Scriniary

lists Thirty-Two Statements About Writing, which are thought-provoking. (via )

This one:

14. Language is more important than you think. It is not a tool, it is, in the end, the sum of literature. Language has a taste, a texture, a smell. If a painter used only beige, white, and grey, the viewer’s eye would slide off the canvas and start examining the wall. Strive for eggplant, oxblood, and burnt sienna.

is something I still need to work on quite a bit. I don’t believe language is “the sum of literature” (I’m in this gig for the stories), but I want to write pretty. Not McKillip-pretty, but prettier than my natural black-and-white literalism.

I do disagree with her on revision and workshops. I need both. A lot. But really, numbers 31 and 32 are the most important (esp. 31), and I can’t argue with those.

---

Writer angst:1. Thriller writer with huge first advance ends up in death spiral of sales (via )
2. Holly Lisle is in trouble again, after more than 20 published novels.

I don’t know their sales numbers, obviously. The bit that worries me is this: Not only does a book have to be “good enough”, it has to be Spectacular.

Filed by scriniary at 9:28 am under Writing
Comments Off

Limyaael’s rant on distinctive minor characters:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/limyaael/383016.html

One of the things I am doing in this revision is getting rid of or reducing the roles of many of the minor characters.

Filed by scriniary at 8:21 am under Writing
Comments Off

The snowflake method for novel writing has generated some discussion on rec.arts.sf.composition. It definitely does’t work for me (I can’t plan much at all), but parts of it work nicely for organizing revisions between drafts.

Basically, the idea is to start with a one-sentence overview of the book, and gradually expand it into a scene by scene outline, generating synopses of various lengths along the way. Eventually you write the book. If that sounds appealing to any of you, have a look. If it sounds completely alien, avoid it. (I’m avoiding it – it’s not possible for me to get past step 2.)

Filed by scriniary at 5:15 pm under Writing
Comments Off

If anyone has not read ’s post on sentence-level crafting, do so. That’s one of the big things I’m working on now, getting rid of the scaffolding and weasel words and using non-literal techniques.

Filed by scriniary at 6:25 am under Writing
Comments Off

Karen Traviss on the tough life of a full-time writer: I’m sitting here with a pot of tea reading Dark Horse comics for homework. Honestly, isn’t there a trade union I can join to stop this kind of brutal exploitation?

Filed by scriniary at 6:27 pm under Writing
Comments Off

Limyaael has an excellent post on the “designated love interest”. I think I have sucessfully avoided these problems, perhaps.

Filed by scriniary at 5:33 pm under Writing
Comments Off

What’s in a Name? reconfirms for me that my plan to have other people examine my characters’ names is a good one, because I don’t have the linguistic and historical knowledge necessary. I can make pronouncable names, spellable names, but consistent names? No.

Filed by scriniary at 7:28 am under Writing
Comments Off

Holly Black on things authors worry about: http://www.livejournal.com/users/blackholly/50626.html

Filed by scriniary at 7:35 am under Writing
Comments Off