FatCat
Maester
Write you're reply, an elegant answer to your question by a prompt. Write your reply to your character, why are they important? What ideal makes them different? How do you feel? Do they feel the same?
-
Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!
If I'd only known...
- Thread starter Jackarandajam
- Start date
Prince of Spires
Istar
In defence of mr. King, he actually put himself in the second group of writers who were decent and through hard work got pretty good.
The thing is with the Bronte sisters, they got their practice in early. They started writing stories at an early age and got good feedback on them. So they got their 10.000 hours of practice in before anyone could notice them. There's no magic there. Just a lot of hard work at an early age.
Finchbearer
Istar
No magic, but certainly savant like abilities. Looking at Emily Brontë specifically, whose own account for her preferences might suggest that she was actually autistic. My own son who at nearly three is hyperlexic, meaning he can read and do things that are beyond his years, but he has other areas with deficits. Certainly for the Brontë sisters having access to pen and paper and the time to pursue these hobbies were also paramount to their practicing their art.
Finchbearer
Istar
I’ve changed my viewpoint on the whole Mary Sue / Gary Stu thing. There are some great examples of authors writing Mary Sue’s who have written iconic works - Jane Eyre being one prime example. I think if the author is still creating a characters with realistic flaws and giving me a good story then it does not bother me. It only becomes boring when the MC can do no wrong, and they’re brilliant at everything, and oh, they’re going to save the world.
pmmg
Myth Weaver
I've not seen Mary Sue thrown around of late, but it used to get used more liberally. I think it was overplayed, and really should be reserved for those that are so on the nose they do bring their stories down.
With a wide enough definition, I could say every MC is a Mary Sue.
With a wide enough definition, I could say every MC is a Mary Sue.
- Thread starter
- #26
Jackarandajam
Maester
That is what a Mary Sue is. If it's done well, I don't think it's a Mary Sue.
Granted, some characters are understood to be more static, like in a detective series novel, when it isn't so much how the character changes but how they overcome the plot, but I think Mary Sue/Gary Stu is a term used to describe an MC without enough realistic flaws or a proper moral arc in the story.
Incanus
Auror
One of the difficult lessons I learned will likely not apply to everyone.
It has to do with perfectionism, though I feel certain I’m hardly the worst case ever.
For many years, and for virtually all of my projects, I would attempt to get something as close as possible to ‘complete’ in the very first draft. I think there may be cases where this isn’t necessarily the wrong approach—like, perhaps, stream-of-consciousness writing, and maybe even static ‘character studies’.
But since I am trying to write secondary-world fantasy, I’ve learned this isn’t a great way to go. Introducing and setting up the secondary world, depicting characters, developing plot, handling exposition and pacing and description, and doing it all with good, interesting prose. All in one go? No wonder I was banging my head against the wall.
I no longer aim for all this in a first draft.
One bit of advice that I never did find all that helpful: kill your adverbs! Not that this hindered me in any way. I just never abused them in the first place.
It has to do with perfectionism, though I feel certain I’m hardly the worst case ever.
For many years, and for virtually all of my projects, I would attempt to get something as close as possible to ‘complete’ in the very first draft. I think there may be cases where this isn’t necessarily the wrong approach—like, perhaps, stream-of-consciousness writing, and maybe even static ‘character studies’.
But since I am trying to write secondary-world fantasy, I’ve learned this isn’t a great way to go. Introducing and setting up the secondary world, depicting characters, developing plot, handling exposition and pacing and description, and doing it all with good, interesting prose. All in one go? No wonder I was banging my head against the wall.
I no longer aim for all this in a first draft.
One bit of advice that I never did find all that helpful: kill your adverbs! Not that this hindered me in any way. I just never abused them in the first place.
pmmg
Myth Weaver
Just an aside, but Hemingway did enjoy the Bronte Sisters's writing. He was known for his list of 16 books he would often list off as book people should read, and Wuthering Heights was often his second pick.
While he was, of course, well read, Wuthering Heights was one that stuck with him. It is said that one of his most famous works, 'A Call to Arms', is a retelling of Wuthering Heights, and he did not play down those comments. The MC of his novel, Catherine, is named after the MC of Wuthering Heights by his own admission.
I think you will find that Hemingway, like all of us, is a complex person, with many different facets. Many of his works carry themes highly sympathetic to women and their struggles, and usually portrayed men as greatly flawed. One of the largest themes of his works was a effort to push back against the boxes and frameworks cultures and societies and outside forces push upon us, and show people as they truly are, men and women both. I think Hemmingway was one of those who had transcended somewhat conventional attitudes and thinking and tried to display it in his works.
I dont really care if people read him or not, but I dont think he can be simply discounted as not worth reading.
16 books:
While he was, of course, well read, Wuthering Heights was one that stuck with him. It is said that one of his most famous works, 'A Call to Arms', is a retelling of Wuthering Heights, and he did not play down those comments. The MC of his novel, Catherine, is named after the MC of Wuthering Heights by his own admission.
I think you will find that Hemingway, like all of us, is a complex person, with many different facets. Many of his works carry themes highly sympathetic to women and their struggles, and usually portrayed men as greatly flawed. One of the largest themes of his works was a effort to push back against the boxes and frameworks cultures and societies and outside forces push upon us, and show people as they truly are, men and women both. I think Hemmingway was one of those who had transcended somewhat conventional attitudes and thinking and tried to display it in his works.
I dont really care if people read him or not, but I dont think he can be simply discounted as not worth reading.
16 books:
Finchbearer
Istar
Of the American modernist authors, I’d say Richard Brautigan was more complex and intriguing, and highly underrated. I think he understood women, at least from his point of view as a man living in 1960 / 70’s America. I think he was sympathetic to the struggles of women. He was what I’d describe as truly progressive. His prose always breaks my heart. You can keep Hemingway.
- Thread starter
- #30
Jackarandajam
Maester
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1954 was awarded to Ernest Miller Hemingway "for his mastery of the art of narrative, most recently demonstrated in The Old Man and the Sea, and for the influence that he has exerted on contemporary style"
I consider myself to be fairly well read but I can't say that I've ever heard so much as a mention of a Richard Brautigan.
I'll be sure to look him up, thanks for the recommendation.
I consider myself to be fairly well read but I can't say that I've ever heard so much as a mention of a Richard Brautigan.
I'll be sure to look him up, thanks for the recommendation.
Finchbearer
Istar
In fairness if I were younger and not so time poor, I’d give Hemingway a look in, but there are just other books on my to read list right now.
pmmg
Myth Weaver
I've a friend who likes Hemmingway. To me, his writing was kind of homework. I've read some of his stories, and maybe some I did not know were his, but...its not an interest of mine.
I'd rather read Wuthering Heights than a Hemmingway book
Funny, he lists two books by Stephen Crane, both of which I've never heard of. I did read the Red Badge of Courage. Its on my list of books I liked.
(In fact, while I have read some of the authors on his list, I've not read any book he lists Maybe when all my writing is done, I will go after some of them).
I'd rather read Wuthering Heights than a Hemmingway book
Funny, he lists two books by Stephen Crane, both of which I've never heard of. I did read the Red Badge of Courage. Its on my list of books I liked.
(In fact, while I have read some of the authors on his list, I've not read any book he lists
Maybe when all my writing is done, I will go after some of them).
Last edited:
Finchbearer
Istar
I own the Oxford book of English verse, and it’s mostly male poets…but it’s fun to go through to get inspired nevertheless. There are some really old poems in there. I read half of Anna Karenina and wished I had carried on, but it didn’t blow me away.
pmmg
Myth Weaver
Looking up the Book of English Verse on Amazon, I'm'ma pass...
JessMahler
Dreamer
Hemingway is on my 'maybe one day' list. I suspect he's too literary for my taste, but I'll take a look if I get the chance.
As for writing advice---
1) Kill your darlings (Kristen Stewart) - I had a tendency to get too attached to certain scenes/lines/characters Learning to let go of things that might have been really good on their own but didn't fit the story was hard.
Advice that I had to ditch --
The five act plot structure and everything related to it. I spent most of my life having people tell me that the problem with my writing was not enough conflict, max wasn't climaxy enough, etc etc. Realizing that not all stories center conflict, that there are a million ways to structure a story, and that if the story isn't working for me it's more likely to be too much conflict from trying to fit a 'traditional' plot structure... really turned my writing around and let me find my writing voice.
As for writing advice---
1) Kill your darlings (Kristen Stewart) - I had a tendency to get too attached to certain scenes/lines/characters Learning to let go of things that might have been really good on their own but didn't fit the story was hard.
Advice that I had to ditch --
The five act plot structure and everything related to it. I spent most of my life having people tell me that the problem with my writing was not enough conflict, max wasn't climaxy enough, etc etc. Realizing that not all stories center conflict, that there are a million ways to structure a story, and that if the story isn't working for me it's more likely to be too much conflict from trying to fit a 'traditional' plot structure... really turned my writing around and let me find my writing voice.
pmmg
Myth Weaver
Usually that one goes to Faulkner.... Kristen Stewart?
JessMahler
Dreamer
Blogger I knew for a while, not any kind of big name. Think she writes under a pseudonym. It's possible she got it frm Faulkner.
The Dark One
Auror
Reflecting on this... and looking back over what I regard as my writing development, trying to make every line zing when I first started was a big mistake.
Now I try to make every chapter zing but every line is exhausting - for both writer and reader. There has to be a comfortable matrix of prose or the real gems don't stand out.
Now I try to make every chapter zing but every line is exhausting - for both writer and reader. There has to be a comfortable matrix of prose or the real gems don't stand out.
Incanus
Auror
This is similar to my experience. My first novel is basically a poor story that is fairly well written. Not doing that again!
The Dark One
Auror
My sister described my first (never published) book as one long poem.
I thought it was a work of genius when I finished it, but these days I can't read three sentences without vomiting blood.