[Fan Fiction] Random Editorials: 2/29: "Kill the Sheriff in the First Paragraph"

A Clockwork Tomato 11-26-2003 07:56 PM
SCRIPT VS. NARRATIVE FORM

I've noticed that a lot of fan fiction is in script form. I hope that everyone understands that using script form is just about the hardest possible way to write something!

Narrative form (as you'd see in most short stories or novels) is a lot easier to work with, and is more flexible, too.

In theatre, movies, and TV, the script isn't the same thing as the story at all. It's just the foundation layer. The director and actors interpret all the action, and the folks in charge of sets, wardrobe, props, and so on interpret the setting and the objects in the work.

When you write in script form, these contributions tend to be largely missing from the finished work. I'm not saying that it's impossible to put the same level of description and nuance in a work that's in script form, but it's hard.

One thing I find particularly difficult about scripts is that there isn't a single viewpoint character. Everyone's action, thoughts, and dialog are presented the same way. I really like having only one viewpoint character at a time, because focusing on a single character's thoughts and reactions is a lot more intimate; I think you connect better with the reader that way, whether for action sequences, romance, and even puzzles like mystery stories. This is also true of first-person narration, which is VERY difficult in script form.

(For example, in my ACT 29: THE MASTER CRIMINAL, I think that the fight scene wouldn't have been half as good if I had made Roger the viewpoint character, rather than Beck.)

Just my two cents. But you might want to give it a try next time you write something where you could go either way.
Tony Waynewrong 11-26-2003 08:08 PM
Well, I don't know. I am partial to script form. It feels more natural to me.

I agree with you, though. I find it harder to describe certain situations and events via script. But, I leave that up to the reader.

Oh well, good point ACT. Smile
Advinius 11-26-2003 08:13 PM
this is the exact thing i'vve been strugling with. i have about 3 fanfic concepts plotted out, but I've been subconciously trying to shoehorn them into script format,a nd have realized that it's jsut not working. i'll be starting over on them in narative format. I think.
A Clockwork Tomato 11-26-2003 08:37 PM
quote:
Originally posted by tvperez
Well, I don't know. I am partial to script form. It feels more natural to me.


Some kinds of scenes work really well in script form, especially ones that could just as easily be set on a stage -- in particular, scenes with lots of dialog and no particular viewpoint character. A lot of fan fiction is like that. No prob.

But imagine writing an extended scene with no dialog at all. This is very common in narrative fiction -- it happens in almost any scene where the viewpoint character is alone. It's sort of strained in script form. Another problem crops up when you need the reader to hear the character's thoughts. I'm not sure how to do this in script form at all.

Big O is a show that lends itself to extended sequences without dialog. For example, in STRIPES, I believe that Dorothy has exactly one line in the entire episode: "I am listening to a song." She has extended sequences, including being shot up by Alan, but she doesn't say a word. It's really hard to do such scenes justice in script format.
Tony Waynewrong 11-26-2003 10:33 PM
Well ACT, after further consideration (namely Zola twisting my arm Smile ), I have decided to make an attempt to write a narrative story. Actually, I am converting a Mary-Sue story that I have been working on, from a Script to Narrative form.

We'll see how it comes out.

** Loading gun. **

And if it doesn't work, the Mary-Sue gets it. Wink

Thanks for your insight, Dude.
IamRogerSmith 11-27-2003 12:04 AM
Script format truly is harder to write than a narrative. Especially since if you give too much direction to your script, you might as well just WRITE a narrative. Good suggestion for up and comming writers! Here here!!
Lady Tesser 11-27-2003 12:06 AM
I can't write scripts anymore. I used to do it several years ago when I was convinced I wanted to be a playwright, but I got more into prose and went directly into short stories and novels.

I prefer the prose/narrative method out of comfort because technicalities get in the way with scripting. My last script was for a comic book my brother was drawing and I had actually handwritten a ten page short story before I ever worked on the script.

Although I found I'm very good at translating a story into a script ... hmm ...
pen1300 11-27-2003 08:07 AM
I know when it comes to short stuff like in the Blooper thread (I miss that!!) I wrote in script form (I think) with little narrations of the movements. My fiction when I write though is in the narrative. I find scripts better on the short hand, like here, but then, in the one RPG, I didn't do that because narrative seemed better.

Hey, thanks, I think you helped me figure out what was wrong with my story I've picked up again. I had no viewpoint character last night, though I had the two main characters together, they were a little out of it. OH, I hope they're not tired. Frown

I find first person easy to write. As someone else said about the script, its just natural when I write it. I have another set of stories where the story is in first person. I find it easier to write cause then I don't have to crawl into another person's head. Reading first person is fine with me too, I know some people don't like it.

This is an interesting topic. Thanks for starting it, ACT!

Later,
Pen1300
A Clockwork Tomato 11-27-2003 08:41 AM
quote:
Originally posted by pen1300
I find first person easy to write.


First person can be a breeze if you can talk like the character for page after page, and if the character actually notices the things you need to tell the reader.

Writing from Roger's perspective in the first person would be relatively easy. Dorothy is hard.

Here's a pretty good link on viewpoint, though I think it's less upbeat than it ought to be:

http://www.qui-gonline.org/fanfic/quill-POV1.htm

First person can be a real hoot. One of these days I'll write something in the first person by Beck, who would give you a rollicking, exaggerated, untruthful version of events. First person is great when you WANT an unreliable narrator, which is a wonderful gimmick in some circumstances, such as a mystery where it turns out that the viewpoint character did it. The two problems are maintaining a consistent voice for page after page and getting the story across in spite of the fact that first-person narration has to omit things that the viewpoint character didn't notice or wouldn't reveal. This is hard if, for example, the viewpoint character is hit on the head and spends an important chapter unsconscious. With third-person narration, you just choose another viewpoint character for that chapter.
Pygmalion 11-30-2003 05:10 AM
One thing that helps me keep a 3rd person limited POV straight is to mentally put myself behind the character I'm writing about and imagine what it is he or she sees.

Probably the best way to get a feel for the differences in POV is to reread a story, this time watching for the cues that tell you which POV it is written in. Rewriting from a different POV is a great exercise to "see" a scene from another perspective.

Pygmalion

P.S. The Qui-Gon website also has a nice article on plot.
A Clockwork Tomato 12-05-2003 10:59 AM
So, what do you do when you write a piece of fiction? First, I want characters and a setting. With fan fiction, this is easy. You can just scoop up the setting and characters from a show and not change a thing.

Then I need a plot. What interesting things might happen? What might the characters do if left to their own devices? What kind of interesting stuff might be imposed on them?

When I say, "interesting," I mostly mean "scary," "tragic," or "funny." I beat my head against the wall trying to come up with things that will threaten or unhinge the characters -- and funny situations, too. It takes a while to get used to this sort of thing, especially in fan fiction, because you start writing it because you love the characters, but to keep things interesting (and to maintain the tone of the show), you have to shoot them up, threaten them with death, destroy the things they love, and generally make their lives a misery. Usually they overcome this by the end of the episode, but still.

As a writer, it's your job to do a bait-and-switch on the readers, since readers will SAY they want a "happily-ever-after" ending, but in fact they want lots of suspense and conflict and action that's completely inconsistent with unbroken bliss.

With a few situations in mind, then I have to link all the events together. That's plot. Chains of events -- combinations of cause and effect and coincidences -- that unify the story and make it satisfying.

Also, if you're doing a series, it's time to throw in precursors to future action -- foreshadowing -- even if you haven't figured out what the action is going to be, exactly. That's part of plotting.

Mysteries are also good. You don't want to reveal things too quickly and you need to come up with new mysteries when you resolve old ones. BIG O has a very mysterious setting, and you don't want to make it flat and uninteresting by explaining too much. Don't let the characters figure stuff out too quickly! But the audience will get restless if they don't figure stuff out at all.

So where does symbolism come in? It's stage dressing; lily-gilding; prestidigitation. For example, if you have an elevator going down to the very bottom level of some unguessable complex, labeling that floor B666 is almost irresistable. What does it mean? It means that the elevator has gone down to the very bottom level of some unguessable complex! Also, that the author has chosen to be pretentious rather than matter-of-fact about it.

Similarly, if you want to weird out the audience without being too specific or limit your freedom in writing future episodes that you haven't plotted yet, what could be more convenient than a dream sequence? The conventions of fiction mean that the reader expects you to load it up with mysterious symbolism, meanings that are only hinted at, weirdly twisted and inaccurate versions of past or future events, and other stuff that foreshadows future action and sets mood, but that you can't really be held accountable for because "it's only a dream."

Symbolism should never be confused with mysteries. Paradigm City is loaded down with all sorts of mysteries, including "Why can't I remember?" and "Why are the written records missing, too, along with my memories? What could possibly have caused both to happen?" Mysteries have pragmatic consequences and drive the characters either to act to resolve the mystery or to make mistakes because they haven't. Symbolism is static: "Why was AT&T thinking when they adopted a logo that looked like the Death Star?" It hardly matters what the answer is, unless you're in the marketing biz.

A lot of people have been having loads of fun, and some angst, attempting to deconstruct Big O. This is of absolutely no use as a preliminary to writing, though if you want to become a Freudian psychiatrist it's probably good practice. A lot of the folks are latching onto the most superficial ornamentation, such as symbolism and hallucinations, and considering these to be more "real" than what happens to the characters on-camera or the continuing mysteries that underly Paradigm City.

In fiction -- or, at least, the kind of fiction that you can dare hope that other people might READ -- what happens to the characters on-camera IS the story.

-- A CLOCKWORK TOMATO
pen1300 12-06-2003 07:10 AM
*Claps* Beautiful! I liked this one very well!

I hope you want us to discuss what we do because that's what I am going to do.

When I write fiction, I usually come up with a general idea.(I'll reference the story I came up with last night that I want to write). Say, like last night, I decided that I wanted to write with this set of characters I have, but I had no idea what situation to put them in. Next, I decided I wanted to write a Christmas story, and I decided to mix this set of characters in a Christmas story. One character loves Christmas, the other dislikes it so much, but by the end, the one who dislikes it will give in. (Typical I think, but I'm still learningTongue )

Anyway, I used to sit down and do all of that character sketching and setting descriptions, but I learned that, doing that just doesn't work for me. I've accomplished more by saying, I have this character for this reason and this is what I need to happen. Or I just go on for a freewriting, like this one story I started. I didn't realize that it would be such a turning point in their lives until I ended up half-way through it and I ended up with the ending in my head before I was done. (Its up to 80 pages single space). I have had problems with that story, but its only draft one.

Characterization: I need to take the characters in my head and act with them for a while, let them lead their lives...through me. (I do this when I'm home alone or when I'm driving). That's how I learn what they're like, what makes them uncomfortable and how much one seems like myself.

quote:
With a few situations in mind, then I have to link all the events together. That's plot. Chains of events -- combinations of cause and effect and coincidences -- that unify the story and make it satisfying.

Also, if you're doing a series, it's time to throw in precursors to future action -- foreshadowing -- even if you haven't figured out what the action is going to be, exactly. That's part of plotting.

My plotting: I end up with scenes that just appear and I work the story to fit in with that. Usually I have the ending before the beginning and then the beginning with the ending. I can't seem to find a middle. I have one story I'm struggling on with this. I have the beginning, the ending but nothing in between and its hard to follow to story I'm using as a framework, due to time periods ect. (I need to watch/read more with stuff like that...or re-read it.)

quote:
A lot of people have been having loads of fun, and some angst, attempting to deconstruct Big O. This is of absolutely no use as a preliminary to writing, though if you want to become a Freudian psychiatrist it's probably good practice. A lot of the folks are latching onto the most superficial ornamentation, such as symbolism and hallucinations, and considering these to be more "real" than what happens to the characters on-camera or the continuing mysteries that underly Paradigm City.

There are some symbolisms in Big O. That dream in Act 14 was CHOCK full of symbolism! And the tomato is.

Dreams are an excellent place for symbolisims, since dreams are symbols. Its probably odd when you have a dream with in a dream, which I'm goofing with.

I LOVE Symbolisims! There are some shows that have it, and Big O has a good number, but most are obvious...in a way...

quote:
In fiction -- or, at least, the kind of fiction that you can dare hope that other people might READ -- what happens to the characters on-camera IS the story.

This can be dangerous, but mostly is true. Mostly, stuff I've read says that characters should be able to lead their lives outside of the camera, especially in series. These things are only frames of what happens. I probably restated what you are basically getting at.

I like these editorials. Maybe you could do one on editing? That is such a tough thing for me. I have two stories I need to edit, but I don't have the heart to start over. I was going to use this idea where you re-write the story, same framework, but that doesn't seem to work. I think I'll have to figure out how to edit my way.

Later,
Pen1300
Lady Tesser 12-06-2003 09:56 AM
Plotting? Well, bare bones, the direction I want it to go in, but the story usually writes itself and surprises me as much as anyone else when it's finished (for instance, 'Blossoming Rose' was going to have Cassandra as the murderer, but it turned out to be the librarian).

I hate symbolism. My literature teachers were evil people who made me look for symbolism that I simply didn't care about, nor saw any relavance to my enjoyment of the story. I read and write mindless escapism - not anything that will end up being critiqued by students against their wills. I actually muttered in class one time during a Hemmingway discussion "Oh, peachy, he used symbolism. How freaking pretentious do we have to act to appreciate it?"

Symbolism is just another excuse for man to find patterns - which the human race is good at. We want patterns and order, and if other things corrospond to that order, we pat ourselves on the backs for finding it. I guess those who outright look for symbolism (PERSONAL OPINION) are more interested in the construction of the story rather than the story itself.

I find it as useless as a catbox in a desert.
A Clockwork Tomato 12-06-2003 10:56 AM
quote:
Originally posted by pen1300
*Claps* Beautiful! I liked this one very well!

I hope you want us to discuss what we do because that's what I am going to do.


Aw, shucks. Thanks!

Yes, I should probably say, "everyone post if you wanna" somewhere in these. Some people get possessive about threads, but I like the rough-and-tumble, even if some of the time the thread veers completely off-topic and stays there, or when everyone hates my idea!


quote:

Characterization: I need to take the characters in my head and act with them for a while, let them lead their lives...through me. (I do this when I'm home alone or when I'm driving). That's how I learn what they're like, what makes them uncomfortable and how much one seems like myself.


I like doing this, too. With new characters (not many of these in my fan fiction) I'll often write scenes that happen BEFORE the story begins, to work the bugs out and get things running smoothly. A lot of people do this. The scene is never published, but the events in it are often referred to from within the story, in a sort of "remember when?" kind of way.

quote:

My plotting: I end up with scenes that just appear and I work the story to fit in with that. Usually I have the ending before the beginning and then the beginning with the ending. I can't seem to find a middle. I have one story I'm struggling on with this. I have the beginning, the ending but nothing in between and its hard to follow to story I'm using as a framework, due to time periods ect. (I need to watch/read more with stuff like that...or re-read it.)


I often just have isolated scenes that amuse me, such as wanting to see Angel slapping Beck so hard his head almost spins around and then crying in his arms in the same scene, Roger and Beck having a fistfight, or Dorothy putting on a miniskirt and accompanying Angel to bars. Then the real work consists of making these events seem logical and even necessary!

A lot of plotting is fairly mechanical. If I'm two-thirds of the way through a BIG O episode, it's time for the robot battle. This rule doesn't have to be followed 100% of the time, but it's so usual for a BIG O episode to be structured this way that I might was well follow it when there's nothing preventing it.

quote:

There are some symbolisms in Big O. That dream in Act 14 was CHOCK full of symbolism! And the tomato is.


But the point is, if it serves a purpose in setting up future action, it's not really symbolism, it's FORESHADOWING. If it actually explains something, it's EXPOSITION. If it sets a mood or gives the impression of depth, it's ATMOSPHERE. If it makes people draw in their breath, it's SPECIAL EFFECTS (or stage dressing, if you prefer).

Symbolism for its own sake is often done in the "Neener, neener, neener, I'm smarter than you because I understand what I wrote and you don't" kind of fiction, which of course no one reads.

You can also use some symbols as a recurring theme that helps weld the story together even if it doesn't really make sense. You see this in absurdism, where nothing makes sense at all, but the endless repetition of a few themes gives the impression that something non-random is going on. In mysteries, you get a series of events and clues that are obviously related, but you can't tell how or why -- not for a long time, anyway. Symbols can be slotted into place this way, just like anything else. That doesn't mean that the symbol's MEANING is important (though of course it works a lot better if it resonates with the audience).

Only a maniac would write a show like BIG O in a way that obscured the story if you haven't taken college-level literature courses or studied the Book of Revelations recently. While everyone wants to create art, TV is very much about money, and you have to keep your audience watching. Ending a season on a big "Who Shot J.R.?" mystery (Wow! THAT shows my age!) is good box-office, though they probably overdid it in Act 26 (which I liked but which freaked out a lot of folks.)

quote:

Dreams are an excellent place for symbolisims, since dreams are symbols. Its probably odd when you have a dream with in a dream, which I'm goofing with.


Dreams are wonderful, especially if you write to a fairly rigid set of viewpoint rules, as I do. (I spend very little time revealing the characters' thoughts, so dream sequences, which happen entirely inside the character's head, allow me to really cut loose with all the stuff they'd never talk about and I can't narrate under normal circumstances.) You get to add tons of atmosphere and say things that ain't so. Sometimes a well-placed lie works wonders in fiction! But if you have a viewpoint where the narrator is reliable, you can't mess with that, or the audience becomes very upset. (This is one of the reasons why people are so upset about Act 26. They think that cause and effect and the characters' actions were shown to be meaningless. This isn't how I saw the action at all -- far from it -- but I can see how you could come to that conclusion. If there had been an Act 27 that aired the next week, no harm done, but the indefinite wait has turned it from a mystery to a misery in many people's minds.)

The ability to lie at will is one of the best things about first-person narration. Done right, the readers know the narrator is lying sometimes, and you add a level of mystery as you try to figure out what he's hiding.

quote:

This can be dangerous, but mostly is true. Mostly, stuff I've read says that characters should be able to lead their lives outside of the camera, especially in series. These things are only frames of what happens. I probably restated what you are basically getting at.


Yes, it's always best to assume that the characters have a real life 24/7, but that only snippets of it appear on camera. The on-camera snippets are the story. The off-camera parts are just as real; they just haven't been written down. That's the way I like to think of it, and clearly you do, too!
A Clockwork Tomato 12-06-2003 11:09 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Lady Tesser
I hate symbolism. My literature teachers were evil people who made me look for symbolism that I simply didn't care about, nor saw any relavance to my enjoyment of the story. I read and write mindless escapism - not anything that will end up being critiqued by students against their wills. I actually muttered in class one time during a Hemmingway discussion "Oh, peachy, he used symbolism. How freaking pretentious


Yeah, watching the literati mincing and prancing their way through a story is pretty hard to take.

I should have mentioned the issue from the other side. Everything has connotations (a word I like better than "symbolism"), and these are worth keeping in mind. To the viewer, seeing a character drinking directly from a brown 12-ounce bottle has an entirely different connotation than drinking directly from a fifth bottle. In one case, he's having a beer under informal circumstance; in the other, he's getting drunk just as fast as he can, with no pretense of doing anything else. So the details always matter.

But context is everything. In DAEMONSEED, Oliver is wearing a crucifix. Since he clearly has no idea -- not consciously -- of what the church next door is for, or what the crucifix would symbolize if everyone hadn't lost their memories, the conclusions we can safely draw are very different from the ordinary symbolism of the cross in its usual context. I would think that Oliver was drawn to this ornament through no more than a vague association of ideas, probably centering around the old folks' attitude towards the tumble-down church next door. The complex symbolism WE would apply to the same object is simply unavailable to him; he doesn't have the background.

(Of course, the animators can have it both ways by choosing something that means something to us that's very different from what it means to the characters, and to use the juxtaposition of these two viewpoints to set a mood or heighten a mystery. And they were doing exactly this, quite deliberately, in DAEMONSEED. Nice work, guys!)
A Clockwork Tomato 12-21-2003 07:24 PM
I have a couple of writing thoughts and gimmicks I figure are worth mentioning.

UBER-PUNCTUATION. This technique may have a real name. I don't know. In dialog, there's a technique you can use to toy with the flow of words in addition to the usual use of punctuation and paragraph breaks. It's the placement of your "said" words and other bric-a-brac.

For example:
    Dorothy said, "I don't know. I'll have to think about it."

versus
    "I don't know," said Dorothy. "I'll have to think about it."

To me, at least, there's a longer pause implied by the version with "said Dorothy" in the middle than the one without.

UNDER-USE OF "SAID" WORDS. There are a lot of words people use instead of "said" in dialog, and a lot of adverbs you can stick after the word "said" or its equivalent. Personally, I would rather say "said" a hundred times in a row than start some kind of rotation between alternate words, because the word "said" is essentially invisible to the reader -- only writers consciously note the words "said" or "asked" in dialog -- and I want the other words to pack a punch when I use them at all.

This goes against some people's advice to writers, which implies that your characters should more or less randomly mutter, exlaim, yelp, shout, or whisper -- just to keep the word "said" from showing up too often. Nope -- if the character is not using special emphasis, neither should you. That way, if you say the character is muttering or yelping, you're not kidding around. Otherwise, your readers will ignore you, and you might just as well have used "said" the whole time.

Anyway, with a two-way conversation, you can leave out "said" words altogether in most paragraphs, since the speaker is identified with 100% certainty from context. The same goes for "asked."

Same goes for adverbs. For example, in most contexts:
    "Drop dead!"

    "Thanks. I think I will."

works at least as well as:

    "Drop dead!" she said angrily.

    "Thanks," he replied sarcastically. "I think I will."

...assuming the speakers have already been identified, and the reader has some vague idea of the general run of the conversation. (Unless you want to imply a long pause between the "Thanks," and the "I think I will," which I think the last example does nobly.)

Which brings me to my next topic...

EXTRA EFFORT ON OPENING PARAGRAPHS

In the first paragraphs of any scene, you have to orient the reader, who needs to know who the viewpoint character is, when the scene is taking place, where the scene is taking place, and who is present. Also the mood of the characters, what they're doing, and general "atmospherics" -- weather and other elements that may or may not just be stage dressing for setting the mood.

While it's possible to do an enormous amount of scene-setting by describing a single element that implies the rest, those of us who ain't Hemingway probably want to go down some kind of list like the one above to make sure the reader isn't surprised a page and a half later to discover that Dorothy has been in the car with Roger all the time!

I violate my own rules of brevity and such when setting up the scene, because I don't want my readers to get lost. They would become annoyed, for example, if I moved Roger from the penthouse to the cockpit of Big O without telling them, and they had to figure it out for themselves based on the clue that the penthouse doesn't have a chromebuster.

This is especially delicate if you are, in fact, trying to surprise your readers. You need to get them through the surprise without paging back and rereading. This can be tricky.

Once the ball starts rolling, a lot of this stuff doesn't need to done anymore, though occasional reminders will keep the reader from forgetting too much and have to page back. A useful rule of thumb is, "When the reader doesn't understand, it's probably the writer's fault."

And, finally....

KEEP IT LONG

In fiction (and often in non-fiction as well), the shorter the piece, the harder it is to write. It's much easier to write an interesting story that's 5,000 words long than it is to do anything worthwhile in 500 words. My Season 3 episodes have ranged from 8,500 words to 12,000 words.

I could make them shorter, but this would basically involve writing them out to full length, cutting scenes, and rewriting to cover the gaps created by the cutting. Alternatively, I could achieve shorter episodes by plotting out the entire episode in advance and writing to the narrow purpose dictated by the plot. I hate writing that way. Detailed outlines all sound the same to me: good ones, bad ones -- I don't know if I like 'em until I've written 'em out. I also have a lot of my best ideas under deadline pressure. "No pressure, no copy" is the ancient writer's motto.

Now, admittedly, I have been a professional technical writer for twenty years, and have around 100,000 words of (unsold) fiction under my belt. And I write very quickly. But I think my point is still valid. Short fiction is like haiku; it's amazing that you can say anything at all with that kind of length restriction. The more ample formats unfetter you and give you a chance to meander a bit from the direct line from A to B. Since lots of us have real difficulty with plotting (plotting drives me crazy), the wiggle room you get in a longer format is very helpful. If I were keeping episodes down to 5,000 words, I wouldn't be able to add cute scenes just because they're cute, they'd have to advance the plot with every sentence, and do it EFFICIENTLY. That's just too hard. In this case, more is more.

#
Tony Waynewrong 12-21-2003 07:48 PM
quote:
Originally posted by A Clockwork Tomato

Now, admittedly, I have been a professional technical writer for twenty years, and have around 100,000 words of (unsold) fiction under my belt.


I find it hard to believe that an excellent writer (no, I am not being sarcastic) like yourself has never sold any of your fictional works. They are extremely well written, but I digress.

I am sure I am not alone in saying that your editorials has been gold to many of us aspiring (or struggling, whichever you prefer) writers. I have found your advice very helpful (especially now that I have all but abandoned script writing).

Before I joined PCF, the greatest thing I ever wrote was my thesis on Artifical Intelligence. It was a whopping 120 pages. I must say, writing it was like a chicken trying to lay a bowling ball sized egg. So, your advice is much appreciated.

Thank you sir, may we have another. Smile
A Clockwork Tomato 12-21-2003 08:04 PM
quote:
Originally posted by tvperez
I find it hard to believe that an excellent writer (no, I am not being sarcastic) like yourself has never sold any of your fictional works.


Oh, not being able to sell fiction is the easiest thing in the world! All you have to do is write something that does not lie 100% within an established category. It hardly matters how good it is. (And believe me, I've written some pretty bad stuff.)

For example, episodes of an anime series written in prose rather than comic-book form is entirely outside the box (though I will get off my duff and shop it around at some point). Or my SF novel that would be considered a juvie if the technology were more glittery and the violence weren't so realistically brutal.

I'm told that 85% of published writing is non-fiction, which generally has the advantage of being useful to the reader, so not quite hitting the mark on the "pure enjoyment" front doesn't disqualify you. With fiction, the reader is buying your work solely for the pleasure that reading it will give him, and there are so many books out there that even if yours is perfect for him, he's unlikely to ever realize it exists. That's why so much of what's out there falls into narrowly defined genres. Readers buy stuff that they figure isn't going to disappoint them too badly, since it's so hard to find stuff they think is great.
Lady Tesser 12-21-2003 09:37 PM
On the 'dumb luck' of publishing - preach it, brotha'.

I've pretty much figured out the 'mechanics' when I was younger. The one thing I promised myself - the only thing I ever wanted - was to be a writer. I did the whole immersion method, studied what I liked, and did the 'chameleon-writing' by copying my favorite styles.

I eventually found my own story telling voice ... it annoyed my 'creative writing teacher' to no end because the narrator (even third person) has a personality. Prose is merely written storytelling. There are pauses, dashes to drive my point home (it drove my AP Literature teacher bonkers), and bizarre placement of sentences and dialogue. I firmly believe in following the rules of writing, but having a voice while doing it.

Trick is, to write what you mean. I have that problem. (Pygmalion knows it too well.) Big Grin
A Clockwork Tomato 02-22-2004 11:39 PM
Well, I did it -- and survived! I wrote a 13-episode fan fiction Season 3 of Big O in 13 weeks, posting Act 27 exactly one week after Adult Swim aired Act 26 for the first time.

If anyone had asked me, I would have said it couldn't be done. In fact, I never actually committed to doing it -- I figured I'd keep it up as long as I could, and when I ran out of steam or ideas, oh well. I was pretty surprised I made it all the way to the end!

A few things really helped out. One is that I'm a very fast writer. Another is that I decided to write in an episode format. This was great, because a lot of decisions were made for me. I needed a big fight about two-thirds of the way through every episode, and the episode would end a couple of scenes after the fight was over. A lot of the first part of the episode would be setting up the events that would culminate in the fight, and I could have character development and stuff in there, too.

In addition to keeping me on track, the episode format is spacious enough that I could write the episodes relatively loosely. Short stories end almost before they begin, and you have to make every word count. The shorter the story, the truer this is. My episodes were mostly in the 8,000-12,000 word range, which is big enough that they can meander a bit. If I write a scene whose dialog isn't essential to the plot, I can leave it in! You can't do this with shorter formats. It probably takes me just as long to write a 3,000 word story as a 10,000 word story.

In the beginning, I had to make a lot of decisions about how Paradigm really worked. I lean towards simple explanations that make sense out of what happened. A lot of theories deal with names, labels, and symbols, but I mostly didn't care about these, and dealt only with events. So I didn't worry my pretty little head about whether Big Venus should be a goddess of love; I considered her name to be largely irrelevant.

In particular, it was very important that all the main characters be who they had seemed to be all along. Roger had to remain Roger, Dorothy had to remain Dorothy, and Angel especially had to remain Angel. It would have been ludicrous to have her strip off a mask and turn out to be God or the Devil or Cecil B. DeMille or something. The series had invested a lot of time and effort in Angel, and it would have been ghastly to throw it away.

I tried to stay true to the series in most ways, though I decided from the start to get Roger and Dorothy into bed right away (though not on-camera) and to increase the general level of smooching to what you'd expect if the show were American rather than Japanese. There were lots of hints about future developments and about the nature of Paradigm in the show. In many cases, even though it wasn't clear WHY things were the way they were, the pattern was well-established, and I could run with that.

When writing, my biggest problem was plot. Usually, the plots involving enemies were very difficult for me to come up with, while the ones involving friends were much easier. Once the situations were figured out and set up, the actual combat sequences weren't that hard. It was coming up with enemies in the first place, figuring out their motivations, capabilities, and plans that was difficult.

One of the more entertaining things about the episodes was the use of different viewpoints. It's a great deal of fun to write Megadeus combat scenes from Beck's viewpoint, for example, because he's so uninhibited. While Roger might condescend to use Big O to dance the Cucaracha on a swarm of zombies if it were necessary, he wouldn't LAUGH while doing it. Beck would. In general, I found the more extravagent and out-of-control characters to be much easier to write for, while the controlled and self-contained characters were more troublesome. They're nowhere near as expressive.

Writing dialog for Dorothy is also quite difficult. I'd make special passes through my drafts solely to reduce the number of words Dorothy said, and to a lesser extent Dori's, too. The other characters didn't really require any special treatment; they pretty much wrote their own dialog for me.

I intended to put a lot more of Norman into the episodes, but I was thwarted at every turn. He simply spends too much time at home.

I found that adding Dori into the cast diverted a lot of attention away from Roger and Dorothy, and that there wasn't a whole lot I could do about it. The addition of more Megadeuses also took the spotlight away from Big O. This was inevitable, but I wanted more Roger-Dorothy time in the series.

The one-episode-per-week pace was really too fast, and I was getting pretty tired towards the end. On the other hand, if I hadn't had a (self-imposed) deadline, I probably wouldn't have written anything at all! The tight deadlines meant that I needed to cut corners. I never made my own map of Paradigm, I rarely knew what day it was, I didn't sketch out the enemy Megadeuses so I could describe them with precision -- stuff like that. Sometimes I didn't check my facts, such as keeping track of whether damage was to the left or the right leg of a Megadeus. I never mapped out a timeline of how quickly an android's early emotional dependence on her awakener faded -- I just winged these things.

Another thing I learned as I wrote this was that my readers' appetite for romantic moments and fan service was insatiable. There may be an upper limit out there somewhere, but I haven't found it yet.

I have also not found their limit of tolerance for brutal robot combats. I'm always amazed that Japanese robo-combat is always so clean. Where's the smoke-filled cockpit? Where are the rivers of molten metal pouring off the armor when hit by energy weapons? Where are the non-mortal internal fires and explosions? Where are the limping robots and the robots with only one functioning arm that continue to fight gamely? Where's the crew valiantly trying to get the systems back on line? Where are the knees to the crotch? I put a bunch of this into my combat scenes.

My advice to other fan fiction writers is to try working on a larger canvas. An episode or two, rather than just a scene or two. The familiar format works in your favor, and the greater size of the story makes it much easier to write. It's big enough to have some mystery, some romance, some detective work, a robot battle, some fan service, a couple of laughs, and some loose ends to pick up next time. A lot of fan fiction is so short that it can only cover one of these bases. There's nothing wrong with that, but the audience here at Paradigm City consists 100% of people who really liked Big O episodes, so you'll find it easier to hook them and reel them in if episodes are also what you do.

I also found it very comforting to try and run with the series as I found it, rather than changing everything around. Mary Sue stories, for example, introduce the problem of getting rid of one of the lovers so you can take his place, something which is hard to do convincingly and will alienate a large part of the audience. Alternate universe stories require that your readers accept your alterated universe. This can be done, but the fans love Big O, and you can make your life easier by giving them something that tries to be "real" Big O, rather than a Big O derivative. The obvious choices are to start after Act 26 or to write stories that occur between existing episodes.

I'm always surprised at how rare this approach is. It's so much easier than the alternatives and has such an increased chance of fan acceptance that I would have thought that everyone would do it.