Frederic’s Comments (group member since Jan 31, 2012)

Frederic’s comments from the Q&A with John R. Fultz group.

I agree--about APES, and about the soundtracks of yesteryear. I need to see DRIVE!

At our writers' group this evening, someone brought up a quotation from someone who said "Writing a short story is like trying to shove an angry bear into a paper bag without tearing the bag." Isn't that great? It's a delicate form that has to contain so much power and intensity!

Heh, heh! Me again, John. (It's like some friends have invaded your living room and are talking away. But we are here to support your Q&A! Feel free to jump in anytime, John -- got anything in your fridge?) :-)

So the short story is one straight step, and the novel is a lot of straight steps along many winding paths.

But Dorothy also asked what the similarities were. With both the novel and the short story, I think you want to start the thing as close as you can to the climax. The short story just goes right there, but the novel needs a lot of smaller payoffs along the way (the climax is farther away), so instead of one arc that rises to the end, it has many arcs, many rises and falls, but a steadily mounting feeling, always rising toward that overall climax.

Before I figured out that a novel needs such an up-and-down rhythm, I would be trying to write one, and I'd have a state of extreme tension that went on for pages and pages. The reader would be exhausted by the end -- pulverized. I thought I was doing a great job! But that's different from maintaining suspense and keeping the reader turning pages. Even in highly suspenseful books, the reader has moments to rest. A state of "climax" that goes on and on isn't suspense!

I can see how PLANET OF THE APES would work for "An age of legends. An age of heroes. An age of war"!

That seems like a good analogy to me! With the novel, the wire runs from tower to tower to tower, and the more distant ones are hidden in mist. At times it clears a little, and you can see them looming, and you get a vague sense of how far away they are before they're obscured again. And yes, often it's not just one strand: mirror-images of you, the writer, are inching along several wires toward the same goal.

There's a little platform on each of the towers when you can step off the wires for a moment, catch your breath, and sometimes wave across the gulf to another you who is resting on another platform. You can assess something of how the whole operation is going, but you don't really know until all the walkers get to the goal safely.

I like that model because a novel is made up of a whole lot of scenes. Each scene is its own tightrope. But they're all part of a vast, interconnected web. Still, the real work is just one finite task at a time . . . reaching the next tower.

The short-story wire stretches from the beginning to the end. Once you know those two posts, it's just a few days of intense concentration and keeping your balance as you walk straight there.

At least, that's more or less how it is for me . . .

This is a very good question! John, this is your Q&A, so I won't hog the microphone!

That's really interesting to hear! Thanks! It's been said that it's wise to quit for the day before you've written to the end of what you can see; that is, to stop while you still know what lies immediately ahead. That way, when you come back to it, you're not starting cold; you're not trying to move the mountain from a dead stop.

Me, I've never been able to write with music on, because I stop and listen to the music! I can handle white noise, but not anything as intelligible as music. But I'm glad the music works for you! I like that idea of catharsis.

One more technique question: Many writers talk about the difficulty of those first few minutes when you sit down for a writing session, how it's hard to get the work to start flowing for the day when you're faced with that blank page. Is that a challenge for you, or not especially? And if so, how do you get the writing gears turning?

Thank you, John! I've been working on it a lot lately!

Thanks! It's good to hear a solid defense and celebration of first-draft writing! The consensus among the three or four of us who were talking about it was that we all like revision slightly more (though everything you said about the first draft is quite true!). In the revision stage, you still get some of the thrill of creating new scenes (at least I do--I nearly always have to add some scenes that aren't there in the rough draft), but you also have a solid foundation that you're building on, the excitement of a book that's almost done, that you can't wait to send out into the world, and you're making it better and better.

Again, I love both phases of the process! It would be interesting if more writers would weigh in on this issue!

Thanks, John! That's a fascinating glimpse into how you go about it!

Hey, John! Some writer friends and I were talking about which part of the writing process we enjoy more: the first draft, or the drafts after that (revision). Admittedly, they both have their joys and frustrations. Where do you stand on this? Is it more fun to shape a story on the blank screen, or is it more fun to hone and improve that story?

Hey, John! If you don't mind revealing this, how do you come up with the names of the characters and places in your work? Are there any particular methods you use for finding/developing names, or do they all "just come to you," or what?