Story time - in more ways than one.

OK, I've decided that, as I'm trying really hard to get the last Granny Rainbow story finished AND revamp Rurik so the rings aren't so obvious AND jot a stroyline for The Lufbra Job AND draft shorts for the next short story group collection - *whispers* - I'm going to cheat on this ultimate blog challenge!

Over the two years I've been a member of the Word Cloud, I've not missed a single monthly comp. Because of that, I've produced a variety of flash fiction which has been constrained by various parameters. (To be honest - that's part of the fun, giving myself a challenge and writing in ways I couldn't possibly hope to keep up through a  novel!) Now - some of the long standing cloudies who drop in here might have seen them before, but I reckon there's a lot of Squidge's Scribbles readers who haven't. So - every other day, purely for your enjoyment, there will be a very short story posted.

Added to that, I'm going to set up another 'Challenge Me!' If you didn't get involved last time, the idea is that you, blog reader, post three objects in the comments box below; I will hand over the list to the rest of my family, who will choose their favourite combination. Then, I'll endeavour to weave those objects into a story. (Please bear in mind that I reserve the right to delete suggestions I deem are unsuitable.) Last time, it ended up with me writing not one, but two stories - you can read them here and here.

I reckon I'll give you until the 15th to post your suggestions, then I'll stick the finished story up on the 31st. How's that?

So...here's to Squidge's Scribbles and an October filled with snippety bits of literaryness!

The Ultimate Blog Challenge!

Can you believe, it's time for the next blog challenge? The last one was July, which really got me going on this blogging lark - but I didn't realise it ran every quarter!

I'm wondering whether to go for it again; 31 posts in 31 days, over a month which isn't the summer holidays, when I'm writing more on Granny Rainbow and Rurik. Hmm...have I just made life difficult for myself?

Oh, what the heck! Let's go for it!

Anyone else fancy joining me? Let me know if you do - we can cheer each other on!

A chance to get your work published...

One of the short story collections I've been involved in - Reading is Magic - has raised £134.88 to date for the NSPCC! How fab is that? 

Vanessa handing the cheque over

Vanessa, the short story group originator, posted the news earlier today, and I couldn't be more pleased for her. She invested so much time and effort to get the book ready for publication (I had a small part to play in editing the stories before the authors submitted their final versions), it's good to see that all the hard work has been worth it. I think I'm right in saying that it's also the most popular collection to date by the short story group.

The short story group is currently inviting authors to submit stories for the next collection on the theme of 'past, present, future', and you can find further details here if you're interested. Again, all profits will go to a charity - and you get to see your work in print.

A bit of a revelation...

OK, so you know a while back, I was lamenting the fact that I couldn't use rings in Rurik's story without nearly everyone thinking I was ripping off Tolkien? And I also mentioned more recently that I'd had a lightbulb moment regarding what I could perhaps focus on instead?

Well, I've had a revelation today, about how I can improve things...Come closer, so I can whisper;

I think I know how to change Rurik so I can keep the rings in - but they aren't the main focus of the story! 

Wahey!

Strong storytelling

Jeremy Sheldon is a writer and a screenwriter - a good one. His session on strong storytelling was high on my list of 'must-go-to-this' workshops, because one of the things I've been told about my stories is that they're 'too nice'. If Jeremy could help me see how to make the stories stronger - I wanted to know how.

Now I have to admit, my notes from this session are not that easy to decipher after the event - though they all made perfect sense on the day. I can remember what hit home the most for me, so that's what I'm going to share!

Okay - so - consider the mechanics of storytelling, as opposed to writing. You can write many things, but storytelling requires controlled information delivery in order to get the reader to invest in your story. Over the course of the story, the writer (hopefully) meets the reader's expectations so they carry on reading, and by the end of the book, they will have had their investment returned with a satisfactory outcome. To achieve this, there has to be continuous movement through the story - a hook in the plot, followed by another and another.

Now, some folk talk about their stories being 'plot-based' or 'character-based'. Jeremy reckoned you can't separate the two - both are essential in a strong story. (I've already blogged about character and structure if you want to read more - they reinforce this point). This makes perfect sense, as characters are the people who experience your plot and are present throughout the story. It'd be a pretty boring story without people/dragons/talking plants.

This meshing together of plot and character was coming over loud and clear as something I needed to work on. The reader has to see the character change. 'Recognition and Reversal', Jeremy called it. Can the character recognise their weakness and reverse the effect of it on their life? If they can, the story ends up a comedy. If they can't, it becomes tragedy. So it can be a major plotting device to give the character what they need - not what they want - and see whether they can adapt to that.

This served to reinforce my dawning realisation that I am probably a 'plot-driven' writer who happens to create good characters. But for a really strong story, I have to entwine the two and show my characters changing as a result of what I put them through.

Otherwise? I'm at risk of writing 'nice' stuff for ever.

Honing your pitch

I'm hopeless at trying to condense my story into a couple of sentences - just hopeless.

Fortunately, Juliet Pickering ran a session at York where she encouraged us to try. Now I have to admit that during this session, I was struggling with a migraine that made my head feel like it was filled with cotton wool and needles. Juliet must've thought I was mad, sitting in a corner with my sunglasses on...either way, it didn't make writing a pitch very easy.

As a starting point, she suggested we write a pitch for a book you know and love - in no more than two lines.

Then we tried it on our own WIP. Boy, did I struggle. In two sentences, I needed to give a clear indication of the genre as well as what happens to the main protagonist. It needed to be hooky, as it'll probably follow the book right through the publishing process. Oh - and I had to try to include the unique selling point too. So...

'When Rurik arrives on Ring Isle as a servant, one of the five rings of power has been hidden to protect it. Rurik's accidental adventure to find it leads him to the ring - and a destiny he never dreamed of.'

Guess what? *sigh* Rings - Juliet picked up on that straightaway.

Now you'll know from an earlier blog that this is a problem with Rurik. They aren't rings for your finger, but because I mention 'rings' quite frequently there's been an assumption that Rurik will be a Tolkien derivative. (It's not - but first impressions count).

So what IS the USP for Rurik if it isn't rings? Mandy, a fellow cloudie sitting in the session, has read Rurik. She suggested an alternative...so I came up with this:

'By the time Rurik realises that the auras he can see are ancient powers of protection, he is already on a quest to save them. When he finds the object in which some of the power is trapped, he also discovers a destiny he never dreamed of.'

Cracked it? Not entirely sure...but it doesn't mention rings. Now to rewrite the synopsis - with the same 'no-rings' treatment.

Learning story structure from film.

“Standing room only! How cool is that?”

Thus began Julie Cohen’s popular workshop on story structure, using Pixar movies to demonstrate her points.

I LOVE Pixar films! They are funny, fast, emotional and beautifully executed artistically, with characters you can’t help but fall in love with.

No, I didn’t pick it just because it was an excuse to watch clips from some of my favourites - Cars, Finding Nemo, Wall-E and Up! These films had been picked by Julie because they’re aimed at children and as such, have been stripped down to the essentials of story-telling and are easy to study. Like the many others who attended, I was interested to see how using them would improve my writing. 

What I learned is :

1. Pixar films open fast. Just think of the opening sequence in Cars, when Lightning McQueen is literally hurtling round the race track. Wall-E seems much slower by comparison, but both manage to get across vital information about the main character, their conflict and the world they are living in, into – usually - the first 4-6 minutes of film. Backstory is always included as part of the story itself, but it's kept short and it has to be essential.

I know from experience that my stories don’t start as fast as perhaps some folk would like them to, but if I get the vital information right, hopefully it’ll still give me the hook I need to keep the reader’s interest.

2. They use the three act structure – or for those who like it simple: beginning, middle and end. So we are introduced to Lightning’s selfishness and desire to win fame and fortune in Act 1. In Act 2 we see him change when he finds friendship (Mater), love (Sally), and fickle fame (Doc Hudson). The end of Act 2 is marked by the lowest point in McQueen’s journey (the ‘oh shit!’ moment), when the media find him again and his new way of life falls apart. Act 3 opens with the climax – will Lightning win the race at any cost? No - he redeems himself by demonstrating he’s a very different car to the one we saw at the start. 

This really hit home – I can’t have a fabulous plotline on its own. I need the character to be ‘a very different car/man/girl/robot/dragon to the one we saw at the start’. (I wrote about character qualities earlier this week if you want to know more...). 

3. Using a repeated image helps to chart the emotional journey of the character through the story. For example, helium balloons appear several times in Up – particularly in the fabulous prologue (more of that later!). Similarly, hand-holding is a recurrent theme in Wall-E.

I tried to think whether I’d ever used this in my stories - and came to the conclusion I hadn’t. It will be interesting to consciously ‘plant’ something I can use subtly through a storyline and link it to the MC’s development.

4. Subplots are always related to the main plot, which should always move forwards and offer insights into the development of the main character. In Finding Nemo, the plot is about finding courage, when Marlin (the dad) needs to find enough to enable him to rescue his son, and Nemo finds enough to escape the fishtank he's found himself in.

Again – this points to flaws in my ability to character build, as I’ve never consciously considered the character arc. I’ve had sub-plots, yes, but just viewed them as twists and turns, rather than use them to ‘grow’ characters.

5. The climax has to be BIG! There’s always lots at stake to keep the viewer on the edge of their seat, wondering how on earth the MC is going to get through it.

This, I understand and do achieve reasonably well. However, it’s worth noting that in Pixar films, there is always a satisfactory resolution. No leaving the viewer on a cliff-hanger, feeling cheated that the story hasn’t really finished, so buy part 2, which picks up where part 1 left off - NOW! Personally, I don’t enjoy that in a book, so my stories always have a resolution. Normally happy because hey, I like to make people smile. I do like to leave a door open, in case I have an idea for a sequel…but the main story gets tied up neatly.

6. Prologues are sometimes unnecessary – but they can be wonderful when done right. Just look at Up, where the first ten minutes or so are total backstory about when Carl met Ellie and how their dreams of adventure coloured their life together. Had it been written, that part would probably have been cut. Visually, it’s a stunningly beautiful prologue and never ceases to make me - or Julie Cohen, or the vast majority of the delegates in the session - need to find the tissues. (If you’ve never watched Up, you’re missing a treat. I guarantee you’ll never say ‘SQUIRREL!’ again without laughing…)

I’ve had funny experiences with my prologue. It’s been like the hokey-cokey: in, out, in, out. Even shaken about. At the moment it’s in, loved and hated in equal measure by those who’ve read it. I think the rule of thumb has to be whether it is vital to your story for the reader. Not vital for you, to explain how this wonderful world you’ve created works, or to explain exactly how your MC got the nasty limp: vital for the reader. Julie’s advice is to write it last, once you know your story.

(Slightly off-topic - I bought one of Julie's books at York: Girl from Mars. I loved it 'cos it's a great story, but there were proverbial lightbulbs popping all the way through it because as I read, I could see and understand exactly what she'd been covering in her workshops about characterisation and story structure.) 

So, back on topic - even though my kids are now a little old for Pixar, I’ve got an excuse to watch all the old favourites again. When I've done that…

...I’m going to write a story as though it were going to be the next big thing to come out of the animator’s studio.