How to do the same stoy, form differnt POV's with a different author for each POV?

[1sickbastard]

Lovecraft68 and myself are workingon a collaberative short story, from divferent POV's. We've got the plot sketched, but need advice on how to work two differnt pov's into the same story.

We want this to be one chapter which is why the normal chain story formula won't work

 

[Stella_Omega]

That can be rough on the reader! You might have to write in third person, IMO. Keep to one POV per paragraph, at least-- two or three paragraphs per might be better. It's rough to have your conciousness dragged out of one mind into another repeatedly.

Or, another thought-- you can write it as if the two people are telling the story together, to the reader who functions as an audience. They can take turns talking-- but even more fun, they can disagree with each other, interrupt, and override once in a while. In that case, the two tellers will speak in first person.

Does that help? Any ideas come from that?

 

[sr71plt]

Just section them off. Sabb and I do this all of the time with our Shabbu stories (many posted to Lit.), and I do it frequently in my own stories and e-books as well. We even sometimes use both first and third person in works--but always sectionalize to mark the transitions.

 

[TE999]

You could always screen 'Rashomon'.

 

[HeyAll]

I think the best way to do is to clearly note the time & scene for each character.

For instance, for a new section, put in bold "XYZ's account" and perhaps below that, put in parenthises that it's XYZ's point of view of what happened early on in that day.

And then keep going back and forth on that.

 

[lovecraft68]

That can be rough on the reader! You might have to write in third person, IMO. Keep to one POV per paragraph, at least-- two or three paragraphs per might be better. It's rough to have your conciousness dragged out of one mind into another repeatedly.

Or, another thought-- you can write it as if the two people are telling the story together, to the reader who functions as an audience. They can take turns talking-- but even more fun, they can disagree with each other, interrupt, and override once in a while. In that case, the two tellers will speak in first person.

Does that help? Any ideas come from that?

Hi Stella
After much debate 1 sick and I ahve decided to go with the more traditional chain story format. I am going to do chapter one as the sister seducing the brother-nice that I get to be the horny slut!-and he is doing chapter 2 from the brothers pov walking up in bed with his sister and doing the "oh shit" thing well that is until he screws her again.

No matter what else we looked at didn't look right and I kept picturing myself reading it and going "What?" reason I saw this is we are doing it as an online role play first to get the gist of it down then flesh it out from there. The he said she said is beyond us. at this point anyway I've only been writing a few months and he even less. we were only trying to stick to a chpater because we both have our own stuff and don;t want to really spend a ton of time on this
Thank you for your suggestions it does make a lot of sense the conversation sounds fun to try whe ni get a little more advanced.

 

[rgraham666]

This may sound a little strange but it might be wise to write down the parameters of your partnership, print it out and sign it. Treat it like a business partnership.

I say this because of my own experience of writing with a partner. One day I posted a political opinion she disagreed with and she made it very clear that as long as I worked with her I was allowed no political opinion save what she said I could have. She wasn't nice about it either.

So lay out the parameters of your partnership.

 

[Weird Harold]

No matter what else we looked at didn't look right and I kept picturing myself reading it and going "What?" reason I saw this is we are doing it as an online role play first to get the gist of it down then flesh it out from there. ...

I think "transcripts" of roleplaying are very hard to turn into readable stories.

For your original concept:

First establish an outline establishing the main events in the story. Don't try to write anything or decide who writes what.

Once you agree on the sequence of events in the outline, each author fills out the outline from his viewpoint completely independent of the other.

When each version is complete, interlace the narratives at the bullet points on the outline and edit out any absolute contradictions -- like one author undressing a character in paragraph one and the other finishing with the character still half-dressed.

Don't worry about minor detail differences -- every witness sees something different and that's the charm of multiple viewpoint stories that cover the same events.

 

[lovecraft68]

This may sound a little strange but it might be wise to write down the parameters of your partnership, print it out and sign it. Treat it like a business partnership.

I say this because of my own experience of writing with a partner. One day I posted a political opinion she disagreed with and she made it very clear that as long as I worked with her I was allowed no political opinion save what she said I could have. She wasn't nice about it either.

So lay out the parameters of your partnership.

Valid point. however in this case it is a simple incest story and we are both in total agreement on plot and outline, i don't feel we will offend or steal from each other.

 

[sr71plt]

Or you could just do it and see out it works out. That's how Sabb and I do it, and as far as I can see we're the only ones in this thread discussion who are actually publishing and making money out of collaboration writing--tamer ones under Stephen Kessel; steamier ones under Shabbu.

We approach it a couple of ways. We have some where we both write our own separate storylines to a central theme (e.g., Tree of Idleness) or a phrase/scenario that's popped out in our daily e-chats (e.g., Angel in the Barn or Despoiling David). In the former case, I usually take what's been produced and reweave it into on storyline.

At other times a theme pops out in our daily e-chat and one of us proposes a cowritten book (e.g., Stephen Kessel's The Velvet Interrogation or Shabbu's coming Operation Black Jade), giving a loose setup and proposed ending. Then I usually do a loose outline of who is going to tell the tale of the perspective of which character(s) and what plotline events they need to cover in each segment. Sometimes we only set out the beginning of this. Then we toss the building manuscript back and forth between each other, with each editing the other's accumulated work and adding to it before tossing it back. At the end of this process, I rework the whole thing into a coordinated whole, smoothing out transitions and tying up loose threads. Sabb then edits, I clean up, and it gets published.

We sometimes abandon ideas (not often), but usually early on, and either one of us who signals we want to drop the idea can do so.

Sometimes our efforts are separated by chapters; sometimes by sections within chapters. But usually we've tossed it back and forth enough that the contributions are intertwined. And as I noted above, we usually have multiple characters looking at the same events from their different perspectives and sometimes we mix first person with third person--always clearly sectionalized though. Our work gets reviewed on the Internet and never has a reviewer said that the mixing of perspectives didn't work for them.

Theorizing how something will work is one thing. Examples exist to check out how it is being made to work.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I think "transcripts" of roleplaying are very hard to turn into readable stories.

For your original concept:

First establish an outline establishing the main events in the story. Don't try to write anything or decide who writes what.

Once you agree on the sequence of events in the outline, each author fills out the outline from his viewpoint completely independent of the other.

When each version is complete, interlace the narratives at the bullet points on the outline and edit out any absolute contradictions -- like one author undressing a character in paragraph one and the other finishing with the character still half-dressed.

Don't worry about minor detail differences -- every witness sees something different and that's the charm of multiple viewpoint stories that cover the same events.

I like this approach!

 

[sr71plt]

I like this approach!

Yeah, well, starting with a complete separate outline by each of what the work will be is, I think, the main reason why so many are giving advice here on what they actually haven't gotten done. If you start from that basis, you're already on different railroad tracks going to different towns.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I agree. I've attempted a couple of SRP's and turned one only into a transcript. It worked because the premise was very simple, and my partner was very passive Mostly I wrote the action and he wrote some reactions. Made it very easy for the readers.

Another one turned into something worth writing as a novel-- it's in my to-do file. And you can bet there will be a written agreement between me and my original partner protecting our respective rights-- just in case it brings in any actual money. But it won't be written as a transcript.

 

[Weird Harold]

Yeah, well, starting with a complete separate outline by each of what the work will be is, ...

...NOT what I suggested.

I suggested a SINGLE outline and then two different, independent, viewpoints/interpretations of that SINGLE outline -- to achieve the desired effect of two people relating the same events.

 

[sr71plt]

I agree. I've attempted a couple of SRP's and turned one only into a transcript. It worked because the premise was very simple, and my partner was very passive Mostly I wrote the action and he wrote some reactions. Made it very easy for the readers.

Another one turned into something worth writing as a novel-- it's in my to-do file. And you can bet there will be a written agreement between me and my original partner protecting our respective rights-- just in case it brings in any actual money. But it won't be written as a transcript.

I'm afraid that my experience is that one of the writers has to be the senior partner. But she/he needs to be flexible enough to permit the other partner breathing room and her/his creative space.

In my case it helps that I'm usually prepared to reshape the end (and beginning and middle) to go with elements my writing partner have interjected that weren't in my own vision. This is actually part of the reward of working with another writer on a single work.

I also write primarily for the enjoyment of writing. I don't need to make money off of any of this. So, as an artist, I wouldn't even start into a writing collaboration that was buried under rights/responsibilities paperwork. I went into a personal relationship with my coauthor (starting with him contacting me with a "I like your work and I write similiarly" e-mail) before a writing collaboration, and we don't work on formal agreements. (I do what I like best--write. He collects any money from it and makes deposits to my account.) I would hope we'd stop writing together if disagreements threatened our personal relationship. (And it helps that he does, indeed, have a writing style that coordinates well with mine. Reviews sometimes misguess which of us has written what.)

 

[sr71plt]

...NOT what I suggested.

I suggested a SINGLE outline and then two different, independent, viewpoints/interpretations of that SINGLE outline -- to achieve the desired effect of two people relating the same events.

You're right. I misread. Sorry.

The more equal the partnership is going to be, the harder that even this is going to be, I think.

 

[lovecraft68]

I'm afraid that my experience is that one of the writers has to be the senior partner. But she/he needs to be flexible enough to permit the other partner breathing room and her/his creative space.

In my case it helps that I'm usually prepared to reshape the end (and beginning and middle) to go with elements my writing partner have interjected that weren't in my own vision. This is actually part of the reward of working with another writer on a single work.

I also write primarily for the enjoyment of writing. I don't need to make money off of any of this. So, as an artist, I wouldn't even start into a writing collaboration that was buried under rights/responsibilities paperwork. I went into a personal relationship with my coauthor (starting with him contacting me with a "I like your work and I write similiarly" e-mail) before a writing collaboration, and we don't work on formal agreements. (I do what I like best--write. He collects any money from it and makes deposits to my account.) I would hope we'd stop writing together if disagreements threatened our personal relationship. (And it helps that he does, indeed, have a writing style that coordinates well with mine. Reviews sometimes misguess which of us has written what.)

This is sort of the case I am taking the lead as being more experienced and 1sick is fine with that (we have already agreed to do a second one that he will take the kead in). the premise is very simple almost mindless compared to the soap opera I have been writing and he and I are very much on the same wave length. We are not just role playing on the fly but IM'ing before we put down our part so we dont; stray to far. Honestly I think the role play can work as an outline a "skeleton" to then flesh out. In the end however around 1:30am last night after a long debate we are making this a two parter I am doing the first chpater "The seduction" he is doing the second chapter where the brother deals with the reality of what just happened. so now iguess it becomes a traditional chain story.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I'm afraid that my experience is that one of the writers has to be the senior partner. But she/he needs to be flexible enough to permit the other partner breathing room and her/his creative space.

In my case it helps that I'm usually prepared to reshape the end (and beginning and middle) to go with elements my writing partner have interjected that weren't in my own vision. This is actually part of the reward of working with another writer on a single work.

Indeed. In my other collaborative concern, the other writer and I take turns being the senior writer-- we each have our strengths, depending on the focus of the story.

I also write primarily for the enjoyment of writing. I don't need to make money off of any of this. So, as an artist, I wouldn't even start into a writing collaboration that was buried under rights/responsibilities paperwork. I went into a personal relationship with my coauthor (starting with him contacting me with a "I like your work and I write similiarly" e-mail) before a writing collaboration, and we don't work on formal agreements. (I do what I like best--write. He collects any money from it and makes deposits to my account.) I would hope we'd stop writing together if disagreements threatened our personal relationship. (And it helps that he does, indeed, have a writing style that coordinates well with mine. Reviews sometimes misguess which of us has written what.)

My partner has said things like "he doesn't care if it makes any money" and the truth is I will be writing about 75% of the whole, using the early material we cowrote as a starting place. But yanno... creative partnerships sometimes have unexpected hiccups, and I don't want misunderstandings or mis-rememberings ruining the fun. A signed agreement is kinda squicky but it's better than a ruined friendship.

 

[sr71plt]

My partner has said things like "he doesn't care if it makes any money" and the truth is I will be writing about 75% of the whole, using the early material we cowrote as a starting place. But yanno... creative partnerships sometimes have unexpected hiccups, and I don't want misunderstandings or mis-rememberings ruining the fun. A signed agreement is kinda squicky but it's better than a ruined friendship.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess, but my cowriting is built on a personal relationship. As cliched as it might sound, this is one of our ways of making love to each other in cyber space. And much of what we write together has spun out of such a session. When either of us feels cheated by the writing, that's the time we'll stop. Paper only builds in the assumption that we will reach that point. We probably will, but it damages the relationhip from the get go to assume it.

To the extent I've even peeked at the business end of it it has been to tell him that he isn't drawing enough of a share.

 

[manyeyedhydra]

Can't help on the collaboarative approach, but whenever I've done a story with multiple POV's I've always used

* * * *

as a break to indicate moving to a different POV.

 

[sr71plt]

Can't help on the collaboarative approach, but whenever I've done a story with multiple POV's I've always used

* * * *

as a break to indicate moving to a different POV.

Yep, that's the standard internal chapter section breaker.

 

[mynameisben]

Screw the reader. If a story is hard to write, it damn well ought to be hard to read.

 

[1sickbastard]

Thanks for all the input, everyone. Lovecraft & myself have got what we're doing worked out, mostly. As LC68 wrote, we've agreed on all the major plot points, He's the lead writer (as he had far more experience, and because he had dibs on the story). It will be a two-part chain story. Should be done some time soon, as soon as we get it writted, edited & sumbitted.

Again, thanx for all the help!
1sb