It's the time of year when everyone declares their NanoWrimo intentions, so I'm talking this moment to declare: Don't wanna; ain't gonna.
I think Nano is awesome. But, Nano's strengths are not my weaknesses. The learning opportunties presented by Nano aren't the ones I most open to absorbing right now. Not that they conflict or anything. Writing is writing is writing and that always good for a writer. I have other goals besides large wordcount and I think they would be better served by other writing activites.
I might dedicate November to some other writing effort, though. Haven't hit upon what would be both fun and effective for me yet. (Tick tock, Opera 4 days)
So now that I got Nano off my chest (Good luck, btw, to anyone participating), I'm going to yammer some more about the "Constellation of Images" idea from the writing class I took a couple of weeks back.
The idea is that there are objects, ideas, situations etc. that constantly show up in our writing-- intentional or not. I love that notion. Constellation implies pattern, a sum greater than its part (omg, cliche!). But it's not always an obvious pattern. Sorta like the Big Dipper is obvious, but Orion doesn't really look like a dude in armour until it's pointed out. (your stargazing may vary)
As much of a crush as I have on the idea, and as I've said before, I think it's important to distinguish which objects are meaningful and which are go-to. Meaning, do you always describe a beach by its sand because sand is somehow meaningful to you (and your story) or because it's the first description that comes ashore. Or because it's something that's "always" worked in the past (see also, cliche)
Of course, the first step to making that distinction is also the hardest: noticing your constellation. When I went through my old stuff, I saw a lot of my usual suspects (sibling rivalry, unfairness, doing the right thing, hotels, cars, fast food, skin temperature), but I noticed others: running and movement, in particular. Does Matt ever sit still in The Prince? He's running from the moment he enters the story, he's running in the last scene. Two of my earliest stories are set in moving vehicles. My stories feature stairs and elevators and hallways and characters moving up, down, through, across. Characters wander in and out. Now, while part of that was me not knowing that not every step of a character needs dramatizing, but I'm thinking part of it is just me. I run, so my characters do. I travel and wander around town so my characters do.
Another thing that struck me was how many objects in my daily life that extremely important to me never ever show up in my writing (at least I think they don't). I collect antiques-- not priceless, historic, outrageously expensive ones. I just like housewares and knick knacks with life behind them. Other than mentions of Taker's "treasure-hoarding" and his half-a-notion to remodel an old house in The Prince series, I've never really added that to my fanfic. I guess because I feel the characters wouldn't care. Even though I know Batista collects metal lunch boxes (so do I omg, I have a Miss America one that is Glam-ou-rous)and their travels through America give them plenty of opportunity and that if they know how to shill their goods on Ebay, then they know how to buy stuff on it too.
And then there's the lake. I circle around a lake each morning on the way to work. It's been cold (mid-30s F)lately, and it's interesting to watch the steam rise from Phalen's surface. In the summer, I watched the ducks. In the spring, I like checking the ice breaking up. In the winter, I like watching the ice take over. It's a whole circle of the seasons, weather-hinting, little affirmation of I'm so glad I live where I do. So why do I never write about that? Especially overtly?
I mean, generally cities that I protrayed as bad: Fargo, Kansas City, Denver are "dry" places, and the cities where good things happen, Eau Claire, are "wet". Eau Claire not only has water in its name, but it was raining in the story. But it's always been window dressing at best. I wonder why I haven't been so artlessly balls out about it as is typical of my writing? I wonder why some notions just show up why others never appear at all?
Anyway, this whole Constellation of Images idea has been working overtime for me. Even in early drafts, when I'm struggling to form a story out of Imagination Ooze. It's taught me to look for objects in emotional scenes. Instead of picturing Jericho struggling not to break down; I see an unmade bed. Instead of seeing a bored Jeff, I see him fiddling distractedly with a beer bottle. And while those objects don't necessary stand for or explain the emotion, they give a starting point. Something to work from. It's so much easier to hang the unique POV or telling adjective off a noun than an abstraction.
I think Nano is awesome. But, Nano's strengths are not my weaknesses. The learning opportunties presented by Nano aren't the ones I most open to absorbing right now. Not that they conflict or anything. Writing is writing is writing and that always good for a writer. I have other goals besides large wordcount and I think they would be better served by other writing activites.
I might dedicate November to some other writing effort, though. Haven't hit upon what would be both fun and effective for me yet. (Tick tock, Opera 4 days)
So now that I got Nano off my chest (Good luck, btw, to anyone participating), I'm going to yammer some more about the "Constellation of Images" idea from the writing class I took a couple of weeks back.
The idea is that there are objects, ideas, situations etc. that constantly show up in our writing-- intentional or not. I love that notion. Constellation implies pattern, a sum greater than its part (omg, cliche!). But it's not always an obvious pattern. Sorta like the Big Dipper is obvious, but Orion doesn't really look like a dude in armour until it's pointed out. (your stargazing may vary)
As much of a crush as I have on the idea, and as I've said before, I think it's important to distinguish which objects are meaningful and which are go-to. Meaning, do you always describe a beach by its sand because sand is somehow meaningful to you (and your story) or because it's the first description that comes ashore. Or because it's something that's "always" worked in the past (see also, cliche)
Of course, the first step to making that distinction is also the hardest: noticing your constellation. When I went through my old stuff, I saw a lot of my usual suspects (sibling rivalry, unfairness, doing the right thing, hotels, cars, fast food, skin temperature), but I noticed others: running and movement, in particular. Does Matt ever sit still in The Prince? He's running from the moment he enters the story, he's running in the last scene. Two of my earliest stories are set in moving vehicles. My stories feature stairs and elevators and hallways and characters moving up, down, through, across. Characters wander in and out. Now, while part of that was me not knowing that not every step of a character needs dramatizing, but I'm thinking part of it is just me. I run, so my characters do. I travel and wander around town so my characters do.
Another thing that struck me was how many objects in my daily life that extremely important to me never ever show up in my writing (at least I think they don't). I collect antiques-- not priceless, historic, outrageously expensive ones. I just like housewares and knick knacks with life behind them. Other than mentions of Taker's "treasure-hoarding" and his half-a-notion to remodel an old house in The Prince series, I've never really added that to my fanfic. I guess because I feel the characters wouldn't care. Even though I know Batista collects metal lunch boxes (so do I omg, I have a Miss America one that is Glam-ou-rous)and their travels through America give them plenty of opportunity and that if they know how to shill their goods on Ebay, then they know how to buy stuff on it too.
And then there's the lake. I circle around a lake each morning on the way to work. It's been cold (mid-30s F)lately, and it's interesting to watch the steam rise from Phalen's surface. In the summer, I watched the ducks. In the spring, I like checking the ice breaking up. In the winter, I like watching the ice take over. It's a whole circle of the seasons, weather-hinting, little affirmation of I'm so glad I live where I do. So why do I never write about that? Especially overtly?
I mean, generally cities that I protrayed as bad: Fargo, Kansas City, Denver are "dry" places, and the cities where good things happen, Eau Claire, are "wet". Eau Claire not only has water in its name, but it was raining in the story. But it's always been window dressing at best. I wonder why I haven't been so artlessly balls out about it as is typical of my writing? I wonder why some notions just show up why others never appear at all?
Anyway, this whole Constellation of Images idea has been working overtime for me. Even in early drafts, when I'm struggling to form a story out of Imagination Ooze. It's taught me to look for objects in emotional scenes. Instead of picturing Jericho struggling not to break down; I see an unmade bed. Instead of seeing a bored Jeff, I see him fiddling distractedly with a beer bottle. And while those objects don't necessary stand for or explain the emotion, they give a starting point. Something to work from. It's so much easier to hang the unique POV or telling adjective off a noun than an abstraction.