Writers on Writing

Incidentally, this writer writes from beginning to end, with the character speaking for themselves. I know others go from the end backwards, outlining the major events. For bad example, John Cleese would write episodes of "Fawlty Towers" by first creating the insane ending, then going backwards trying to make each thread as separate as possible.

I was just wondering if anyone knows of Chuck's process. I would suspect it's a random assortment of ideas that get organized into an outline, and then he fills in the blanks. But that's just a guess. Actually, I remember him saying something about when he gets to the end of a book, he just writes the first ending that comes into his mind so that he can finish the book and have that sense of completion, because he's partially burned out on it. Then he goes back and fixes the ending and whatever else. So it's mostly linear?

I'm pretty sure that's what I remember too. I think he said it in a magazine interview or something. Whole lotta help I am.

don't listen to writers talk about writing. it's bullshit anyways.

Kitty Kat, That's about the worlds most uninformed opinion I have ever heard. Why is that your stance? I'd love to know.

cause i'm a writer? and often times we don't even know what we put into something? because being a writer i know that 50% plus of writing is how the reader interprets it? because as a writer i dont' think anyone can tell anyone else how to write? because i think people should write like themselves, as a writer?

so how is that uninformed again?

i can see how a writer can tell people how they as a write write, but telling people [I]how[/I] to write is like when i was a kid in swim classes and our instructor told us how to swim. yea, sounds great, but until you do it for yourself and develop your own way of doing it, them telling you how to do it just doesn't work and you tend to just end up splashing around like a bloody lunatic.

Shoot, I didn't mean any disrespect by my assertion. I think you know that. However, I feel that there are no hard and fast rules, and over the years I've gained a lot of insight into the process, and how it's developed for myself via reading about others methods and techniques.

But that's just me. I might suggest that your pronoun use (i.e. "because WE") isn't fair, only because you can only speak for one writer: yourself.

And of course, in every regard, that is the only writing that matters.

When I was at NYU, I remember reading, "How to Tell a True War Story," a short story in Tim O'Brien's "The Things They Carried." It was like a religious awakening for me. And that little story (and it is a story, but it's a story about war AND how-to write) taught me more about the craft than probably 3/4 of the workshops and classes I've taken over the years.

I guess I shouldn't have said, "uninformed." I'm sorry for that. But you did state your opinion like it was a blanket fact. And it's not.

I love you more because you offered it though!

i know that half of you consider him as either a has-been or a complete hack, but some of the most useful and practical advice i've read so far was in King's "On Writing".

my boss and i actually did a class on that one valium, and yea, at times i do consider him to be a hack, but then again how much of a hack can King be? look at all the things he's written, he obviously knows what people want to read.

I consider him neither, and agree with you completely. I picked up that little book thinking it would be a fun way to pass a Sunday, ended up reading it twice that day, and have gone back to it many, many, many times since.

Chuck slagged it, but you know what? Fuck him. I loved it.

And I love you for being daring and offering up maybe a nonpopular opinion. Especially one I agree with .

will, i love you and i love this site for saying "fuck him" about the person this site is dedicated to. now THAT is cool.

Kitty Kat, I love you too. And I love Chuck's work bushels and bunches. EVERYONE knows that. But, no one is perfect, and I don't think this site would be that great if we couldn't offer up dissenting opinions besides, "Uh, Lullaby was a big disappointment," or whatever.

Believe it or not, every now and again (twice, so far, including the Stepehen King thing) Chuck will say something I disagree with. But God Bless him for it, you know? How boring would the world be if we all agreed?

Pretty boring! Love!

fuck yeah! i love this board!

i 'm not sure where chuck mentions "On Writing", but if I had Chuck's talent, i wouldn't be reading how-to shit about writing anyways.

the only other book on the subject isn't really about anything but grammar, but i keep "elements of style" in my library for reference.
fuckin english language can be tricky.

i do enjoy the minimalist school that chuck developed in, but i'm afraid if i started practicing it i'd just sound like another chuck-wannabe... and that's not happening.

no, will, i was saying it's cool.

valium, i agree with you about the minimalist thing. any "school" of writing is limiting, IMHO.

god! i was SO not going to admit i was a writer on this board. and here i am doing it anyway. argh.

Good to finally see some Stephen King supporters on this board. Funny that this topic is being discussed, as I just finished reading "On Writing" today... and like you guys... I loved it too. It made me want to go out and attempt a novel.

As for King in general... I gotta stay loyal to the dude. Yeah, I know it's the popular statement to say, "But his new books blow..." but for me... I count his first 30 or so novels as his "old books." So that's more than enough of a collection for me.

Like Chuck did for so many of the "youngins" on our board... King was the guy that got me into reading way back when. He's my "summer author." The guy who I like to read when I'm laying on my chaise lounge in the backyard on a sunny day. In fact, some of my fondest memories of reading while growing up, happened in the towns King transported me to. Whether it was Derry, Bangor, or Castle Rock... King takes me over for months at a time. And when I read one of his books, I usually piggy back right into the next one.

In light of just finishing "On Writing," I'll be starting Bag of Bones tomorrow. Then it's Insomnia. Then Cujo. Then I may re-read It. Who knows.

All I know is that... I've now read a whole bunch of his novels... and there are still many to conquer.

[URL=http://recommendedread.blogspot.com/2002_07_01_recommendedread_archive.html#79491021]here's my $0.02 (well, maybe more like $2) on stephen king.[/URL]

there's another thing to be said about S.K. even after a car wreck, the guy still kept on writting novels. he could have easily retired sooo many years ago, but he obviously enjoys writing. that in itself makes S.K. a good author.
p.s.I find it odd that a lot of librarians think lowly of S.K. based on the genre he writes, considering he has pretty much helped a lot of people see the point in reading for pleasure.

which librarians are these?

pleantiful in our system, and in a few other systems i've worked.

hmm. i've never met any such librarians.

Personally, the only reason I would read a book on writing is if I was interested in that particular author and their particular process not as a guide.

The best advice I've ever read regarding writing fiction follows. Its a quote from a letter Ursula Le Guin wrote to the L.A. Times last January

As for 'write what you know' I was regularly told this as a beginner. I think its a very good rule and have always obeyed it. I write about imaginary countries, alien societies on other planets, [I]dragons[/I], wizards, the Napa Valley in 22002. I know these things. I know them better than anybody else possibly could, so its my duty to testify about them. I got my knowledge of them, as I got whatever knowledge I have of the hearts and minds of human beings, through imagination working on observation. Like any other novelist. All this rule needs is a good defination of 'know.'

(italicss mine-cos, you know, chuck has a very moving piece on dragons elswhere on this site)

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by trypdwyre [/i]
[B]
p.s.I find it odd that a lot of librarians think lowly of S.K. based on the genre he writes, considering he has pretty much helped a lot of people see the point in reading for pleasure. [/B][/QUOTE]

I know what you mean, book sellers too. I used to work in a book store and we would talk such absolute shit about the customers choices. We would also peg people as they walked in. You know, "self- helper" "$40 cookbook" "magazines" and yeah, "Stephen King" which was a catch all phrase for people that bought John Grisham, Michael Crichton etc.

I was younger than, I don't really make fun of people anymore:D

good.

The author Peter Carey ("Oscar and Lucinda", "Bliss" (read Bliss first if you're checking him out)) says you should write what you DON'T know, that way you get a fresh perspective rather than one that is within the box. I like that idea.

Incidentally, I'm always fascinated by the process of things (dev psych background probably), so I'd like to hear the process of Chuck's novel development at the conference. So I like that article up top, although I might not agree with it!

Hey Bronskrat,

thats basically what Le Guin is saying . She means she "knows" whats in her imagination. Obviously she doesn't have a first hand knowledge of aliens on other planets or Napa Valley in 22002 but thats what she writes about.

I'll check "Bliss" out. I loved Fat Man In History and Oscar & Lucinda

"Bliss" is brilliant. Recommended to all here!

fuck editors. ever hear the saying, those who can, do, those who can't do, teach? instead of teach, it should be "edit other people's stuff".

writing is such an individual process that I really don't care to learn how others do it. I just know what works for me and that's that, I guess. Asking people about their writing process and using it is like using someone else's masturbation techniques... it may work for them, but might leave you high and dry.

you need to write in your own feces and blood. until you do this, you will never amount to anything.

then take the page, rub your cock on the back, feeling the bumps your heavy handwriting left and repeat until you jizz or tear a layer of skin from your prick. then you will be your own Walt Shitman. Then the world will be at your feeet.

so glad to see you branched out lowlife, and such diversity of conversation.
seriously, i'm done with hearing of you and your fecal writings.

no, no, wrong thread. you need to go to the "Beautiful Artwork" one for scatalogical conversation.

The really sad thing is that all things fecal are only my secondary interest. I'm really all about going against THE MAN. I wouldn't want to be known just as "the shit guy".. well, actually, I guess that would be alright. OK- I'm rambling here... nevermind... talk to y'all later.
Believe nothing and get back to work Crud!

I just take my experiences and put them on steroids and crack and that becomes the finished product. It's like they've always said (whoever 'they' are), you do need to do alot of living before you can do alot of writing. Insular little lives make for stale boring reading.

You can post anywhere you want. Have fun.