Novel Writing ProcessInnovative writing process
Planning your novel and enjoying the write experience | Ed Docx | Guardian Masterclasses
Prizewinning writer Ed Docx shows you how to make a step-by-step map for your novel and start the script. It covers the most important things you need to know about the story, your personality and your point of views, and gives you a few hints for your work. You will also acquire some important structurally and problem-solving abilities that will allow you to devote more of your free space to creativity and less to the mechanical aspects of this type.
Editor, writer, journalist and lecturer in the field of creativity typing. General business partners can be found here. For more information about our reimbursement policies, please read our General Business Policies.
Writing a novel
There has been a long-standing discussion about a crucial part of the write process." At present and in colloquial language it is referred to in some appendices of the syndicate as a playful "pants vs. ploting / outlining/planning" about it. Woolf took plenty of note before she began to write her books, as did Fyodor Dostoyevsky and Vladimir Nabokov (his note on index cards).
But James Joyce thought: "A work should not be designed in advance, but, as one would write, it will shape itself, submitting, as I say, to the continuous emotive inspirations of its own person. "Ernest Hemingway said the same thing and thought he could just pour out what was inside him, stop every single morning before it was totally empty, and resume the next.
Authors' own views on authors' own process can differ from those of others. There, the archetypical designer could be someone like J.K. Rowling, who has delineated the Harry Potter line in detail, or John Grisham, who supposedly sketches each of his novels before his work. On the other side, Stephen King thinks it is "dishonest" to predefine an action, and William Gibson hates the letter that he sees as "homework".
" Stanislaw Lem, a writer from Poland, compared his compositional processes to "dipping a string in a fluid sugary liquor; after a while sugars begin to set on the string and it becomes thickened... and this recalls what Neil Gaiman, the phantasy writer, says about his novels: "that they multiply".
Maybe Lem and his colleagues need to idealise their work before they do it. Author such as Raymond Chandler and George R.R. Martin maintain that if they were to plan, they would loose all motivations to do so. The separations should not negate that the actual letter is a kind of plan, even if only in hindsight, and that the boundaries between shimmering vision, thoughts that have been evolved, preparation notices, provisional outlines and first designs are blurred.
Designers cannot and certainly cannot do everything, and even the incorrigible spontaneously get into certain unintentional cramps in plannin. A differentiation that could clarify the dispute is the state of mind associated with the writeing-method. A lot of pants see the perfect state of the letter as a sleepwalk.
As Stephen King says, when he is writing, he is dreaming, and Ray Bradbury said the same thing, warning authors not to be moved by emotions, not intelligence, when they want to see this state ("Don't think". You' re just gonna have to do things. There is an old concept of godly insanity in the poet and prophet (and I am including authors of novels under these great headings).
Kalidasa, the Hindi writer, is said to have had the seal of inspection drawn on his mouth by the deity. The water of creation was then shed. Insanity and God's inspirations stand in contrast to quiet, clear, intelligent rationalism and plan. So there seems to be a division between the novel, whose creation results from the agitation of its author, who, channeling into a dream-like state, discards what comes to his head in an almost automated state, and the novel, which develops in a more deliberate, brain-bending choice, in which emotion and thought are almost equivalent companions, and who imagines what he wants before he consciously seeks to do so.
To a certain extent, the design is carried out in both of them. It is a more specific, thoughtful way of designing for the designers, while for the trousers it is thoughtless design that is done through this first design. As a rule, this is not a deliberate procedure.
There' s signs that when reading a story, the reader identifies with the character and does the same. You have to put yourself in the characters' heads and then fake what the people do. That is why Hilary Mantel may call it an actor's act.
It is the sensitive creation prozess that creates the act of constructing a character, exposing them to shocks or hindering their desires by an obstruction and then just following them in their fantasy as they react. The empathetic processes also refer to the possibilities of the character who somehow takes over and even surprises its Maker.
It is sceptical of Jorge Luis Borges, who, I admit, is not a writer, that such a thing is not just an authoritarian self-deception. It was absurd to him to think that a character could really defend himself against its writer. But Leo Tolstoy was surprised by what his figures did, especially by one of Anna Karenina's most notorious deeds.
In fact, a dreamer like Stephen King thinks it unfair for an author to pretend an action instead of just giving the character the opportunity to follow what they are doing. J.R.R. Tolkien asserted that he had long ago learnt not to let Fiats control what a character does and let them control their own action instead, and Bradbury says that the action is just the footsteps of the character who sprints towards their wishes.
Henry James thought a whole lot through a given circumstance and then broadened the effects of that one. It was a great joy for him to make the complicated organisms in which the situative seeds flourishedvisibly - a sensitive method, but one that was still screened by a mighty sense of plan. It is often associated with the wish to explain an concept with the help of fantasy.
Dostoyevsky undoubtedly took his comprehensive memoirs because his works had to illuminate complicated philosophy such as the "positive concept of beauty" in The Idiot or the ability to act beyond moral in crime and punishment. Admiring the Gothic cathedral concept, he thought in architectural terms, or with the unit of paintings or a great sinfonia, and pulled his figures and scenes from his mind accordingly.
Bradbury says that when he types, a second self emerges and everything is written; his muses do all the work. But that in itself does not tell us much about the planing discussion, because this second self, this other self, can be exactly the self of reflexion and not the automatical, subconscious self that is manifested when the mind is in a dream.
Proust himself, on the other side, states that for an artists "instinct" is royal, and that the mind bowed by its own light in recognition of this fact. Unfortunately, he never exactly defined what his instincts are or how he can be achieved in the writein' processes, and apologizes with an idee that Faulkner announces on his own and no less stubbornly: that there are no written-papers.