Starting without an end vision

[sr71plt]

I think there are "both brain" writers too--who don't do "everything" in a pat pattern.

I usually have a resolution in mind but sometimes I have some other story element in mind when I start. I think the important thing isn't that I have a "this only" secret but that I do start writing--and that I don't obsess over techniques or formulas rather than just sitting down and doing the writing.

 

[lance gt]

Every story I started writing without an ending, turned into chaptered series. I start with a beginning, plot and ending for everything else. It depends on the type of story I'm doing, as well. I might start with an ending, but it could develop into more than I imagined and that ending becomes moot at that point and I need to find a new one that works.

 

[lovecraft68]

I rarely know where a story's going when I start it. I start with a vision of a scene or situation, and just start writing toward it, and almost always it provides its own direction.

There's a theory that there are right-brain writers and left-brain writers. Left-brainers are organized and logical and plot-driven. They like notes and outlines and character cards. Right-brainers like freedom and chaos and work intuitively, not always knowing where the story's going. I just happen to be very right-brain.

Right brain over here I guess. My series was 51 chapters, and my only outline was one piece of paper with the names of the secondary characters I was going to use. Winged the entire thing and everything fell into place perfectly.

 

[lovecraft68]

I think there are "both brain" writers too--who don't do "everything" in a pat pattern.

I usually have a resolution in mind but sometimes I have some other story element in mind when I start. I think the important thing isn't that I have a "this only" secret but that I do start writing--and that I don't obsess over techniques or formulas rather than just sitting down and doing the writing.

Yes, of course we all know you would have to say you were both. Heaven forbid there be something you're not.

 

[sr71plt]

And we all knew you'd find an angle to rag on me. I'm just finding the air to be getting a little thick in here on obsessing over techniques and formulas. Good writers already have this stuff engrained in their heads. They sit down and write--working from whatever varied inspiration that hit them.

You, for instance, seem to have the "wanna fuck and torture my sister" technique established, which, yes, has a big audience at Lit., because most story sites find it too sick to permit.

 

[MrMax59]

To tag one more testimonial onto the already long list of examples and scenarios I just finished a story that started as a very non-consensual story with some level of disdain (or possibly outright hatred?) in the first 10 paragraphs. I actually lost motivation on it at the point, not knowing where to take it other than an ongoing sequence of fuck scenes.

Luckily the characters led me to what I think is a great story. Not earth shatteringly, sing to the heavens great, but I'm pleased with my work. It's in queue for approval, hopefully one day soon...

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I think there are "both brain" writers too--who don't do "everything" in a pat pattern.

I usually have a resolution in mind but sometimes I have some other story element in mind when I start. I think the important thing isn't that I have a "this only" secret but that I do start writing--and that I don't obsess over techniques or formulas rather than just sitting down and doing the writing.

Yeah. It's not an either/or thing. We all use both "brains" when we write, but we tend to favor one over the other.

Being organized is a lot more important when you're doing a novel than when you're writing a short story. It's kind of like building a bird feeder vs building a house. Unfortunately, my novels tend to be a series of bird-feeders taped and tacked together.

To Stella, BTW, they say the best way to write a mystery is to start at the end and work forwards. I don't know what kind of ending you have in mind, but maybe you can use it that way.

 

[sr71plt]

Unfortunately, my novels tend to be a series of bird-feeders taped and tacked together.

Not that I noticed when I did what I did with a couple of them. The transitions were quite good.

 

[NikkiBastion]

Then again, maybe it doesn't need to end. Maybe it could just be an ongoing soap opera style tale with many plots beginning and ending and evolving over time - less "series" and more soap.

Since I have no idea what your actual story is about, this may or may not even work - just a thought ;-) I have a similar experience with a story I LOVE, have such an eager anticipation to get it out for its own sake whether it's ever officially published or not - though I'd love to share it later. I had the two main characters ending up going off the rails but today when I came back to follow up my thread about how to keep them in line, I found a solution.

In the same sense, you said your secondary characters seem to be taking over the show, so why not let them? Give yourself freedom to tell their story and maybe you'd find that you can take the main two out and put them in something else entirely, tell a different story, then you have two stories

I found this helpful, some vids I was watching last night on You Tube, and one of them had been on plotting, pointing out that we're used to thinking of books/stories as beginning middle and end...but this guy pointed out the alternative - dilemma confrontation resolution.

Where I was getting stuck on this one I've been indulging in for awhile is I had the beginning, middle, and end...and one character's dilemma, confrontation and resolution, but there are 4 characters...and I had to look again at why they were even there. They contribute as supporting roles though I refer to them as main characters, since technically, there are 4 people in this story I see that until today's revelation, I was watching things with the other 2 stall out since there wasn't anything for them to do otherwise. They're just there.

Now, though, looking at it from this other perspective, I can easily focus on giving each of them their own dilemma, confrontation and resolution as a sub plot and solve the whole problem.

Maybe instead of looking for an ending, change it up in terms of how are they solving a problem - and the resolution is what provides a satisfying conclusion in and of itself. So, your guy is turning out to be a whiny little bitch and you saw him originally as having more fire. That in and of itself could be his own dilemma, maybe he perceives himself as inefficient on some level and wants to have this fire and sense of self, whatever, but ends up being a bitch instead. What kind of thought process would he have, would he recognize his weakness? Would he be the kind of person who, when he got too close to a weakness, he unconsciously takes flight and escapes facing it? What kind of scenario could he be in that would force him to face it at all and back him into a corner one good time so that after he's forced into a confrontation with self, he realizes it was a lot easier to do than he believed - fear of fear.

That doesn't even have to be some long complicated profound life event for the character. It can be simple and secondary - some pattern situation he's in that suddenly doesn't go his way and he has to come up with a different response, making him conscious of it and of his choice, then realizing afterward he had it in him all along, which would easily transit into a sense of confidence where he could spit fire and see how it worked, it gets reinforced by those around him, and there ya go...he arcs from little whiny bitch to someone with a little more fire. Or, even arrogance - this is common when we trip over success and pat ourselves on the back...we can trip over that feel good to the point it looks to others as arrogance.

Without more of an idea of the story, the above may not work, may not be any room for it. But at least there is wiggle room with the alternative perspective of how they'd solve a problem.