In which I have a light bulb moment about why some books do so well. 🙂 Over at Ana’s blog!
2015 Word Count Goal
Current Active Projects
The House of Manlove Fourth of July Flash Event
Find Book Posts by Category
In which I have a light bulb moment about why some books do so well. 🙂 Over at Ana’s blog!
Back from our spring hiatus, the Three Dirty Birds are pecking away at Libbie Hawker’s Take Your Pants Off! and discussing her plot signposts.
Zoe: I almost didn’t want the stuff on character arc and theme to end. I was having fun!
Kate: True. Once I started getting into the meat of plotting out the specific events of the story, I felt my pace slowing down. And I’m still either not using it correctly, or it isn’t something that is going to work after all. Though the first half of the book was great! And I will totally keep using that part. Maybe I just need more practice.
Zoe: The first half alone was worth $2.99. (Or more.)
Kate: If she brings this out in paperback, I’m buying a hard copy.
Zoe: Me too. So as we get into plotting, Libbie introduces her own set of beats, some of them like beats in other guides, some a little different. But they’re still pretty much the same concept. (She calls them “plot headings” as opposed to beats, which I kind of liked because it made me feel a little less frantic. Semantics, yo.)
Kate: It’s all about the psychology.
Ana: That is a big part. Especially since I’m always trying to beat my own laziness and the fear of the blank document. Which is also only psychological. I like when plotting doesn’t seem or feel like work.
Zoe: I think that’s what I like about the term “plot headings”—”headings” implies that you’re going to put stuff under them, so just by typing the headings, you’ve already gotten started.
Kate: Yes, it’s very easy to sit down and tackle one when you think of it that way. Actually filling in the headings, though, I found considerably more difficult. That, I think, comes down to my process in developing stories.
Zoe: It may be, Kate, that you need your own set of headings for the types of signposts you tend to work around.
Ana: I know I’m trying to change/adjust some of them for me.
Kate: It’s not even that, I think. I’ll tell you a story. 🙂 This weekend, I sat down and fleshed out a lovely plot for a story to please The Editor in Question. The plot worked, everything fell into place, logic, logic, logic, feelz. I am no more than 325 words into it and it’s not going to work. The plot was fine, but it won’t suit Loose Id. In fact, it probably won’t suit most publishers. (Except maybe Riptide.)
Ana: What’s wrong with it?
Kate: The two MC’s can’t actually get together in this story. Instead, they’re forced into round after round of sex with other people. The actual psychology of the story means that the original plan for it is broken, at least as a novel. As background, though, it works excellently. So now I have to replot, or rewrite, to try out the new idea. But I couldn’t see it in the plot I wrote, because it didn’t communicate the characters the way I needed to engage with them.
Zoe: The good news it only took you 325 of actual writing to get to that point?
Kate: Lol, yes. But it’s good to see that these are things that I need to do. I think my method of engaging with story isn’t compatible with pre-plotting, but I’m going to try finishing one, and then see what I can slot into the plot headings and go from there. It might work better for me as a post-check than a pre-plan.
Ana: I’m having some trouble pre-plotting my current story too. Now, the plotting thing worked fine with my last story I just finished for that writing event, but I noticed I didn’t try it there until I’d already spent some time writing that story. So now what I’m trying is I play around with my story for a week or so, and then try to fill out the plot headings after I’ve had some contact-time.
Zoe: Yeah, I was going to point out that you started mid-story…as did I. I haven’t had a chance to start an all-new story with Libbie’s book yet; I’m working on the second book that was already-in-progress right now. I can’t wait to get free and start a new one from scratch. I have the outlines started!
Kate: I think I’ll try that with this one. Later on, after I’ve done my obligatory words getting my fireman into his relationship, I’ll start the first chapter of the one for She Who Must Be Obeyed and see if that shakes loose anything. Kind of tempted to write out the heading on a whiteboard, and fill them in as the story makes itself known to me.
Zoe: That sounds like an interesting experiment.
Like Ana, I’ve been changing the plot headings a bit to fit better with the way I write. And of course as Libbie says in the book some of the plot headings happen in the same scene, or in a different order than she lists, and I try to stay cognizant of that flexibility.
Kate: I try to picture them on an actual story arc, like a curve that starts low, has a high point, then ends a little lower.
Zoe: I love Libbie’s reminder that as you build your plot outline, you can only use bricks from the work you did in the first part: character arc, theme, the Story Core. (I have a feeling I still have stuff that doesn’t really need to be in my book, but it helps nonetheless.)
Ana: With my last attempt at outlining a romance that way (my paranormal), I got rather far until I realized I didn’t have enough space to actually build my characters’ relationships. So, I’m not sure, maybe I need more/different beats added or another drive for goal / fail cycle. But I’m not sure what it’s going to be yet.
Kate: This outlining thing is very much a work in progress.
Zoe: Could it be that you need two outlines, one for the non-romantic plot and one for the romantic one? (I’m assuming there’s a non-romantic plot that’s taking up all your room.) I really got into doing three outlines for the main characters in Dead to the World. (I had to build a timeline to piece them together after, but it slotted fairly nicely.)
Ana: It could be. Because my character’s external goal here isn’t anything to do with romance.
Zoe: So you do have two plots, or at least a plot and a subplot. They’d have their own beats.
Kate: Don’t we always, though? I mean, there’s the character’s plot for their internal growth, but then there’s the external plot dealing with events. Sometimes they overlap, and you get elements affecting both plots from one scene or event, but I know–in my head, anyway–there’s a series of parallel lines where I store my plots.
Zoe: Yes, but if you have a non-romantic external goal and a romance goal…I think they’re both still external goals, so they don’t fit into one outline (necessarily) as well as the standard external/internal, which can be more tightly intertwined (you have to overcome the internal to achieve the external). Libbie didn’t really cover subplots. She needs to write a sequel.
Kate: Lol. Demanding authors.
Ana: I feel further experiments on this outline will have to be done.
Zoe: Can’t wait to hear how they go!
Kate: This is going to be fun.
Zoe: I did find that using Take Off Your Pants for Dead to the World got me finished more quickly than I think I would have otherwise, even with stopping for three days to do the three outlines. I wound up revising 22k words and writing another 40k in just 18 days. … I wish I could say the same for Ride the Devil, but for the past four days I’ve been avoiding touching that one. I think I might just be fatigued.
Kate: Honestly, I’m beginning to think KM Weiland might have hit something on the head in her book, but not what she planned. I keep coming back to her talking about how the story bounces around in her head for months or years before she’s ready to write it down. And I wonder if outlining can really only come when your brain has processed enough of the story internally to have the material necessary to support an outline. And I don’t mean it all has to be consciously, but that the act of putting the outline together accesses subconscious planning that you weren’t aware you were doing. Your brain making logical connections between things as you plot. Does that sound crazy?
Zoe: Not entirely. 🙂 I’m looking forward to putting it to the test because I do have an outline for a story that I came up with without spending weeks or more playing it in my head, and I stopped thinking about it when I had an outline I was happy with, so I’m interested in seeing how the writing goes. But I can’t start until I get Ride the Devil first-drafted and Dead to the World revised. (Which means I’ve been outlining even more stories, because my head is always working on stories when I’m supposed to be writing stories. How do I get to be an outline factory like James Patterson?)
Kate: *cough* hire people *cough*
Ana: I think it’s a pretty individual thing. I have this friend, he’s a real idea machine. He could outline any of my novels after a few sentences from me. Now, if he could write them, I don’t know, but I often have times where I’m sitting in front of an outline and just go ‘uh…. what now?” and I hit him up and he has like ten ideas for what could happen. Most of them good, too. Me, I need more time to work things out.
Kate: Everyone has different methods, which makes learning to outline and learning to write such a challenge. It’s part science, but mostly art, and for art you have to feel your way through until you find the method that works for you.
Zoe: Kate, have you had a chance to crack open Save the Cat yet?
Kate: I did! During the teenager’s birthday party, while they were in the pool. I like it. He’s blunt, and a lot of what he says makes perfect sense. It’s things I know about, but don’t always remember because I’m still learning. There’s some parts that are very obviously only for screenwriters, but a lot of it crosses over. I need to finish it, after I clear the decks of some of the day job stuff.
Zoe: I thought to ask because I had a crisis moment at the movie theater yesterday. We went to see Danny Collins, and it was an enjoyable movie, but during several scenes, I was so hugely aware that it was hitting its beats. I know on one level that most of the people in that theater weren’t feeling the beats hit as hard as I was, but at the same time I was all, “I DON’T WANT TO WRITE STORIES YOU CAN MAP OUT LIKE THAT!” It was an existential moment that was probably exacerbated by the fact that I’d run out of garlic parmesan french fries to shove in my mouth.
(Ana: Wait, you can eat fries IN the theater?!)
(Zoe: Oh yes. And drink beer…but you guys probably had that in Germany already.)
(Ana: Yes to the beer.)
(Kate: I need to move next to Zoe.)
Kate: I suspect part of the job of a writer is to hit those beats, but to disguise them cleverly enough that you don’t recognize them as beats. In some stories it’s okay–you know he has to save the cat, and you know he has to fail at least once, and it’s kind of a game to guess which character that’s important to him will be only threatened and which one will die–but it shouldn’t be the modus operandi.
Zoe: Yes, and I need to add that I’m also aware that hitting beats is what makes a movie enjoyable a lot of the time. If it’s just a shambling mess, people can’t get into it. I was just a little too aware of the mechanisms creaking underneath the fun patter. (And the movie did have a lot of pleasant surprises in it—and that may be why I noticed the beats so much more, because of the contrast between the pleasant surprises and the “oh yeah, totally saw that coming.”)
Ana: It’s a little like watching a magician. Once you know how he does it, it’s not fun anymore.
Zoe: Unless you’re That Guy—the one who gets all his fun out of spoiling it for everyone else by loudly telling the whole theater how it works. (I just sat quietly wishing for more fries.)
Kate: It could be a writer’s game. Go to a movie, and afterwards, the person who can identify the most beats gets their meal paid for by everyone else.
Zoe: I’m in! (Did I mention that this theater had comfy couches? This place might turn me into a theater-goer again. It doesn’t hurt that there’s a Tom Hardy movie out right now…comfy couches, fries, Tom Hardy…)
Or at least I think it’s theme. Still waiting for my new laptop fan, then I get to play computer tech! But until then, it’s all the poor computer can do to keep Scrivener open. Internet is on-again, off-again–I’m assuming from the heat. I have a backup plan, though. I have an old desktop I can put the hard drive in, if I have to, but I’m really not looking forward to it.
Check out our thoughts on Libbie Hawker’s Take Off Your Pants! over at Zoe’s blog. 😀
My usual method of writing is reasserting itself. I got 2K on my firefighter and paramedic story, which does not have an outline. And 500 on my outlined story. There’s something off about those numbers, I think. 😛
No picture today–my computer fan is dying and stuff just isn’t working like it usually does.
The Three Dirty Birds are back and plotting! (Not that we ever aren’t plotting but this time, even Kitty is plotting. As in, has an outline. Prepare for Armageddon.)
Zoe: I’ll be right back, guys. I’ve never seen pigs fly before, and I don’t want to miss the view out the window.
Ana: Flying bacon!
Kate: I have a flying toy pig at work. We call him Kevin.
Zoe: Breakfast is on Kate! (But we won’t eat Kevin.)
Ana: Did you name your MC in your story after a flying toy pig?
Kate: No, his name is Thilo. Random name generator, clicked through until I found something that I liked. (I never thought about that with respect to Kev, though. Hmmmm)
Zoe: I love the random name generators. My favorite gives me a first and last name, saving me so much headache.
Kate: They are such a great jumping off point. I used to use a baby name book, but I found myself in the same letter all the time.
Zoe: Yes! I go to the same ones all the time. The generators save me from myself, and keep my world from being populated with D- and R-names.)
Ana: And here I thought I was the only one with favorite letters. There’s something about Ds, though… isn’t there?
Kate: I have an ANT problem. A, N, and T. Oh, and I. (Why I?)
Zoe: Speaking of ANT…we’re up to the Antagonist section in Take Off Your Pants now, aren’t we?
Ana: Right, I’ve always had trouble identifying clear antagonists in some of my books. When I try the ‘what your character wants most’ angle (meaning, the antagonist is the one who’s after the same thing), I almost can’t help but make my Love Interest the antagonist.
Zoe: And I can see that working in a lot of cases. They both do want the same thing, and what gets in their way is the other person.
Ana: Maybe this is why so many romances build on miscommunication. When the protagonist and the antagonist realize their goals aren’t in opposition, it’s all over.
Kate: That’s how this story that I have most of an outline for is working–not the miscommunication, but one MC wants to change the part of the other MC that he’s embarrassed about, without seeing all the good things about it. I think miscommunication is often cheaply handled. There’s so many stories out there where if one of the MC’s didn’t just have a childish tantrum and actually spoke to the other person like the adult they’re supposed to be, the story wouldn’t exist. And then, there’s the misunderstanding after misunderstanding type of plot. I’m not saying it shouldn’t be done, but it needs a lot more thought put into it than seems to happen, and it’s a lot harder story to write well.
Zoe: I think it winds up being the crux of the conflict because the author didn’t give the characters arc-relevant flaws. They’re bratty or have abuse in their past or whatever, but it’s not really tied to the character growth (or character destruction, though you wouldn’t have that arc in a romance), so they wind up falling back on miscommunication and misunderstandings for lack of anything else, rather than through intention.
Kate: Drama for the sake of having an exciting emotional moment, rather than something that actually contributes to plot or character development.
Zoe: Yeah or, there’s nothing really to keep these two apart, so something has to be manufactured.
Kate: I really want to read that Truby book she mentions.
Zoe: SUCH TINY TYPE!
Kate: Epub? I like being able to blow up my text on my Kobo (which seems to be on the point of breaking again. Next time, I’m getting an H2O so I can read in the bath).
Zoe: Ebook is probably the way to go.
Ana: Yeah, I just found it on kindle for about €10. But I think my next read will be Super Structure by James Scott Bell.
Kate: And, to Google I go…
Zoe: What do you think of Libbie’s assertion that the antagonist is a mirror of the hero, that he’s a “there but for the grace of God” version?
Ana: That’s the part I really can’t work into my story.
Kate: I think for most stories that works. I’m trying to figure out how that can work in a romance, especially my little ‘trapped together during a storm’ story, where there’s only two characters. Maybe it doesn’t work for romance? (although it does kind of work for Knight, if I change some of my emphasis. But that’s because I have crazy Michael in it.)
Ana: The problem with using this for a romance novel where you cast the LI as the antagonist is that this take on the antagonist paints him as a bad person, not necessarily someone you should strive to have a relationship with? Although of course you do have the MC1 saves broken MC2 romances.
Kate: I’m not sure even that fits into it. I really feel that her antagonist, if you always define him or her as being the photonegative version, doesn’t work for Romance. The definitions of ‘someone who wants the same goal as the MC, but not in the same way” works very well for romance where the characters themselves are a big part of the problem.
Zoe: This is a good example of how the spirit of Libbie’s book is valuable, and she’s got a great way of explaining things…but when you get to the nuts and bolts of your own story, you may not actually use everything in Pants. Even taking Charlotte’s Web as an example: we can agree that Wilbur and the farmer want the same thing—Wilbur’s life. But the farmer’s not a photo negative of Wilbur; he doesn’t really represent what Wilbur will become if Wilbur fails. Unless the farmer is made of bacon.
Ana: Good point.
Kate: Now I want bacon.
Zoe: It is the case in other stories, of course. I can think of a number of action thrillers where the hero and the antagonist are very much alike; they’ve just chosen different sides.
Ana: Those are usually the characters I slash in my head.
Zoe: [Yes. Those guys are so doing it.]
Kate: Yes, that’s pretty common, and it adds a nice tension to the story. (Not the slashing, but the mirror image stuff.) (Although, slashing adds a nice bit of tension too, just not the same kind. 🙂 )
Zoe: Where I run into problems is with the Ally (because I keep going, “Wait…wasn’t he the antagonist?”), which we’ll be discussing shortly….
Kate: I found the Ally tough, until I made myself sit down and really think about it. Maybe we should talk about that…
Okay, that really isn’t the title exactly. It’s Libbie Hawker’s Take Your Pants Off! Outline Your Books for Faster, Better Writing.
The Three Dirty Birds are back, once more throwing themselves into the fray and trying to turn Kitty into a plotter. Today we’re talking about Libbie Hawker’s Take Off Your Pants! (which seems weirdly appropriate for people who all write erotic romance)
Ana: I feel like I’m in a sect and trying to get Kate to join.
Kate: One of those cults. Oh no, they’re brainwashing me!
Ana: I never thought I’d be in a plotting cult.
Zoe: I wish I’d had this book two years ago. 😦
Kate: If any book is going to do it, it might just be this one. She strikes very close to the Seven Point Plot Outline that I’ve had some success with. (Mostly because it just points out the signpost moments in the story.) But the story she tells at the beginning–I’d love to be able to do that.
Zoe: Someone in another group I hang out in said that they’re a lot like the Save the Cat beats with different names.
Ana: I might have to look into that because I wasn’t happy with all the names.
Zoe: I’m not familiar with the Save the Cat beats, but in the discussion it was said that it calls the Ally the Love Interest, so I’m not sure the names are much better. 🙂
Kate: We could do a comparison for our next book.
Ana: The Ally isn’t the Love Interest in my plotting. But maybe that’s because I write Romance?
Kate: That’s what I think.
Zoe: No, I think it’s just that the “love interest” doesn’t have to be an actual love interest—it’s just a weirdly named beat.
Kate: Zoe, you’re going to have to explain that a bit more, because I’m not getting what you’re talking about.
Ana: Maybe that there isn’t a love interest in every book?
Zoe: I can only explain so much since I haven’t read Save the Cat, but apparently his ally role is called “love interest,” although it doesn’t have to be an actual “love interest.”
I think that Libbie’s beats pair nicely with James Scott Bell’s 14 signposts from Super Structure (also mentioned in Write Your Novel from the Middle). They hit different points, different aspects.
Kate: Another one I have to read. I got sidetracked by a book on character naming, which is way more interesting than I thought it would be.
Ana: There’s a book on character naming?
Kate: Sherrilyn Kenyon, through Writer’s Digest. She goes into naming conventions, then gives a bunch of names by nationality.
Zoe: Naming conventions would be useful if you’re writing non-Anglo-Saxon characters…or fantasy.
Ana: If I were writing non-anglo-saxon characters from a country whose naming conventions I’m not familiar with, I’d probably look at a few of those top 100 baby names list for a few years… I mean, from a few different years, not that I’d be looking for years.
Zoe: lol I thought you’d be looking for years at first. I’m not sure the baby naming sites would help—they just give first names. I had to name a Hispanic character in a book recently, and looked up those naming conventions specifically. (Then I had to look up how it was handled once the family was an American Hispanic family because the character is actually second generation.)
Kate: That’s how this book handles it. There’s a section on Japanese and Korean, Ana.
Ana: Ah yes, I rarely think about last names. I’m good with Japanese! Probably won’t write Koreans.
Kate: The Japanese section talks about last names too, and how a married couple can take either his or her last name. Interesting, weird little tidbits.
And, we’ve gotten off track again. (Not like there’s ever a day where we don’t 🙂 )
Zoe: We have. So Libbie sets out in the beginning to tell you that her method will help you gain more confidence in your stories at the outline stage and write faster. Having now read it and done three outlines and gotten back to work on my WIP, my thoughts on that claim are “yes” and “maybe.” I can see myself taking less time in rewrites because I’ll have fewer story problems to fix, but I’m not sure that I’ll first-draft any faster.
Kate: I’m looking forward to trying it out on something from scratch. I have two in-progress stories that I’m trying to work on where I plan to give it a whirl, but I don’t think it’s the same thing.
Zoe: Ironically I started a new story from scratch last night…and haven’t outlined it yet. (But her book still helped, because I wouldn’t have been able to grasp what I have if I hadn’t just learned all that stuff about character flaw.)
Ana: I tried the outline thing on a short project I’m working on now, and it’s going well so far. I’ve yet to test it on something longer, but will probably do so soon. At least, with this outline I get my story split into chunks that I can make into story goals so I know how much to write each day and about how long it’ll take me to get to the end.
Zoe: Yes! I made a list of scenes in Evernote with little checkboxes next to them, then broke them into days, with more scenes on weekends than weekdays, and now I can see that I can finish this draft by the end of the month. (I love ticking the little boxes…though I’m contemplating switching to index cards for the next one.)
Ana: I want little boxes to tick!
Zoe: Get you some Evernote!
Kate: I love having a goal to write toward, which is why the 7 Point Structure worked pretty well for me. But it would be nice to have more smaller goals, so I’m not spending days writing toward one goal, but can accomplish one or two each day. (Push the button, get a pellet. Repeat.)
Ana: I’m almost sad this story I’m writing isn’t going to be submitted anywhere. I already have a synopsis!
I can certainly see the point of having an outline, or a serious plan, when you start writing. Libbie’s story about taking two years to write one book, then three weeks to write the outlined book, is one of the reasons I keep coming back to the “There must be some way to make it work with my brain!” idea.
Zoe: Kate, I have to ask now that you’re about halfway through the book: have you been an irritated bird yet?
Kate: Not once. How’s that for strange?
Zoe: (True story: I only wound up buying this book because I wanted to see if it was going to piss Kate off. Then I got hooked.)
Kate: And this is what I live with–writing buddies who do things just to see how far my tail will fuzz.
Zoe: I’d have told you not to buy it if it had been cranky-making. (After quoting all the cranky-making bits in chat.)
Ana: I would have been there for moral support. And popcorn.
Kate: That I can believe. But I have to say I’m glad you bought it and got me to buy it. I’m finding the specifics of the plot section a little harder to get into, but part of my method is that I write myself into the characters as I go. There’s a lot of stuff that comes out on the page that I have no idea where it came from, but then later something else comes out and the first one turns out to be foreshadowing, or necessary characterisation. And that all depends on the characters.
Zoe: Some people I’ve talked to had problems getting their heads around some of the stuff in this—I’ve seen discussions going on about the antagonist, the plot stuff, and the idea that the character has to overcome their flaw, which should make for interesting discussion in our chats as we get more into the specifics of the book.
Ana: To come back to what Kate said about the specifics, I think that even if you don’t follow the outline in the outlining part of the book, it can still help you if you got your character flaw and theme figured out before you start writing. (And possibly also how you want the book to end.)
Zoe: Yes. I think this book works for pantsers as well as plotters.
Kate: It does feel less “This is the word of our Lord” to me, which means I’m more likely to take a kick at what she says to try, and be less frustrated when and if it doesn’t work.
Zoe: I also see most of the book as more what you’d call “guidelines” than set-in-stone rules. I’ve been loosey-goosey with a lot of the plot stuff, changing headings, moving them around, grouping them together. But the book indicates you can do that as well.
Kate: One thing I figured out right away, and haven’t had time to go back and apply my new knowledge, is that you have to use this book either with notecards or a computer–you can’t just pull out a sheet of looseleaf and go to town. It’s definitely designed to be flexible, and for you to move stuff around, add and subtract, etc. Which is very much my way of doing things. (Although I do love my looseleaf)
Zoe: (I have a binder full of blank looseleaf. I bought it with the best intentions. Over a year ago.)
So, are we ready to dive into the Story Core in our next discussion?
(Ana: Nice, Zoe, ending the chapter with a question.)