Brian Yansky's Blog, page 18

Why It's So Hard to Go From Last to First Draft

            When you’re writing final draft you’re crafting sentences, refining scenes, tweaking characters, sometimes tightening structure. It’s all about refinement. You’re living in your novel by that point. You’re comfortable. You’re excited. Each change seems to help. You know what you’re doing.            Now, of course, you may be wrong. Writers delude themselves all the time. We need this delusion to keep writing. We need to believe we’re writing something well. But whether you’re right about the feeling or not, those final moments of the final draft are pleasant. You’ve made it to your destination or close. Not as perfect as you imagined it. Never that. It was always a bit better in your imagination than you could do.            Still—not bad.            And then a day or week or whatever later you start the next novel. And it’s a bloody mess. Did you ever really know how to write a novel? How could you possibly have finished one in the first place? You know nothing. You can’t even write a decent sentence or if you do write one the next one sucks. Characters are as thin as a paper. And where are you going? You’re wandering like a drunk failing a sobriety test. You think, Lock me up, please! Get me away from this!            BUT “this” was how you began the last novel, too. Writing in the dark, stumbling and fumbling about, trying to find your way. One of the reasons it’s so hard to go from the last stages of a novel to the first stages of the next is the memory of those last stages is clearest in our minds. You yearn, if you’re like me, for the relative clarity and precision of the last work when you were at the last of it. But you have to put that out of your mind. Writing a first draft is a different experience. It has other pleasures, like the pleasures of discovery. Enjoy those. There will be plenty of time for all the refinements later.

A first draft is just the beginning. In a way, that’s liberating

WHY REVISION IS LIBERATING It should go without saying but I think I’ll say it anyway. Revision is more important than drafting. Nothing wrong with NANO or any other method or deadline that helps the writer push through a first draft. My own process is to write a first draft as quickly as possible. Just get it done. Just finish. But here’s the thing—I push through knowing it’s going to be, well, basically, crap. 99.999999999999999999999999999999% of the time it is crap for me and most writers. (That’s a percentage arrived at after careful mathematical evaluation of absolutely no data—in case you were wondering.)
I’ve heard agents call December the cruelest month because people who do NANO finish their novels and send their masterpieces into agents. And naturally they are bad, no terrible, and agents get hundreds of ridiculously bad manuscripts because novice writers have written a draft of a novel and think they’re done.NO. It just doesn't work that way for 99.99999999999999999999999% (or thereabouts) of us.
A first draft is just the beginning.  In a way, that’s liberating. You don’t have to get it right. You won’t get it right. You know this. You allow yourself to write on through the fog, the forest, the wasteland—whatever you want to call it. You accept there will be wrong turns and missteps and that acceptance helps you push through the very humbling experience of writing a first draft.
Revision, really re-seeing the novel in the first few revisions, and then revising language and re-seeing again and going through for particular problems and tightening characters and doing whatever you need to do over the next five or six versions of the novel—or however many it takes—is what shapes that rough draft into something that isn’t rough.
That’s how, in my humble opinion, a novel comes into being. It’s built and rebuilt and rebuilt. 

Don't Fear The Semi-Colon/Punctuation Is Not The Enemy

DON’T FEAR THE SEMI-COLON and DON’T BE A SEMI-COLON HATER. “I’m afraid of the semi-colon,” a fellow writer said. Don’t fear the semi-colon. It’s just a piece of punctuation. And don’t hate it either. There’s no reason to treat the semi-colon like some undesirable who crashes a party. Some people do though.
Some people are worried they’ll use it wrong but others seem to think it will turn off readers. They feel it has a snobbish quality.  Why not just use a period and be done with it? What, you’re too good for a period?  
The semi-colon is just another punctuation tool we have in our toolbox of punctuation. I need all the options I can get. Anyway it’s a sophisticated and friendly little comma and floating period ;--what’s not to like?
The semi-colon (;) looks less powerful than the colon ( :) , but looks can be, as we all know, deceiving. It is the only piece of punctuation that has the muscle, by itself,  to separate two independent clauses (also know in most circles as complete sentences).  So if you have two sentences that are related, the semi-colon works quite nicely. Or if you have a lot of short sentences and you want a longer one for the sake of paragraph rhythm, it’s there for you.  The only thing you have to be careful about is that you do have two complete sentences (thoughts). A thought and a half (dependent clause, independent clause) will just need a comma.
Embrace the semi-colon.  Just not too often.           

The Element of Surprise

HOW NOT TO START A NOVEL/ THE IMPORTANCE OF SURPRISEDon’t start a novel by having an outline that you’ve scratched in stone with diamonds. First of all, that’s a very expensive and difficult way to write. Secondly, you won’t want to change things. I think it’s essential that you be willing to change any outline you write because of the element of surprise. In this case, I mean the surprise most authors encounter in the act of writing fiction.
This surprise can happen in many different ways. Suddenly a character starts doing things you didn’t expect, or things happen to that character you didn’t expect, or a character you didn’t expect shows up in a “guess who’s coming to dinner” sort of surprise. Could be that the tone of the novel itself will change, giving the whole novel a different feel.  Could be many things. It’s the writing itself that puts you in places of surprise. And your surprise will translate into surprises for your readers.
You have to be open to these surprises to take advantage of their narrative vitality and importance. 

genre blending/bending

As a writer I like to draw outside the lines of genre. I cross the borders of sci-fi and fantasy and realistic fiction and mystery and literary fiction and comedy and drama because a mix of genres helps me find the spark(s) that drive my story and give form and structure to it. Genres are all well and good if that’s where your work naturally fits. Mine doesn’t. I have to wander. Good for me. Not necessarily good for marketing.
A lot of people call the kind of fiction I’m talking about genre bending, but I think of it more as genre blending. I end up wandering in and out of genres and taking what I can from each that helps me tell my story.
People who sell books, as opposed to write them, like genres. They want to be able to put fiction in a neat category for the purposes of drawing a particular audience. (More true of adult novels than YA) Completely understandable. It makes it easier to sell a book if the seller can identify the audience and then try to find ways to attract that audience to a novel.  Publishers like genre and bookstores like genre. But here's the thing about fiction. It's not cooperative. There's something inherently rebellious about writing fiction. And there are writers who find themselves, even if they begin writing in a certain genre they love to read, wandering. Sometimes they’ll try to restrict themselves or pull their story back a certain way so they don’t loose their genre place. I think this can deflate certain stories, allow a certain inauthenticity to creep in, rob them of a richness a mix of genres might give.
I think, even though it may make your work harder to sell, you have to tell the story you have to tell. You gotta be who you gotta be. Eventually, readers will find you.
I like to read in many genres. Literary because I love language and character driven stories.  Sci-Fi for ideas—especially the strange ones—fantasy because the world needs magic and is full of mystery, mystery for story and entertainment…Of course I’m most drawn to works that might be presented as belonging to a certain genre but that I see as blending more than one. Kurt Vonnegut, for instance, who mixed realism with science fiction and comedy with drama and social criticism and lord knows what else to create a potent mix. GG Marquez mixed fantastical events and realistic fiction so well critics decided to give him his own genre: magical realism.  Kate Atkinson’s mysteries have elements of literary fiction and her literary fiction has elements of mystery.  These are just a few. There are many.
I love to write. I love to genre blend. I am frustrated that the market often struggles to accept good stories that blend genres but I have to write what excites me. I know there are readers out there like me who love to read books that artfully blend and bend genre and make something different, unusual, unique. I like a lot of books but what I’m looking for are books to fall in love with. 
For me, that’s often a book that doesn’t neatly fit into any category.

Here's a little more on beginnings. What I wish I had sai...

Here's a little more on beginnings. What I wish I had said in this interview that I didn't say (alas, a common thought in interviews I've given and life in general--what I wish I had said--and that may be the title of my next book, in fact) is that knowing the ending is hugely helpful in constructing the book, the structure of the book, and in finding the right place to begin. So I try to remain open to major changes when I revise because it's not until that point that I know the ending (sometimes only roughly and sometimes the actual last paragraph).
http://youtu.be/9d6-ADvUEoQ

Back to the Beginning

Beginnings:
Some people begin with a character or characters. They want to know more about that character. That works, but you may find, if you just want to know more without a focus, that you write a very interesting character sketch. The character needs to do things and want things and be challenged in order to show, as Vonnegut said, what “he or she is made of.” This is a way to create character and story.
Some people begin with plot and try to fit their characters into that plot. I don’t think there are many writers that write this way, but some do. It works for them.
Elmore Leonard says he begins with dialogue. He needs to hear his characters talking. Then he kills off the ones who don’t have interesting things to say. He focuses on the ones who have the most interesting things to say. 
Joyce Carol Oates also talks about having characters talk to each other to find her way into a story. One exercise she has for students is she has them write for a conversation between two characters. She has them do this for an hour. She says the writer will have something at the end of that hour. Not something to use directly but something.
I begin with a situation and then let character direct the story.
There is no one way, of course. You find what works for you through working, putting words on paper. But you will never “figure it out” completely. I’m grateful for this though I’m angry about it, too—sometimes. It keeps writing endlessly interesting though.

MC has some interesting things to say about his character's name and setting as a character.

martial art of writing

I like to think of writing as a martial art. I did martial arts for seven years. I had to learn how to make my body do things it was reluctant to do and I had to get in very good shape to have a chance at doing certain moves. Writing is like this. It is not just intellectual. People who try to think their way into manuscripts often end up with unsuccessful work. I know a lot of very intelligent people who just can't find their way to writing good fiction. Why? In martial arts some people can talk very intelligently about the intricacies of a movement, but they can't actually do the moves. You can know in your mind how things should work but not be able to make them work. This happens in writing to many people.

I like to say when I start writing something new that it is always hard and it always feels like I'm doing it for the first time. I always wonder if I can do it again. I always wonder how I ever did it before. BUT it is also like going out on mat and doing martial arts--sparring with someone. If I know the moves, I can't think about them in order to do them while I'm doing them. I just have to do them. In writing once I get into a story, get into the moment, the moves come back even if I don't/can't consciously think of them. Years and years of constant hard work and conscious effort on aspects of craft and practice and struggle come back so that I make the right choices.

You can't think your way into a manuscript while you're writing it. Later, in revision, there will be plenty of time and need for analytical thinking. But when you're writing it's best to pay attention to something Annie Dillard once wrote. "You’ve got to jump off cliffs and build your wings on the way down.”   You have to write from that place deep within you and beneath your conscious mind which is all too interfering in the intuitive connections stories require—then you will be jumping off some cliffs and building your wings on the way down.

            Good luck.            Wear a helmet and kneepads.

Character and Connections

Characters are the heart of fiction. If they aren't breathing, people can't connect to your writing. So how do you get them to breathe? That's the problem and the struggle. There are plenty of books that will talk about creating elaborate character sketches or filling out this form or that questionaire about your characters. These may, in fact, help some people come to know their characters better and so help them breathe life into them. But by themselves they aren't enough to create living, breathing characters. Why not? Because they are working from the outside. They're trying to force the character to move and act from a set of characteristics the author has created. But unless the author can use these methods to actually create a character who is living in the story the character will make the wrong choices and she won't come to life.

What the writer has to do is find a way to be inside his character and move the character forward with the story. To do that the writer needs to create a kind of circulation connecting the character with the other elements of writing fiction: setting, plot and subplot, narrative drive, language, other characters etc...all of these need to work together, each scene adding to what was before it and connecting to what will come after. It's helpful when writing to keep thinking about making connections. Characters do things for reasons. Sometimes the writer doesn't see these clearly. Fortunately, unlike life, writers get to revise their work. In the revisions the connections will become clearer and clearer and by working to discover these reasons and linking them to the other characters and the story, the characters will begin to breathe.

Or so I think today.