever 3: Space: I'm talking about physical space around the character. Close it down, hem them into tight corners and narrow spaces. The Dallas Death scene is a perfect illustration of this principle. Progressively reduce the opportunity to maneuver and watch the suspense grow.
The Space Lever: Begin with lots of opportunity for the character to maneuver in space and then steadily and progressively take it away.
Lever 4: Time: Ripley in both Alien and Aliens is confronted by a strict time limitation. Both films have countdowns to catastrophy. Time limitation is so often used that there is always the danger of writing a cliche. But the reason that it is commonly used, is that it is very effective at ramping up suspense.
The Time Lever: Create a countdown to catastrophy. Tick ... bloody ... Tock!
Lever 5: Sensory/Situational Awareness: The Clarice Starling Pitch Black scene from Silence of the Lambs is a classic for this principle; where she confronts the serial killer Buffalo Bill, the "Lights go out", and she is blinded while confronting her opponent who is equipped with night vision goggles. Her senses are shutdown, her awareness is curtailed.
The Sensory/Situational Awareness Lever: Reduce awareness. Well lit rooms can become filled with shadows, which can then become pitch black. Add fog, mist, or steam. Is the opponent camoflaged, hiding in the walls. At room temperature and not showing up on the scopes. There are a zillion ways to do this.
So there you have it, five levers for creating suspense in your stories.
Have fun.
I'm all for a heart pounding, page turning, edge of the seat - what the hell is gonna happen next - reading experience.
So how is it done?
First some references from some movies that excel at suspense to illustrate the points that I will make.
[1] The Dallas Dies scene from Alien (1979)
[2] The Ripley - Elevator scene from Aliens (1986)
[3] The Clarice Starling - Pitch Black scene from The Silence of the Lambs (1991)
My analysis of suspense is that it draws on the following "Levers of Suspense"
[1] Expansion of Care Factor
[2] Expansion of Risk/Threat
[3] Contraction of Space
[4] Contraction of Time
[5] Contraction of Sensory/Situational Awareness
First we will establish a baseline, which will indicate - No Suspense - and then show how the above levers come into play to create suspense.
Imagine a character who you have no reason to care about, in a safe environment, with lots of space, no time pressure, and an abundance of situational awareness - yes, you're right - that's about as boring as it can be.
So with the baseline set - let's explore what we can do to really create a suspenseful narrative.
Lever 1: Care Factor: From our references, Dallas as ship's captain, man's up to his duty to confront the alien and save his crew and his ship. He takes responsibility, is brave, and put's his life on the line for others. It's a great package and creates a high level of Care Factor.
Ripley, (one of my favourite heroes) puts her life on the line to save a lost child. It is about as noble as you can get and creates enormous Care Factor.
The Care Factor Lever: Have your characters act for a noble and/or great purpose that is bigger than they are. Ensure that the audience can relate to them and empathize with them.
Lever 2: Risk/Threat: From Alien, we start with the face hugger, apparently only one crew member is at risk, then we discover it has acid for blood and the ship and the crew are at risk, then later the real beast pops out of Kane's chest - and everyone is at immediate risk, then it grows big and the risk is worse, then the AP goes "rogue" and the risk gets worse again.
In Aliens, Riply blows away a couple of guardian aliens and decimates the hatchery and then escapes, then she has to confront the Queen without weapons.
The Risk/Threat Lever: Risk/Threat is step by step expanded during the narrative until the final resolution. This can be repeated as an ebb and flow design where you peak with each chapter, and each chapter is a ramp up of risk and threat, until the final climax.
A side distinction - Risk & Threat. Risk is expanded by increasing what can be lost by the heroes. Threat is expanded by increasing the capabilities of the villians, or reducing the capabilities of the heroes (lost weapon, out of ammo, etc).
For Ripley, losing her own life is a risk, losing the life of a child that she has come to love is a greater risk.
Being attacked by aliens is a threat, being attacked by the Queen of the aliens without any ammunition left is a greater threat.
When building Risk/Threat into your narrative, I recommend working backwards from the end. Reserve your highest Risk/Threat situation for the Climax, and work back from there, reducing the level of Risk/Threat as you go back to the narrative setup.
Keep an eye on each character - what do they want most in the world - is it at risk and when is it at risk?
Lever 3: Space: I'm talking about physical space around the character. Close it down, hem them into tight corners and narrow spaces. The Dallas Death scene is a perfect illustration of this principle. Progressively reduce the opportunity to maneuver and watch the suspense grow.
The Space Lever: Begin with lots of opportunity for the character to maneuver in space and then steadily and progressively take it away.
Lever 4: Time: Ripley in both Alien and Aliens is confronted by a strict time limitation. Both films have countdowns to catastrophy. Time limitation is so often used that there is always the danger of writing a cliche. But the reason that it is commonly used, is that it is very effective at ramping up suspense.
The Time Lever: Create a countdown to catastrophy. Tick ... bloody ... Tock!
Lever 5: Sensory/Situational Awareness: The Clarice Starling Pitch Black scene from Silence of the Lambs is a classic for this principle; where she confronts the serial killer Buffalo Bill, the "Lights go out", and she is blinded while confronting her opponent who is equipped with night vision goggles. Her senses are shutdown, her awareness is curtailed.
The Sensory/Situational Awareness Lever: Reduce awareness. Well lit rooms can become filled with shadows, which can then become pitch black. Add fog, mist, or steam. Is the opponent camoflaged, hiding in the walls. At room temperature and not showing up on the scopes. There are a zillion ways to do this.
So there you have it, five levers for creating suspense in your stories.
Have fun.
How to accurately portray morality and moral dilemmas in writing
(In response to a question posed by Dalton Cortner)
Hi Dalton, you pose an excellent question, which I will treat in two parts.
[1] Portraying morality accurately.
Morality, like any other characteristic of a character's personality will be portrayed by their choices and actions under stress.
As in real life, our own characters are not on display in any real sense when we are at rest in a safe place.
The circumstances surrounding the character's choices must be filled with personal risk and high stakes. Then their choices and actions become rich in meaning and provide explicit information about who the character is.
Note that personal risk and high stakes are two different things. Putting your life at risk to rescue your wallet from a mugger is vastly different from putting your life at risk to rescue a child from a burning house. Both have personal risk, the second has much higher stakes for failure.
[1.a] Demonstrate moral character by displaying character choices and actions in the presence of personal risk for high stakes.
Repetition of response displays depth of character and allows for emotional (can be positive or negative) engagement by the reader. If the responses are inconsistent than we do not know who the character is. He lies one minute, tells the truth the next, and then lies again - who is he?
[1.b] Establish and maintain moral character through consistent responses.
As in real life, people are mostly not all good/evil or all good/evil all the time. So we need to add nuance, and add it consistently. For example, a character (such as a spy) may typically use deception as a weapon, and yet never lie to one trusted person. A pacifist may eschew all forms of violence, and yet act with great and sudden violence when their child is under extreme threat. This creates nuance and is more like real life.
[1.c] Portray a nuanced moral character by setting clear boundaries around specific moral choices and maintain those boundaries consistently.
As in real life, people undergo moral evolution for the better and for the worse. The way this is done, is by breeching previously defined boundaries. The key here is that once breeched, they will forever be breeched. There is no going back. (But there is going forward - see next point)
[1.d] Evolve a moral character by breaking boundaries. Once broken there is no going back. (Think Anakin Skywalker, even though he is redeemed at the end of Return of the Jedi, there is no undoing of the murder of the Padawans.)
Leading on from the previous example. The evolution of a moral character can be in both directions. If someone has risen, they can fall, if someone has fallen they can rise.
This is handled in the same was as for point 1.d via breaking and setting boundaries for behaviour. This has to be used carefully. For a character like Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader, there are only two transistions in his life. The first is the fall, cemented with the murder of the innocent Padawans, and the second is the rise (redemption) when he defies and kills the emperor to save his son. If such major turns are more frequent, we end violating point 1.b and have an inconsistent moral character who no (or very few) readers will engage with.
[1.e] Nuance the evolution of moral character with a small number of major shifts.
Given that moral character is only forcefully and comprehensively displayed in moments of personal risk for high stakes, it follows that moral evolutions, when they do occur, will occur under these circumstances.
To summarise, accurately portray the moral character of your characters by setting defined boundaries that are consistently maintained and displayed in moments of personal risk for high stakes. Evolve the moral character of your characters over time by a small number of specific and well motivated shifts or outright destruction of the previous boundaries in moments of personal risk for high stakes.
[2] Portraying moral dilemmas.
Take everything written under point [1] above as a given.
There are two types of moral dilemma. Choosing between competing goods (the greater of two goods) and choosing between competing evils (the lesser of two evils).
This is a very exciting question, as it directly impacts narrative structure. For example, you could place a powerful moral dilemma as the inciting incident of a story, where the protagonist makes the wrong choice and then must redeem that choice - and there is immediately gifted to the author, the powerful motivation driving the protagonist to the end of the story.
(But I digress...)
Put your moral dilemmas at the center of the high personal risk, high stakes circumstances that are driving the characters choices.
The characters choice in the dilemma than strongly reveals their moral character.
I hope that helps.
Hi Dalton, you pose an excellent question, which I will treat in two parts.
[1] Portraying morality accurately.
Morality, like any other characteristic of a character's personality will be portrayed by their choices and actions under stress.
As in real life, our own characters are not on display in any real sense when we are at rest in a safe place.
The circumstances surrounding the character's choices must be filled with personal risk and high stakes. Then their choices and actions become rich in meaning and provide explicit information about who the character is.
Note that personal risk and high stakes are two different things. Putting your life at risk to rescue your wallet from a mugger is vastly different from putting your life at risk to rescue a child from a burning house. Both have personal risk, the second has much higher stakes for failure.
[1.a] Demonstrate moral character by displaying character choices and actions in the presence of personal risk for high stakes.
Repetition of response displays depth of character and allows for emotional (can be positive or negative) engagement by the reader. If the responses are inconsistent than we do not know who the character is. He lies one minute, tells the truth the next, and then lies again - who is he?
[1.b] Establish and maintain moral character through consistent responses.
As in real life, people are mostly not all good/evil or all good/evil all the time. So we need to add nuance, and add it consistently. For example, a character (such as a spy) may typically use deception as a weapon, and yet never lie to one trusted person. A pacifist may eschew all forms of violence, and yet act with great and sudden violence when their child is under extreme threat. This creates nuance and is more like real life.
[1.c] Portray a nuanced moral character by setting clear boundaries around specific moral choices and maintain those boundaries consistently.
As in real life, people undergo moral evolution for the better and for the worse. The way this is done, is by breeching previously defined boundaries. The key here is that once breeched, they will forever be breeched. There is no going back. (But there is going forward - see next point)
[1.d] Evolve a moral character by breaking boundaries. Once broken there is no going back. (Think Anakin Skywalker, even though he is redeemed at the end of Return of the Jedi, there is no undoing of the murder of the Padawans.)
Leading on from the previous example. The evolution of a moral character can be in both directions. If someone has risen, they can fall, if someone has fallen they can rise.
This is handled in the same was as for point 1.d via breaking and setting boundaries for behaviour. This has to be used carefully. For a character like Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader, there are only two transistions in his life. The first is the fall, cemented with the murder of the innocent Padawans, and the second is the rise (redemption) when he defies and kills the emperor to save his son. If such major turns are more frequent, we end violating point 1.b and have an inconsistent moral character who no (or very few) readers will engage with.
[1.e] Nuance the evolution of moral character with a small number of major shifts.
Given that moral character is only forcefully and comprehensively displayed in moments of personal risk for high stakes, it follows that moral evolutions, when they do occur, will occur under these circumstances.
To summarise, accurately portray the moral character of your characters by setting defined boundaries that are consistently maintained and displayed in moments of personal risk for high stakes. Evolve the moral character of your characters over time by a small number of specific and well motivated shifts or outright destruction of the previous boundaries in moments of personal risk for high stakes.
[2] Portraying moral dilemmas.
Take everything written under point [1] above as a given.
There are two types of moral dilemma. Choosing between competing goods (the greater of two goods) and choosing between competing evils (the lesser of two evils).
This is a very exciting question, as it directly impacts narrative structure. For example, you could place a powerful moral dilemma as the inciting incident of a story, where the protagonist makes the wrong choice and then must redeem that choice - and there is immediately gifted to the author, the powerful motivation driving the protagonist to the end of the story.
(But I digress...)
Put your moral dilemmas at the center of the high personal risk, high stakes circumstances that are driving the characters choices.
The characters choice in the dilemma than strongly reveals their moral character.
I hope that helps.
Location, location, location - Kinda
I'm working on chapter 3 (of 9) of A Traitor's War and I had to dig into location research as I have a big fight coming up in Chapter 4. (not a spoiler - any one with a passing acquaintance with my writing knows that there will be fights.)
My original scene definitions for chapters 3 and 4 were a little vague on the location which I envisioned as a derelict residential and light business district.
Actually writing the scenes has forced me to tighten this up, and as usual, the process has produced a better result than the plan.
(... what's that about a plan never surviving contact with the enemy ...)
I like to place my action on real world physical locations which I then modify to support the dramatic needs of the narrative.
[For Example] Swap out the car park, extend and widen the finger of land and put a warehouse on it.
The Boston warehouse site from A Subtle Agency
The reason that I do this is so that I can better visualise the combat and maintain the proportions of the action.
If a vampire can run 5x faster than a fast human and the warehouse is 100 yards long - he is going to get from one end to the other in 2 to 3 seconds - longer if he is being actively targeted by a Ramp master.
Given that a Nightfalcon helicopter is modelled on an uprated Blackhawk can one land on the warehouse dock? I measured it, and it could - so I allowed it.
I take google snapshots and draw maps on paper and measure it all up.
The goal is to produce a seamless, and immersive experience for the reader. Getting the proportions wrong can be a jarring experience for the reader.
I assume that my readers are smart and observent, and will spot flaws if I don't polish them out.
I have a scene in A Traitor's War where a couple are walking past a park at night and a vampire snatches the girl.
Initially I had the girl on the right hand side of the guy. On examination of the location, and the fact that I had the couple heading to a known landmark from a specific direction. I had to swap her to the left to put her next to the park, and him next to the road.
So I rewrote the angles of the scene.
(Pretty obsessive eh?)
Getting back to chapter 3 and a good location for a fight scene.
Five Story Apartments
Imagine this site. Imagine it derelict and abandoned in a distressed neighbourhood. It butts up onto a river, there is a nearby express way. I can put a some other features in around it to add some story value.
But imagine being in a small tightly knit fighting force that has to infiltrate a multi-story site at night that has an opposing group of vampires in it.
It's dark, it's derelict, it's a maze. Your opponents are stronger, tougher, and have better senses. You have superb training and skills.
What's going to happen?
My original scene definitions for chapters 3 and 4 were a little vague on the location which I envisioned as a derelict residential and light business district.
Actually writing the scenes has forced me to tighten this up, and as usual, the process has produced a better result than the plan.
(... what's that about a plan never surviving contact with the enemy ...)
I like to place my action on real world physical locations which I then modify to support the dramatic needs of the narrative.
[For Example] Swap out the car park, extend and widen the finger of land and put a warehouse on it.
The Boston warehouse site from A Subtle Agency
The reason that I do this is so that I can better visualise the combat and maintain the proportions of the action.
If a vampire can run 5x faster than a fast human and the warehouse is 100 yards long - he is going to get from one end to the other in 2 to 3 seconds - longer if he is being actively targeted by a Ramp master.
Given that a Nightfalcon helicopter is modelled on an uprated Blackhawk can one land on the warehouse dock? I measured it, and it could - so I allowed it.
I take google snapshots and draw maps on paper and measure it all up.
The goal is to produce a seamless, and immersive experience for the reader. Getting the proportions wrong can be a jarring experience for the reader.
I assume that my readers are smart and observent, and will spot flaws if I don't polish them out.
I have a scene in A Traitor's War where a couple are walking past a park at night and a vampire snatches the girl.
Initially I had the girl on the right hand side of the guy. On examination of the location, and the fact that I had the couple heading to a known landmark from a specific direction. I had to swap her to the left to put her next to the park, and him next to the road.
So I rewrote the angles of the scene.
(Pretty obsessive eh?)
Getting back to chapter 3 and a good location for a fight scene.
Five Story Apartments
Imagine this site. Imagine it derelict and abandoned in a distressed neighbourhood. It butts up onto a river, there is a nearby express way. I can put a some other features in around it to add some story value.
But imagine being in a small tightly knit fighting force that has to infiltrate a multi-story site at night that has an opposing group of vampires in it.
It's dark, it's derelict, it's a maze. Your opponents are stronger, tougher, and have better senses. You have superb training and skills.
What's going to happen?
Effing Shite! Gratuitous Eye Candy
I'm a natural visual thinker, and it's reflected in my writing style. I reach for visual imagery the way that we all use our dominant hand - it's just natural to do so.
Visual imagery is a strength for me, but because it's a natural preference, like being right handed, it can become an unconscious preference that gets in the way of my best writing.
I had the privilege of having the first three chapters of A Traitor's War read by a very sharp and insightful beta reader over the weekend. They came back with a slew of issues to correct.
Which is a fantastic result.
There was one issue that stood out amongst the rest, and it boiled down to this.
I had a character doing something which was being driven by "this looks good, this is a bit of eye candy." rather than anything else related to the character or the narrative. My beta reader made the point that the activity allows for "this thing, that thing, and another thing" to occur - i.e. a whole can of giant wriggling worms named "Repercussions" was dumped all over my book, and my series...
Here's the eye candy in question... (with the repercussion issue in bold)
So I have a major female vampire character (guess who) who longs to be able to walk in sunlight once more as stated in A Subtle Agency...
The solution for A Traitor's War - to hold the rest of the scene steady and just change the activity and ground it directly back to the characters core motivations. No longer is it sensual relaxation, but a "heartfelt longing." A shift from superficial motivation to deep motivation.
Suddenly, the scene is 100% more powerful and I've been able to remove a whole lot of complications around the specific availability of UV radiation as a weapon against vampires.
And that's a great result.
But, more importantly, my beta reader's insight into the issue, highlighted for me an awareness about my own writing style and my natural preference for visual narrative.
So now, I can look at my own work and ask the following useful question, "Is this visual action character driven, and inline with the narrative, OR, have I just inserted effing "Eye Candy" because it looks good?"
And that's the most valuable result of all.
Visual imagery is a strength for me, but because it's a natural preference, like being right handed, it can become an unconscious preference that gets in the way of my best writing.
I had the privilege of having the first three chapters of A Traitor's War read by a very sharp and insightful beta reader over the weekend. They came back with a slew of issues to correct.
Which is a fantastic result.
There was one issue that stood out amongst the rest, and it boiled down to this.
I had a character doing something which was being driven by "this looks good, this is a bit of eye candy." rather than anything else related to the character or the narrative. My beta reader made the point that the activity allows for "this thing, that thing, and another thing" to occur - i.e. a whole can of giant wriggling worms named "Repercussions" was dumped all over my book, and my series...
Here's the eye candy in question... (with the repercussion issue in bold)
Looking through the full-length penthouse windows at the sunlit city of Manhattan, a relaxed smile curved the corners of her mouth. The windows filtered out the ultraviolet spectrum, and she could safely stand in front of them, bathing in the natural light of the sun.
She felt the sunlight on her face, smiling broadly she let her ivory silk kimono-style bathrobe fall open and slide from her shoulders. She raised her hands high, arched her back and pirouetted like a ballerina in slow motion. The sunlight gleamed on her fair, flawless skin, caressing the curves of her body, she closed her eyes, luxuriating in its warmth.
Her mind hovered between the sensual experience of filtered sunlight on her skin and the problems at hand. She slowly turned again, her body in sync with her mind, relaxed, alert, focused.
So I have a major female vampire character (guess who) who longs to be able to walk in sunlight once more as stated in A Subtle Agency...
She glanced to the side, looking through the dark transparent armor of the canopy at the hard luminous ball of the sun descending toward the horizon. It was moments like this, from behind heavy shielding, that she could look at it without fear of crumbling to dust.
Chloe stared at the sun, suddenly shivering with a deep, heartfelt longing.
One day I will bathe in your rays again and the world will tremble before me.
The solution for A Traitor's War - to hold the rest of the scene steady and just change the activity and ground it directly back to the characters core motivations. No longer is it sensual relaxation, but a "heartfelt longing." A shift from superficial motivation to deep motivation.
Suddenly, the scene is 100% more powerful and I've been able to remove a whole lot of complications around the specific availability of UV radiation as a weapon against vampires.
And that's a great result.
But, more importantly, my beta reader's insight into the issue, highlighted for me an awareness about my own writing style and my natural preference for visual narrative.
So now, I can look at my own work and ask the following useful question, "Is this visual action character driven, and inline with the narrative, OR, have I just inserted effing "Eye Candy" because it looks good?"
And that's the most valuable result of all.
Writing The Metaframe War Series
A blog on all things to do with The Metaframe War Series of books by Graeme Rodaughan + assorted topics and book reviews.
- Graeme Rodaughan's profile
- 402 followers
