I enjoyed everything here: the writing, the content and the illustrations, most of all the loving portrait of your first draft.
I have a question: while "saving most issues with style and voice for later drafts" sounds reasonable and even necessary, does not the half-baked style, a naked and chatty wannabe, jump out all the time, distracting and preventing you from focusing on the plot? I still wonder how to separate those working phases. How does one manage to trust the process and not capitulate?
I certainly can't speak from any place of expertise--but what I'm doing right now is writing a synopsis, the kind of document that I'd eventually send to a publisher. It's almost like writing the abstract to an academic article, in that the whole plot needs to be in there in miniature, with all of the major moments tied together with a clear cause and effect structure, and each character's basic personality needs to be gestured toward. The book itself is in the first person with a very distinct voice, but the synopsis is in the third person and only needs to be clear rather than funny/engaging on the sentence level.
I think that, when I get into redrafting the actual second draft, I will probably spend a lot of time thinking about sentences. (Sentences are the best part.) But I do want to get the structure figured out before I dive into that, or else I fear I will never get the structure figured out!
Sounds like you are juggling a lot, several times over. Regarding the novel, sounds like you ventured into some seemingly intractable but useful semi-chaos. Three drafts of a novel is useful if the first draft has good structure, because then you can follow that with two passes of flesh-out and modify, expansion and discourse.
I would suggest setting the voice opening aside, which sounds like it will be its own creature, to focus where you can do the most work: on the plot-driven part. To first tighten it by clarifying/creating a causal ever-intensifying structure, it would be good to rewrite it in script form (using free DramaQueen software or the like), then in the next draft adapt it back to novel form, which will necessarily expand it and restore some details of description, reflection, takeaways and so on, more dialogue, some more actions, then the final draft will be more of that detailing, expanding, and finishing.
How you connect it to the voice driven part you'll need to determine; you seem to have a feel for it already.
You could write the script initially in classic 5 act TV episode form for ultimate initial concision and structural clarity. Or create the script as 7 acts, or a double episode, or screenplay length, etc, if you need more structural/story length. By going the script route you should be able to see the plot/structure with far greater clarity, because so many details other than character, basic dialogue, and main action are stripped out. Thus, you can ensure that the plot is 1) causal, 2) intensifying, and 3) appealing to your main characters' deepest fears and desires, or turning powerfully on key questions and paradoxes - which seem to be the most potent story engines (in scripts), aka plot devices (in novels) that are known.
What's the ultimate goal of the character(s), and what's the ultimate goal of the author? These overarching forces typically drive the whole thing. The structure and discourse embody and tell this tale.
It's good to riff to get story going (for imaginative power) (journal draft), then shift to the efficient construction of script form (for structural power) (first draft), then shift back to novelization for all its great expansive effects (for discursive power) (second & final drafts). Some novels can't abide this type of construction, and some can shortcut it, but many would benefit by it.
You may be working with a hybrid voice plus plot creature - or maybe there's more structure/plot to be found in the voicey section than you might think, and vice versa. Or not! It all comes back to creating the story with great fidelity to the character's goals and to your own purpose as author.
Yeah, good ideas. Instead of re-outlining, I actually spent a bit of time today writing a synopsis, taking care to emphasize the causal relationship between the events in the story, which kind of accomplishes what you're suggesting with the script (although maybe a script would be good, too, to ensure that enough happens "in scene" rather than in passing summary, one of the weaknesses of the draft). Just trying to make the story beats visible. I like what you said about appealing to deep fears and desires of the characters--I hadn't thought of things in quite those terms before.
It's standard advice from the contemporary pros in part and from the ancients in part that can be passed along. In fact the pros are obsessed with it - the protagonist (and others') greatest fear that can put a literal or metaphorical life-or-death focus on the protagonist's ultimate goal (whether they are conscious of it or not) and force the shape of story - whatever the author's goal - and they are obsessed with causal intensifying conflict and/or causal questions as story motors, sometimes with deep paradox. And the ancients emphasize causality too for max compelling power, plus reversals and recognitions. Novels and memoirs then sometimes seem to be all about reflections and takeaways, often in addition to the rest, not least recognitions and reversals. It's not that episodic plots can't work, it's just harder to make as compelling as causal plots, no matter how voicey. These are tools not rules, for story. Many lit novels dispense with or smash these tools, though many take full advantage of them too because they are so damn effective. You might be surprised how clarifying and invigorating the bare-bones script structure can be, how powerful it can make a story underneath any and all discourse and voice. It's not for every novel of course, or not all the time, but writing a script is a way of writing the basis of full-blown novel in a matter of weeks, once you get the hang of it. The subsequent adaptation and expansion can take much longer but you have a lot of story vision available for doing it that you would not have otherwise if you were winging it and never knowing what scene expansions or additions were truly relevant or how.
“Or can I simply tell the reader, “this is my premise. Get on board or put the book down”?”
Yes, I think you can! Also I love that you’re writing sci fi — literary-minded SFF is the best. My manuscript, which I’m currently in the querying trenches with, fits that description too.
I’d be happy to be a beta-reader once you’re at that point, if that’s something you’re interested in.
Sounds like a plan!! Now if I'm a flake and don't finish and I see you publish your novel to great acclaim, I'll feel like I've betrayed myself, and I'll use my fear of that terrible feeling for motivation (sounds healthy, right?).
I enjoyed everything here: the writing, the content and the illustrations, most of all the loving portrait of your first draft.
I have a question: while "saving most issues with style and voice for later drafts" sounds reasonable and even necessary, does not the half-baked style, a naked and chatty wannabe, jump out all the time, distracting and preventing you from focusing on the plot? I still wonder how to separate those working phases. How does one manage to trust the process and not capitulate?
I certainly can't speak from any place of expertise--but what I'm doing right now is writing a synopsis, the kind of document that I'd eventually send to a publisher. It's almost like writing the abstract to an academic article, in that the whole plot needs to be in there in miniature, with all of the major moments tied together with a clear cause and effect structure, and each character's basic personality needs to be gestured toward. The book itself is in the first person with a very distinct voice, but the synopsis is in the third person and only needs to be clear rather than funny/engaging on the sentence level.
I think that, when I get into redrafting the actual second draft, I will probably spend a lot of time thinking about sentences. (Sentences are the best part.) But I do want to get the structure figured out before I dive into that, or else I fear I will never get the structure figured out!
Sounds like you are juggling a lot, several times over. Regarding the novel, sounds like you ventured into some seemingly intractable but useful semi-chaos. Three drafts of a novel is useful if the first draft has good structure, because then you can follow that with two passes of flesh-out and modify, expansion and discourse.
I would suggest setting the voice opening aside, which sounds like it will be its own creature, to focus where you can do the most work: on the plot-driven part. To first tighten it by clarifying/creating a causal ever-intensifying structure, it would be good to rewrite it in script form (using free DramaQueen software or the like), then in the next draft adapt it back to novel form, which will necessarily expand it and restore some details of description, reflection, takeaways and so on, more dialogue, some more actions, then the final draft will be more of that detailing, expanding, and finishing.
How you connect it to the voice driven part you'll need to determine; you seem to have a feel for it already.
You could write the script initially in classic 5 act TV episode form for ultimate initial concision and structural clarity. Or create the script as 7 acts, or a double episode, or screenplay length, etc, if you need more structural/story length. By going the script route you should be able to see the plot/structure with far greater clarity, because so many details other than character, basic dialogue, and main action are stripped out. Thus, you can ensure that the plot is 1) causal, 2) intensifying, and 3) appealing to your main characters' deepest fears and desires, or turning powerfully on key questions and paradoxes - which seem to be the most potent story engines (in scripts), aka plot devices (in novels) that are known.
What's the ultimate goal of the character(s), and what's the ultimate goal of the author? These overarching forces typically drive the whole thing. The structure and discourse embody and tell this tale.
It's good to riff to get story going (for imaginative power) (journal draft), then shift to the efficient construction of script form (for structural power) (first draft), then shift back to novelization for all its great expansive effects (for discursive power) (second & final drafts). Some novels can't abide this type of construction, and some can shortcut it, but many would benefit by it.
You may be working with a hybrid voice plus plot creature - or maybe there's more structure/plot to be found in the voicey section than you might think, and vice versa. Or not! It all comes back to creating the story with great fidelity to the character's goals and to your own purpose as author.
Yeah, good ideas. Instead of re-outlining, I actually spent a bit of time today writing a synopsis, taking care to emphasize the causal relationship between the events in the story, which kind of accomplishes what you're suggesting with the script (although maybe a script would be good, too, to ensure that enough happens "in scene" rather than in passing summary, one of the weaknesses of the draft). Just trying to make the story beats visible. I like what you said about appealing to deep fears and desires of the characters--I hadn't thought of things in quite those terms before.
It's standard advice from the contemporary pros in part and from the ancients in part that can be passed along. In fact the pros are obsessed with it - the protagonist (and others') greatest fear that can put a literal or metaphorical life-or-death focus on the protagonist's ultimate goal (whether they are conscious of it or not) and force the shape of story - whatever the author's goal - and they are obsessed with causal intensifying conflict and/or causal questions as story motors, sometimes with deep paradox. And the ancients emphasize causality too for max compelling power, plus reversals and recognitions. Novels and memoirs then sometimes seem to be all about reflections and takeaways, often in addition to the rest, not least recognitions and reversals. It's not that episodic plots can't work, it's just harder to make as compelling as causal plots, no matter how voicey. These are tools not rules, for story. Many lit novels dispense with or smash these tools, though many take full advantage of them too because they are so damn effective. You might be surprised how clarifying and invigorating the bare-bones script structure can be, how powerful it can make a story underneath any and all discourse and voice. It's not for every novel of course, or not all the time, but writing a script is a way of writing the basis of full-blown novel in a matter of weeks, once you get the hang of it. The subsequent adaptation and expansion can take much longer but you have a lot of story vision available for doing it that you would not have otherwise if you were winging it and never knowing what scene expansions or additions were truly relevant or how.
Thanks for the mention! Glad the Koch text seems to have had some usable advice for you!
“Or can I simply tell the reader, “this is my premise. Get on board or put the book down”?”
Yes, I think you can! Also I love that you’re writing sci fi — literary-minded SFF is the best. My manuscript, which I’m currently in the querying trenches with, fits that description too.
I’d be happy to be a beta-reader once you’re at that point, if that’s something you’re interested in.
Hell yeah, dude! I'd be honored. I'll be in touch (eventually) about it!
Delighted to learn that you're writing a time travel novel! I love a good time travel story.
I'm working on my second draft, too. Maybe if we both get our shit together, we'll each have a book ready for Substack Sci-Fi Summer 2027.
Sounds like a plan!! Now if I'm a flake and don't finish and I see you publish your novel to great acclaim, I'll feel like I've betrayed myself, and I'll use my fear of that terrible feeling for motivation (sounds healthy, right?).