On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Nat Russo <[email protected]> wrote:
> This was incredibly enlightening. I have been over thinking things a bit > as I go through and re-read what I wrote months ago. I've been really > concerned about "getting it right". My fear is that I'll finish the book, > circulate it, and wind up being rejected because I made some really basic > mistakes that could have been fixed with a little effort. > > The funny thing is that it never really sat well with me that I wrote > several chapters from my villain's perspective. I found that one of two > things would happen: either I would have to reveal too much, killing some > of the suspense, or I would wind up arbitrarily holding back information at > a point in time when it would definitely be on his mind (which, I think, > would wind up momentarily taking the reader out of the story). Originally, > I felt that allowing the reader to see inside the villain's head would make > him less cliche (I wanted to avoid the mustache-twisting "Where's the rent" > villain). But the more I think about it, and read what you said in your > email, the more I think making him the PoV character in a few scenes is too > intimate. It might actually serve the story better to keep some distance > between him and the reader. > > After I pointed out the way in which I overthink things in the first > paragraph, it would appear the second paragraph is pure irony :) > > Nat > > > > On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Raymond E. Feist > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> On Jan 29, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Nat Russo wrote: >> >> > Hi Ray, >> > >> > Have you ever come across a scene on revision that you were so unhappy >> with you just completely rewrote it? >> >> Rarely, if you mean delete it entirely and start over. Usually if I >> tweak the setting, or change something around, say take a scene that had >> Jim Dasher and Pug and change it to a scene with Jim Dasher and Miranda, or >> take a Miranda and Pug scene and make it a Miranda and Nakor scene, it >> suddenly makes sense. I have deleted stuff but it's when I realize it's >> unnecessary to the story. >> > >> > This happened to me while I was writing yesterday. I re-read the scene >> that introduces my antagonist and decided it just wasn't working. So now >> I'm sitting here making a bullet-point list of everything I need to >> accomplish in the scene and I'm going to have another go at it. >> >> Do not over-think. "Paralysis through analysis" can totally waist your >> time. So, introducing a new character? There are tricks to the trade. >> Tell the reader only what the reader must absolutely know at that point. >> This also depends on your narrative style and voice. First person can >> say, "I didn't know who the man with the smoking gun was who had just saved >> my life, but years later I knew he was . . . " Third person: Jack felt >> panic for the first time in his life when he heard the gunshot boom, but a >> moment later he realized it had come from behind him. He saw the man who >> had just pointed his revolver at him falling forward, his blank eyes >> highlighting the masked of surprise that had been his last thought. Jack >> spun and saw the stranger there, putting his guy away as he glanced at Jack >> with an expression that said he knew something that Jack didn't know, such >> as who was that man who had just tried to kill him and why. >> >> OK, so that's 90 seconds off the top of my head, but the point here is >> that you have to hit the ground running in such a way as the reader >> instantly wants to know what's going on and sticks around to find out. It >> doesn't have to be an action scene. Jack looked up from his book to take a >> sip of his Cafe Americano and saw the man in the tweed jacked. It felt as >> he was almost a friend, despite the two men never having spoken. But for >> over a month now, neither man's routine had varied: Jack arrived at the >> coffee shop at 7:15 for a half-hour to read the paper and enjoy a decent >> coffee before the endless cups of bad instant at the office that would >> punctuate the morning, and the man in the tweed coat arrived at 7:30; Jack >> could set his watch by it. With slight amusement Jack noticed the man >> repeated the same order he had every morning since Jack had first noticed >> him. Jack had it memorized: a small espresso, a sesame seed bagel with >> cream cheese, and a danish in a bag to go. Jack considered the oddity of >> lives passing so closely, but never really touching, and was about to >> return to his paper, when he noticed another man, large and looking out of >> place in his particular shop, moving to stand behind the tweed coated man, >> brushing against him as he put something in the pocket of the man's coat. >> A muffled "sorry" and he was off with the man in tweed muttering "no >> worries" and returning to his order. >> >> Now, in that example (which probably needs a decent rewrite) when the man >> in the tweed jacket shows up dead before the end of chapter one, Jack's off >> on an adventure. >> >> There are other examples; open any really good book and you'll find one. >> >> So, do not over thing. Just write the damn thing. >> >> >> > >> > The original scene was a whole lot of sitting and thinking. I wanted >> the reader to get into the head of my "bad guy" to see how he justified his >> own perspective on things, but I think I overdid it. I'm going to try it >> again by moving some of my other characters into the scene and adding a bit >> of conflict. I'll still internalize him a bit, but it may be less "boring" >> if there's some actual action taking place. >> > >> >> >> >> Unless you're brilliant (and I'm not saying you're not) getting into the >> head of the heavy/villain/bad guy is a serious break with how to suck in >> your reader. Your reader wants someone to care about, and unless you're >> trying to do what Mike Resnick did with Walpurgis III, sending the galaxy's >> nasties assassin after the galaxy's most heinous mass murderer (I call it >> bad guys and worse guys) you've got a real tough sell. Your reader will >> think your trying to make the heavy sympathetic which is a mistake. >> Unless you're pulling what I did in Darkness, where it ends up that the >> Heavy (Guy) isn't a heavy but really a guy with a different approach that >> makes sense to him, you've doing it the hard way. >> >> As my dad used to say, "Kid, give the audience someone to root for." >> >> Good luck. >> >> Best, R,E.F. >> >> ---- >> www.crydee.com >> >> Never attribute to malice what can satisfactorily be explained away by >> stupidity. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Sent from my Crappy Laptop (tm) using a poor excuse for a web browser. > > So awesome. I suddenly want Ray to write a hard boiled detective story. Your writing style totally fits the genre - stripped down and direct (in the best possible way).
