Try some; it's good.
Wherein I ramble about books, movies,
music, TV shows, my life, and occasionally, hot emo boys.
My Books
Current WiP
My ValentineGuide sequel = DONE
|
Monday, April 30, 2007
killing the muse (or deconstruction and the art of the endless revision)
There are any number of things that make it impossible for me to write: the dog barking nonstop at the cats, the cats yowling at each other, the kids acting like absolute prats. Whenever I'm trying to work, the smaller denizens of the house sense it and then they conspire to go batshit simultaneously at the worst possible time.
That's not what I intended to blog about today, however. I'm noticing I don't want to surf to writer blogs lately. Why? Because of the constant deconstruction of the process. How do you do (X)? How can we make (X) better? For me, writing is magic; it's not a mechanical process. And for me to think about the nuts and bolts that make the machine run, well, it's like telling a bumblebee he is not aerodynamic enough to fly. The poor bastard's first reaction is, "Huh? What?" and then he plummets to earth. Logic, once applied to magic, cannot be undone.
My writing is like that poor bumblebee. I don't know how it works; it just does. It's lovely, sparkly, and I don't think about the process. In fact, I shouldn't think about the process. Because now that I have been, I'm finding it hard to write. I second-guess myself more than I used to. I need to go back to the old ways, where I simply listen to whatever the characters have to say and write it down. That's truly all I do, and it works for me, profoundly.
I'm not a reviser. I either sell my product or I don't. Once a work is contracted, my editor will tell me what changes to make, and if the book doesn't sell, all the revisions in the world probably aren't going to make a difference. All that accomplishes is to eradicate an author's unique voice, ruthlessly squelched by endless critique rounds. Your crit partners are well-intentioned, but unless they are bestselling authors, they don't have any more idea what sells than you do. They have opinions, of course, but so does everyone. Too much interference will kill the muse.
Mine is sickly, poor thing. And so I'm not going to read blogs where they talk about the best way to do this or that. Or how do I do such and such? I can't analyze it. When you dissect something, you find out how it works, sure, but you no longer have a dynamic, vital entity. Just ask the poor frog floating in Formaldehyde.
That's not what I intended to blog about today, however. I'm noticing I don't want to surf to writer blogs lately. Why? Because of the constant deconstruction of the process. How do you do (X)? How can we make (X) better? For me, writing is magic; it's not a mechanical process. And for me to think about the nuts and bolts that make the machine run, well, it's like telling a bumblebee he is not aerodynamic enough to fly. The poor bastard's first reaction is, "Huh? What?" and then he plummets to earth. Logic, once applied to magic, cannot be undone.
My writing is like that poor bumblebee. I don't know how it works; it just does. It's lovely, sparkly, and I don't think about the process. In fact, I shouldn't think about the process. Because now that I have been, I'm finding it hard to write. I second-guess myself more than I used to. I need to go back to the old ways, where I simply listen to whatever the characters have to say and write it down. That's truly all I do, and it works for me, profoundly.
I'm not a reviser. I either sell my product or I don't. Once a work is contracted, my editor will tell me what changes to make, and if the book doesn't sell, all the revisions in the world probably aren't going to make a difference. All that accomplishes is to eradicate an author's unique voice, ruthlessly squelched by endless critique rounds. Your crit partners are well-intentioned, but unless they are bestselling authors, they don't have any more idea what sells than you do. They have opinions, of course, but so does everyone. Too much interference will kill the muse.
Mine is sickly, poor thing. And so I'm not going to read blogs where they talk about the best way to do this or that. Or how do I do such and such? I can't analyze it. When you dissect something, you find out how it works, sure, but you no longer have a dynamic, vital entity. Just ask the poor frog floating in Formaldehyde.
Labels: SBD
AMEN.
ps - you would be so proud - i finally figured out how to load a linky thingy. whew.
In an attempt to shrink the word count of what I (and my very critical critique partner) both think is my best thing yet, I have totally murdered the muse, alienated my characters and not accomplished a GD thing In weeks.
that's why I'm hung up on these shorts---instant gratification--no word count issues. I just sit and let 'em fly out quick as a wink.
You're right, Ann. I'm going to quit trying to beat it into submission and just submit the damn thing!
T'anks :)
Mostly, I look to my crit partners to say, "Hey, dumbass, you've got a plot-hole the size of a small planet in this chapter. Plus, not enough build-up to the bang-bang. Add more foreplay."
Or, alternately, "Dude. Great scene. More like that, 'k?"
And, in the case of my single male crit partner, "Men don't speak like that. EVER. Fix it."
This doesn't mess with my muse so much as galvanize me to do my best work.
That said, I've been part of more formalized crit groups that were slow, agonizing death with no gainful outcome. Which is why I feel so blessed to have found the three partners I currently have.
I guess it all depends on who critiques you. ;)
I agree with you on the rewrites thing...I basically just have to let the story go. Sure, I'll go back and tweak, but that's usually as I write. If I overanalyze stuff, it makes me crazy...and totally agressive with my red pen!
I think that's the saddest part. You get people cheerleading imaginary successes while someone is still "revising" a book she started in 1987. That's stagnation.
This is just my opinion, obviously, but if a book doesn't make the cut after the third pass through it, then it's a practice book. Further effort is just a waste of time. Now maybe someday when you write "the book" and you hit it big, then publishers will be clamoring for any old thing you have under your bed. Until then, trying to analyze what doesn't work about it is pointless and futile.
I guess I just ain't that talented *g!
Crit groups, I have bad luck with those. Most places I've found are not capable of not attacking other people. If they crit, it's because they're trying to tear you and your work apart. Other wise it's all just ego blowing. It's hard for me not to grit my teeth every time I see an agent or editor recommend crit groups. It makes me wonder if too many people choose to listen to advice they shouldn't from people who have less than honorable intentions.
Good luck getting in touch with your muse again. Nothing tends to get their attention like jealousy. I started keeping a journal and that got me distracted with story ideas. :)
"What works for YOU is what counts."
That applies across the board. Doesn't mean what I say is right for someone else. I just can't do analysis; it's killing my ability to write.
As for writers blogs... I don't usually read the writing tips unless it's something I look for. *ducks tomatoes* I read the other part of the post about what they had for dinner, which gym they're flunking out of, which kid threw a wad of dog poo over the neighbors fence, or some other crazy shenanigans. LOL! (Did I spell that right? She-nan-i... oh, bother! You know what I mean. ) As corny as it sounds, it makes me appreciate them that much more to know there's more to them than just the writing.
Variety is the spice of life! ^_^
An aside on revisions -- three passes is my personal limit for a book. If it hasn't sold and I've gone through it three times and made changes suggested by various parties, then I move on. I refuse to be one of those women who is nursing the same book for 20 years and telling everyone about my cowboy story that I wrote back when Urban Cowboy was cool.