Who writes the story?

[bumblegrum]

I think this might be the right forum, but because I'm something of a newbie, I'd be happy to be redirected if necessary.

Question - authors sometimes say that their characters take over the writing process. It seems as if the characters start to develop the stories themselves. Now this is obviously not literally true, but do any Literotica authors find that their characters start to drive the story themselves? I've witten a little in other genres, and found that this has happened - interested to hear other authors' reactions.

 

[Sugary_Comfort]

Yup, happens to me all the time. It's rather annoying. I have one character who loves to give me grief. When I found out she loved 80s music there was a very big fight about that because I didn't like it but since she did it would mean I'd have to listen to it a lot while writing her. I now have a bit of love for some 80s music. -_-'

There was a huge discussion about this on a writing forum I was going to for a bit. There were a few writers there who felt those that talk about their characters as if they're real are insane. Every last one of us had to keep telling them we KNOW our characters aren't real and then having to explain why we talk about them as if they are.

I think this happens a lot with authors who have a faint outline of the overall plot but still leave a lot of it up to spur of the moment stuff. It allows for more spontaneous happenings that can later be tied up so they're not random but still pretty fun. It's how I operate, though that's just because I can never put much detail in my outline. I'm good at the main points but the stuff in between is pretty unclear. I have to rely on the characters in order to get from one event to the next.

 

[3113]

I've witten a little in other genres, and found that this has happened - interested to hear other authors' reactions.

Why would you think it wouldn't happen in Erotica as it happens in other genres?

I mean, I'm just wondering why you'd ask as you've had experience with it yourself in other writing. Why do you think Erotica would be different?

 

[TxRad]

Character taking over a story? Like that would ever happen.

Most times the characters are the story so why shouldn't they drive. Keeping characters in line is like herding cats, its never going to happen.

Happy writing and erotica is even more character driven than any other type of writing since sex is 90% in the brain anyway.

 

[CarlusMagnus]

I think this might be the right forum, but because I'm something of a newbie, I'd be happy to be redirected if necessary.

Question - authors sometimes say that their characters take over the writing process. It seems as if the characters start to develop the stories themselves. Now this is obviously not literally true, but do any Literotica authors find that their characters start to drive the story themselves? I've witten a little in other genres, and found that this has happened - interested to hear other authors' reactions.

I don't find that they drive the story, but I do find that they frequently do things I didn't expect. I'm still doing the driving, and we're going to the destination I chose, but they insist on some interesting side trips.

 

[sr71plt]

Often the characters, yes. Sometimes the plot--being more complex and a bit different than I had assumed when I started writing. I don't think it's anything other than me doing this though--I think my mind has worked out/continuously reworks where the story is going without me being aware that it has.

 

[bronzeage]

Once a character is developed, it's not really driving the story, it is the story. Unless a writer is describing plate tectonics the story is going to be what the character does and what is done to them.

 

[3113]

Once a character is developed, it's not really driving the story, it is the story. Unless a writer is describing plate tectonics the story is going to be what the character does and what is done to them.

Splitting hairs, picking nits. And how would you know for sure that the character hadn't come alive and was telepathically directing you?

 

[estragon]

It's rather like Method acting. The characters are the story, so you have to get into the characters' minds, even in a third person omniscient narrative. Once there, you may find that your conception of their thoughts is so different to your own thoughts that it feels as if the character has taken over telling the story. But it's still you, the author, telling the story, although it's a side of you that (perhaps) no one but you will ever fully experience (as the reader will bring their own mind to the story).

 

[JayinCA]

I've never had the characters take over the story. When I write fiction, I'm in charge. I outline thoroughly (though the outline is a road map, not a command--if I see territory I want to explore along the way, I can, but I always know where I'm headed), and I create the characters, and I tell them what to do. They don't get to choose. I've had to fight with editors about their fates from time to time, but what I do is what serves the story.

 

[GinaTina]

Of course they do. Mostly when I write; I just start out with a vague idea, begin typing, and see where it takes me. Often, I am surprised with the results.

 

[sr71plt]

I've never had the characters take over the story. When I write fiction, I'm in charge. I outline thoroughly (though the outline is a road map, not a command--if I see territory I want to explore along the way, I can, but I always know where I'm headed), and I create the characters, and I tell them what to do. They don't get to choose. I've had to fight with editors about their fates from time to time, but what I do is what serves the story.

Jeffery Deaver said essentially the same thing at a symposium last Saturday. It surprised me that he writes that way, but he said he did. Whatever floats your boat. I had to do that in policy paper writing for decades, and I turned to fiction because it was freeing not to be so methodical.

But if it works for you . . .

 

[lovecraft68]

Splitting hairs, picking nits. And how would you know for sure that the character hadn't come alive and was telepathically directing you?

Oh shit! Stephen King's Dark Half!

I have been working on my series for over a year and I believe "Megan" is driving. I have sat down many times and started doing what I feel I need to, to further the story and next thing I know it roaring away in another direction.

People use the expression "Muse" I take it seriously. I'm convinced all this shit coming out is not from me.

 

[JayinCA]

Jeffery Deaver said essentially the same thing at a symposium last Saturday. It surprised me that he writes that way, but he said he did. Whatever floats your boat. I had to do that in policy paper writing for decades, and I turned to fiction because it was freeing not to be so methodical.

But if it works for you . . .

Deaver's plots are so complex I would be astonished if he wasn't a tight outliner. James Ellroy used to write outlines more than a hundred pages long--I only say "used to" because I don't know if he still does, but I imagine so. I don't find that outlines make one a methodical writer--rather, they free up the creative mind because we don't have to worry about writing ourselves into corners, or where we're going to end up. We can focus on the writing itself, on the words and phrases and emotions, comfortable in our destination.

 

[autoplot]

A lot of the time, "characters taking over" is a by-product of poor or non-existent story planning. If your characters should be running off doing something "unexpected," it may be you don't know where the story is going in the first place, or you do know but you're dodging it / don't know how to handle it.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, necessarily.

 

[sr71plt]

The only way your characters should be running off doing something "unexpected" is if you don't know where the story is going in the first place, or you do know but you're dodging it / don't know how to handle it.

Oh, I don't believe that. I know the ending of almost all of my stories before I begin to write, but I never know what all of my characters are going to do (I don't even necessarily know all of the characters that will be in the story) while they are en route to the ending. And sometimes my mind has come up with a better ending than I started with. I almost never start out with a story in my mind that is as good as the one my subconscious delivers.

 

[lovecraft68]

Oh, I don't believe that. I know the ending of almost all of my stories before I begin to write, but I never know what all of my characters are going to do (I don't even necessarily know all of the characters that will be in the story) while they are en route to the ending. And sometimes my mind has come up with a better ending than I started with. I almost never start out with a story in my mind that is as good as the one my subconscious delivers.

Right. I know where the journey starts and ends, but how I get there seems up for grabs.

 

[Sugary_Comfort]

Right. I know where the journey starts and ends, but how I get there seems up for grabs.

Same here. I think, though, there's only one story that I started back when I was 13 that didn't have an ending and it is actually considered my most entertaining story by those I let read my stuff. It wasn't until last April that I finally figured out how to end it. Unfortunately now, the binder I kept the papers in (because it's entirely handwritten) is missing somewhere since I moved so much a few years ago. I have no idea where I left off since I haven't touched the story since I was 15 so I can't even begin to start from there and too much happens in it for me to try and start from the beginning.

 

[3113]

A lot of the time, "characters taking over" is a by-product of poor or non-existent story planning.

The wording "Poor or nonexistent story planning" implies that the writer is not a good writer because they can't or don't know how to plan. Yet many brilliant books written by some of the greatest authors have been written without a plan and with characters taking over.

Some writers create such good stories because they are poor story planners--yet that doesn't make them bad writers. Other are good story planners...but they may have found that when they plan it interferes with their creativity and makes for poor stories. Which, again, makes them very good writers.

Which is to say, lack of planning doesn't mean that the writer is either a poor planner (though maybe they are) or a bad writer.

 

[Sugary_Comfort]

The wording "Poor or nonexistent story planning" implies that the writer is not a good writer because they can't or don't know how to plan. Yet many brilliant books written by some of the greatest authors have been written without a plan and with characters taking over.

Some writers create such good stories because they are poor story planners--yet that doesn't make them bad writers. Other are good story planners...but they may have found that when they plan it interferes with their creativity and makes for poor stories. Which, again, makes them very good writers.

Which is to say, lack of planning doesn't mean that the writer is either a poor planner (though maybe they are) or a bad writer.

Seconded!

I mean, as an example, just because I don't know how to study for tests during school, doesn't make me a poor student. If I wanted to pass a class I passed a class. I NEVER study for tests because I just can't figure out how to study so that it benefits me. Most study skills don't work for me. But I've never had problems with tests. If I had a problem with anything in the course it's 99% of the time because the teacher is crappy. If I don't get something I'll go ask about it so if I still can't get something after asking a few times, then someone isn't explaining it right.

 

[autoplot]

Which is to say, lack of planning doesn't mean that the writer is either a poor planner (though maybe they are) or a bad writer.

Okay, let's back up a little. I never said writers who don't plan aren't good writers. Essentially, I said that writers who don't plan, don't plan, and that some (not all) writers see characters "taking over" because they don't know where they're going. Which, again, isn't a value judgment.

It would be pretty hypocritical of me to bag on seat-of-the-pants writers, as I very frequently am one. So please don't take what I'm saying as a declaration of how all writers should write. I don't believe there's a "one true way."

 

[sr71plt]

Okay, let's back up a little. I never said writers who don't plan aren't good writers. Essentially, I said that writers who don't plan, don't plan, and that some (not all) writers see characters "taking over" because they don't know where they're going. Which, again, isn't a value judgment.

It would be pretty hypocritical of me to bag on seat-of-the-pants writers, as I very frequently am one. So please don't take what I'm saying as a declaration of how all writers should write. I don't believe there's a "one true way."

Ummm. What I objected to was that bit starting "The only way . . ." All such sweeping generalizations about writing pretty much get the razzberries from me.

 

[autoplot]

Ummm. What I objected to was that bit starting "The only way . . ." All such sweeping generalizations about writing pretty much get the razzberries from me.

ALL such sweeping generalizations?

Yeah, I should have chosen my phrasing better. Please consider it modified to be duly non-absolute.

 

[sr71plt]

ALL such sweeping generalizations?

Yeah, that was meant to be tongue in cheek.

 

[autoplot]

Clearly, I should have planned ahead before writing out my post...