Is writing magic?
Aug. 2nd, 2011 01:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
writingopedI stumbled upon one of those "better writing" articles today that began with the statement that writing is not magic. It went on to give a list of tips for writing a novel. That list of tips included this one: write the ending first.
Now, I'm sure that the author of that article has had great success following her own tips. But not everyone gets from point A to point B in the same way. Writing is an art. There are no hard and fast rules. If there were stringent rules, writing would be a science and not an art.
For me personally, writing the ending of a story or novel first simply wouldn't work. For one thing, I rarely know exactly how things are going to end. Do I have an idea of where things will end up? Yes. Do I know all the details that will occur throughout the novel that will need to be tied up in the ending? No, of course not. In addition, if I wrote the end of my novel first, then by the time I got to the ending, what I had written for the ending would be obsolete. Let me explain why.
Many authors see themselves as the architects of their stories. They are the big boss, the man (or woman) in charge. They strictly control the flow of their story, carefully sculpting the plot with outlines and flowcharts and who knows what. But others, like me, take a different approach. We open up our minds to our characters and let them whisper their stories into our brains. We aren't in charge. We aren't driving the boat. Our characters are. And as they tell their stories to us, our novels unfold a bit at a time, flowing naturally from start to finish.
Don't get me wrong, this approach to writing doesn't negate the need for editing, research, continuity corrections, or any thing of the sort. But that's what the editing process - and first readers and proofreaders - are for.
Essentially, I believe that the differences between my writing approach and that of the author of the article I stumbled upon lies in the differences in our stories. My tales are character-centric, character-driven. I'd be willing to bet hers are plot-driven. But what it comes down to is this: no two authors are the same, and therefore no two writers are going to approach writing the same way.
As for the question of whether writing is magic - again, no two people are going to have exactly the same view. For me, writing is magic. Words and ideas flow from me that I didn't even know were percolating in my brain. People I've never met come to life on my computer screen, fueled only by my words. Events that have never happened bring out strong emotional responses in those who read about them.
If that's not magic, then what is?
Now, I'm sure that the author of that article has had great success following her own tips. But not everyone gets from point A to point B in the same way. Writing is an art. There are no hard and fast rules. If there were stringent rules, writing would be a science and not an art.
For me personally, writing the ending of a story or novel first simply wouldn't work. For one thing, I rarely know exactly how things are going to end. Do I have an idea of where things will end up? Yes. Do I know all the details that will occur throughout the novel that will need to be tied up in the ending? No, of course not. In addition, if I wrote the end of my novel first, then by the time I got to the ending, what I had written for the ending would be obsolete. Let me explain why.
Many authors see themselves as the architects of their stories. They are the big boss, the man (or woman) in charge. They strictly control the flow of their story, carefully sculpting the plot with outlines and flowcharts and who knows what. But others, like me, take a different approach. We open up our minds to our characters and let them whisper their stories into our brains. We aren't in charge. We aren't driving the boat. Our characters are. And as they tell their stories to us, our novels unfold a bit at a time, flowing naturally from start to finish.
Don't get me wrong, this approach to writing doesn't negate the need for editing, research, continuity corrections, or any thing of the sort. But that's what the editing process - and first readers and proofreaders - are for.
Essentially, I believe that the differences between my writing approach and that of the author of the article I stumbled upon lies in the differences in our stories. My tales are character-centric, character-driven. I'd be willing to bet hers are plot-driven. But what it comes down to is this: no two authors are the same, and therefore no two writers are going to approach writing the same way.
As for the question of whether writing is magic - again, no two people are going to have exactly the same view. For me, writing is magic. Words and ideas flow from me that I didn't even know were percolating in my brain. People I've never met come to life on my computer screen, fueled only by my words. Events that have never happened bring out strong emotional responses in those who read about them.
If that's not magic, then what is?
