Story vs Craft

I'm beginning to realize that the single biggest difference between published authors and unpublished authors isn't the talent in how they write. In fact, there are many instances of published writers who aren't good writers at all. Rather, its the story its self. Which is a huge part that a lot of writers don't pay attention to.

In writing classes around the world we are taught the basics of good writing i.e active vs passive, the dreaded adverbs, show vs tell, concrete & simple language, natural dialogue, the use of fullstops and commas, the descriptive process and POV. These are all great, and if you master them, then yes, you will become a good writer. But there are many good writers out there. The difference between published and unpublished writers isn't how good they are at writing, instead, it's how they tell a story.

Have you ever browsed a book store and opened a few of the best sellers, to only think to yourself "what is this shit? I can do a better job. Look at all the dam adverbs, hell, here shes even telling instead of showing," These moments aren't necessarily bad in themselves, they usually inspire us to get down to work. But you must remember, the average person on the street, who doesn't care about writing technique AT ALL, just wants to lose themselves in a book. They are not going to see the adverbs, or the fact that its being told at points. They are just going to see the images of the plot flash by through their mind, and if they feel engaged they will read on, if they don't, they will put it down.

Story matters more. Instead of fretting over that adverb, look at your story. Does it help the story? If the answer is yes, then include it. Story trumps the correctness of the writing everyday of the week. Take "50 Shades of Grey" for example, or "Twilight." I'm not bagging out these books, but they aren't generally known for their mastery of the written word. They are just good stories who appeal to a mass target audience. fourteen year old girls getting wet over Edward don't suddenly put it down because they see an adverb used poorly. They will usually be so engrossed in the tail that they don't even see the words. They just see the images.

Your job as a writer is really to be invisible. A mastery of writing technique is designed to give your words the power of not being seen. A reader engaged in the story well be reading at such a pace that the words fade into the background, and the images that the words express will be the only thing that matters. If your writing is really bad, then the reader will continually be brought back to the sentences, and fail to lose themselves. But if the writing is average, and the story is strong, then a lot of the time the story will overpower this process. But the opposite doesn't ring true. If your writing is amazing, and yet the story sucks. Then the words will be the only thing the reader sees. If they were interested in pretty words then they could just open a Hallmark card.

All good writing does is gives the reader the opportunity to be swept away, nothing more. But a good story will over come writing flaws everyday of the week.

Of course the ideal scenario is to master both. Then you stand the best chance (duh), but so many writers fail to master the art of story telling. So how does one "master" this art? Well many will say its an art, and can't be taught. I'm a rational guy. I like to think everything can be chunked down to a philosophical system that follows logic. Here's a few tips:

1.) There must be a core conflict. There has to be something that the character has to overcome. This sounds obvious, but I have fallen into the trap of writing something where the character is just walking around looking at stuff, believing that the vivid language was more then enough to sustain the reader. Wrong

2.) Shit has to be going wrong constantly. Over and over again the character has to be getting pissed on by the world around him, and the reasons for him overcoming these obstacles has to keep getting more important, until a final release comes when he overcomes them for good. Or does he?

3.)Don't jump the gun. Keep everything in line with what the main character knows. This is really a POV technique, so it's not so much story related. But I think it crosses over into both domains. Then when the events happen the reader will feel along with the character.

4.) There has to be something the character learns at the end. The reader must feel like they have achieved something by sticking with you for the whole piece.

5.) Read number 2 again. I can't repeat this enough. Put your character through hell, and then give them some relief, but only for a short while...

There are many books out there on story and plot. Just Google some and get stuck into it. You will be greatly rewarded for your study. And remember, when your fretting over every sentence, wondering if it's good writing, just ask yourself, "is this serving the story?"

Greg

P.S This book gets a good wrap on the "art of plot structure:

A Master Of Your Craft

It takes 10,000 hours to master the writing craft, so let's not beat around the bush. To become a published author, earning a full time income, and to be considered one of the wise ones in your field, you have to put in 10,000 hours to get there.

But why 10,000 hours? In Malcolm Gladwell’s "Outliers", he shows that researchers have discovered that every master in their respective fields has been training for approximately 10,000 hours. Even the likes of Bill Gates put in 10,000 hours worth of computer programming in school before he hit it big with Microsoft. The Beatles use to play for 10 hours straight on stage in Hamburg before striking it big time. Even Mozart, a considered child prodigy, didn't compose his first masterpiece till his early 20's, which meant he was practising full time for well over a decade before it.

So what's this mean for you? It means there are no easy shortcuts. Almost everyone thinks they have a book in them, and as many people believe they have the ability to write one, and will do so by their life’s end. But in reality, this is ridiculous. It's like someone saying, "Yeah, I will probably participate in the Olympic games at some point in my life". People grossly underestimate the skill and ability needed to write a novel, because on the surface, it looks easy. But in reality, it’s the masters of the craft that make it look effortless.

An example I think is the Harry Potter series. When I first read it as a teenager, I was like, "This is so easily written, I will dominate the writing market," It wasn't till years later, when I picked it up again, that I realised how well written the series was because I had a greater understanding of the craft.

So what is the real point of this post? Well it's to make you realise this isn't a quick journey. That if you're really serious about being a published author, then you got to be willing to take the long road. You must realise that it may take you 10 years to get there, that it may not be your first book, your second book, or even your third or fourth book that sells. You have to be in it for the long haul, and must write just to write. If you do this, then the journey will be a little easier on your soul.

Have a good one
Greg

Writing Craft Lesson - Expressing Thought

How to express what a character is thinking? This was the dilemma I was dealing with this week. Although, it’s fairly obvious to a writer how to do this. I started to put the process under a microscope, and over think what I was trying to do by trying to come to a "universal" or "right" way of doing it.

My dilemma was this. In some books, such as "Song of Ice and Fire" by George R. R Martin, he always expresses character thought through the use of italics. This would be shown in the following way, "John moved to the wall and rested his back, How in hell are we going to survive this?"

These italics mean that the thought is coming straight from John, as if we have a telepathic connection to him. This is great for establishing a direct connection with the reader to the character, and is what I used for most of my writing.

Then I began to read "Under the Dome" by Stephen King, an unusual read for the most part. King expresses his characters thoughts by pumping his POV through the use of a strong voice, i.e. "There was that stupid woman again. She sat down, crossed her legs, and expressed a mug look to the audience. Mark groaned and sat down."

King is just expressing imagery, but the fact that he’s expressing a point of view, or an opinion into the words, (that stupid woman), we obviously assume that it’s the characters opinion of her that is generating this description. For me, this style of expressing thought gives the writing a greater flair because it adds personality and voice to the writing. It may lessen the connection between reader and character, but I feel it may add a little more mystery to the story.

So I guess it seems that I prefer the latter right now. I feel it makes the writing more engaging. I just asked this question on Absolute write, and the response seemed to be relatively the same. Most believed that there wasn't a right or wrong answer, unless you stick to a few fundamental principles.

Basically, the readers experience is king. If the reader isn't confused, and obviously gets that the words are in fact the thoughts of the character, and is perceiving the characters point of view in relation to the events around him or her, then it’s perfectly fine.

Also, choose what one works for you. As the writer, if you’re not comfortable with what you're writing, then it will show. You will express fragmented sentences that won't flow right. So just express it the way you want to, the way that your natural voice wants to express it. If the readers get it, and it feels good to you to write it like that, keep writing it that way.

Lastly, be consistent. If you keep switching from the thoughts of the character expressed directly in italic, then to the narrator expressing it through POV, then you begin to confuse the reader. The reader doesn't want to have to "work out" what approach you're taking. If they have to do that, then they have left the story and may put the book down altogether.

So in conclusion,
It doesn’t matter which approach you take, as long as the reader knows what you're doing, that it feels good for you, and that you pick one approach and stick to it.

Cheers,
Greg

P.S Since this blog is getting some readers now, I think I may add a writing craft lesson every few days, with some philosophical theory placed in between. I think it will be the best format for the blog, but feel free to have your say.