How to Write a really good Story

Writing a really good story

Finally, I would like to say that it is fun to write stories, so have fun. You have to tell a story that carries the reader away, not just fill pages with beautiful pictures. Well-known writers have something they want to express by writing. Write more really great stories. What is the best way to tell your story?

As one writes a better true story: Simplicity of technology in one unit

The author must combine the main parts of the history and nothing else when he writes a real one. What a novelist discloses in his narrative is only a small part of the plot that actually took place. Almost every episode is a good one if the author is telling the right parts of it.

An experienced author knows that he can inadvertently ruin a good tale if he makes a poor choice. Let's say you tell the tale of two middle-aged men who robbed a bench and the following chase that took three nights before the cops detained the thieves. A novice author, he tries to tell the readers everything the policemen have done throughout the 72-hour period; he can even contribute other incidents outside that period.

A seasoned author realizes that only the 1 1/2 hour "action" for his tale contains, flies over the remainder or leaves it out completely. He is so well acquainted with history that he rejects some of the most important acts. Later, when the author refers to the prints used in tracking the hijackers, the readers feel that the plot makes no sense. 2.

One of the main skills in telling stories is to plan the storyline in advance so that you can tell how much or how little you need to type to uncover all the history's detail. Oneness in the narrative means the condensation or extension of important actions. Every author can make a full history if he has the liberty of length.

Any author can tell the same tale as anecdote, a brief history or a comment. This other form of expression of history does not mean that the author has omitted the main plot. This is the place occupied by the author for each important phase of the work.

This can be illustrated by comparison of the distinction between a full-length history and the synopses of a sequel in a literature-journal. They both have the same level of activity, but one takes up twentyx as much room as the other. This summary is part of the campaign by saying: "Sergeant Johnson rejected the bribe", while the author dedicates four pages in the narrative to this part of the campaign, with dialogues and detail to enhance it.

You can make a similar differentiation through the script scene; the scene that sums up the whole plot of the film can fill four pages; the full-length film can contain 150 pages. Both of these differences show how skilful authors summarize all the main actions of a novel in a brief room and take into account the greater interest in a full-length narration.

Subdivide the plot into a sequence of sequences or sets; they then choose three or four of the most interesting and vivid of these. These three or four full-length sequences are told in detail, along with all the actions and conversations. You compress other sequences into a synthesis. This last one is interesting because the author has almost put it together from dialog and actions.

Auch interessant

Mehr zum Thema