It's important for me as a writer to stick with it. The longer breaks I take between writing on a book, the harder it is for me to find the voice of the book again. I hate missing a day. I usually penalize myself by writing twice as much the next day. Unfortunately, being sick also has an effect. It makes the mind sluggish, dull, lifeless. I'm not against writing when I'm sick, but it often drains the motivation so that I don't write.
I won't say that I've been sick for a week now, because I'm not sure that I have. I do know that I haven't felt well (on and off) for a week now. My writing has suffered as a result. Today I am getting back on the horse. It is time to recover my novel.
I need to keep writing so I have something worth updating soon.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Monday, February 8, 2010
Getting an education
I had a teacher once, Ph.D. in psychology, who told me that the undergraduate program in psychology didn't effectively prepare students for graduate work and future careers in the field. They are constantly changing the undergraduate program to make that statement less true. At the time, he believed that the English program did more to prepare psychology students for future study (granted psychology students would still need to take a few core courses).
I can see his point. English majors read a lot of books. Books about people. Then what do they do? They write papers about the books about people. They analyze them. They try and guess their motives, understand the significance of a character's actions, find the symbolism that must lurk in all things. (I used to believe that symbolism wasn't in everything. I have since corrected that belief to: symbolism isn't purposefully in everything, but good writing will have symbols throughout. They tie the prose together).
It's a great training ground for future clinicians. You don't even have to worry about confidentiality clauses. English majors as clinicians.
It made me ponder the other day, and I realized that maybe my career training (two degrees in psychology) has better prepared me to write fiction than it has to be a psychologist. I have studied how people learn, how people are motivated, how they think. I've learned about humans as social animals, humans with disorders, humans as individuals. Psychology, the study of what makes a human human.
It could mean that I can write better characters, whose actions and inactions are more realistic. I can write about what people will do in situations, because I understand the psychology of what people do in various situations.
At the same time...do I really need a degree to be able to do that? I've lived for almost three decades among humans, only 1/5th of that getting my degrees. It seems that sheer experience more than anything would qualify me to be able to write about the idiosyncrasies of man.
Who knows...but it is something consider: If you want to be a writer, study psychology.
I can see his point. English majors read a lot of books. Books about people. Then what do they do? They write papers about the books about people. They analyze them. They try and guess their motives, understand the significance of a character's actions, find the symbolism that must lurk in all things. (I used to believe that symbolism wasn't in everything. I have since corrected that belief to: symbolism isn't purposefully in everything, but good writing will have symbols throughout. They tie the prose together).
It's a great training ground for future clinicians. You don't even have to worry about confidentiality clauses. English majors as clinicians.
It made me ponder the other day, and I realized that maybe my career training (two degrees in psychology) has better prepared me to write fiction than it has to be a psychologist. I have studied how people learn, how people are motivated, how they think. I've learned about humans as social animals, humans with disorders, humans as individuals. Psychology, the study of what makes a human human.
It could mean that I can write better characters, whose actions and inactions are more realistic. I can write about what people will do in situations, because I understand the psychology of what people do in various situations.
At the same time...do I really need a degree to be able to do that? I've lived for almost three decades among humans, only 1/5th of that getting my degrees. It seems that sheer experience more than anything would qualify me to be able to write about the idiosyncrasies of man.
Who knows...but it is something consider: If you want to be a writer, study psychology.
Monday, February 1, 2010
A Matter of Pacing
I was writing this last week when I encountered a serious problem. The story was happening too fast. I had reached a big point 35 pages into the first draft. Now let me clarify: big events early on are okay, but only if they are the right event. Not this event. This event meant I was on pace to end the book at 75-80 pages. That's pretty bad for a book that is supposed to hit 200 pages.
Pacing is a pretty important element in books, and one that the reader notices, but doesn't think about. Each event is given the appropriate amount of time to develop. That way big events have the impact, and little events don't drag on, boring us to tears.
Good pacing doesn't mean a book is a page-turner either. I've found some books that were enjoyable to read, but also easy to put down. The pacing was good, but not necessarily compelling. And that's fine.
Anyway, I'm just pontificating. Pacing isn't something you can plan correctly. You just have to know. Did I get here to fast? Did I get here to slow? So when I got to one of my big events at page 35 I knew the pacing was all off. It came too fast for anyone to care. I had no time for the characters to develop. I had to put on the breaks. I went back and put in a new "Chapter 2", pushing back all my other chapters. This added several pages to the story and I have a new "Chapter 4" waiting in the works as well, which will push the event farther back.
The way I have it planned now is that the event will hit at about page 60 instead of page 35. That puts me on pace for a book that's going closer to 130-150 pages. That's still shorter than my goal, but it's much closer to what I want it to be.
Pacing is a pretty important element in books, and one that the reader notices, but doesn't think about. Each event is given the appropriate amount of time to develop. That way big events have the impact, and little events don't drag on, boring us to tears.
Good pacing doesn't mean a book is a page-turner either. I've found some books that were enjoyable to read, but also easy to put down. The pacing was good, but not necessarily compelling. And that's fine.
Anyway, I'm just pontificating. Pacing isn't something you can plan correctly. You just have to know. Did I get here to fast? Did I get here to slow? So when I got to one of my big events at page 35 I knew the pacing was all off. It came too fast for anyone to care. I had no time for the characters to develop. I had to put on the breaks. I went back and put in a new "Chapter 2", pushing back all my other chapters. This added several pages to the story and I have a new "Chapter 4" waiting in the works as well, which will push the event farther back.
The way I have it planned now is that the event will hit at about page 60 instead of page 35. That puts me on pace for a book that's going closer to 130-150 pages. That's still shorter than my goal, but it's much closer to what I want it to be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)