New writer, dumb question

[LadyVer]

I LOVE this question!

Answer #1: BECOME your character. Immerse yourself in their skin and see the world through their eyes. Here's some of the best writing advice I ever saw for characterizations, "Remember, the villain thinks they are the hero." Does it show in how they act and speak?

Suggestion #1: Try writing a story from a character's POV. Write it in the first person if you'd like. But more importantly, find a voice that feels different than yours and write in character. Don't over think it. Don't worry if you feel foolish or feel as if you're writing a stereotype - just do it. It will loosen up your muse.

I wrote FAWC 1 A Gloryhole Adventure from a female POV and fooled quite a few people before the authors were revealed.

Question #1: Are you really asking "How do I stop sounding like me when I write?" That's a tougher answer. When Stephen King wrote as Richard Bachman he was found out, in part, due to his writing style.

Actually, I think there are two issues I've been thinking about. One, how to not sound like me as much and two, how to make characters distinctive. My muse definitely needs to be loosened. Thank you!

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

She wont write anything so it doesn't matter.

 

[PervOtaku]

If you are invoking some form of the Five Man Band where a set of characters have clearly distinguishing characterizations, it's probably fairly easy. If the characters are all average, reasonable people without obvious quirks, then you as a writer are probably going to show pretty strongly in all of them. Personally I don't fight it.

 

[BuckyDuckman]

Actually, I think there are two issues I've been thinking about. One, how to not sound like me as much and two, how to make characters distinctive. My muse definitely needs to be loosened. Thank you!

Don't worry about "sounding like you." That's a little thing called: style. Embrace it and go!

 

[Sean Renaud]

If you are invoking some form of the Five Man Band where a set of characters have clearly distinguishing characterizations, it's probably fairly easy. If the characters are all average, reasonable people without obvious quirks, then you as a writer are probably going to show pretty strongly in all of them. Personally I don't fight it.

The Five Man Band only works as a team however and not for a total cast. Even then the five man band tends to be more one person with five voices than five characters though it's not always set in stone.

For people unfamiliar with it the Five Man Band is a name for a group of (generally) five characters and you'll see they generally have a person per slot with some variation. In general.

The Leader: Kinda obvious, guy in charge
The Lancer: This guy tends to be hot headed, nearly as strong or sometimes stronger than the leader this is the guy who screws shit up by running off alone.
The Smart Guy: Every group has a head scientist to solve all those pesky smart people problems.
The Brute: Most groups have a guy who's gimmick is being able to punch through a wall.
The Chick: If five or more people gather together one must have ovaries. She's likely to be fairly sterotypically female because she's there to fill that gap.

There can be some variation of course.

 

[Handley_Page]

The Five Man Band only works as a team however and not for a total cast. Even then the five man band tends to be more one person with five voices than five characters though it's not always set in stone.

For people unfamiliar with it the Five Man Band is a name for a group of (generally) five characters and you'll see they generally have a person per slot with some variation. In general.

The Leader: Kinda obvious, guy in charge
The Lancer: This guy tends to be hot headed, nearly as strong or sometimes stronger than the leader this is the guy who screws shit up by running off alone.
The Smart Guy: Every group has a head scientist to solve all those pesky smart people problems.
The Brute: Most groups have a guy who's gimmick is being able to punch through a wall.
The Chick: If five or more people gather together one must have ovaries. She's likely to be fairly sterotypically female because she's there to fill that gap.

There can be some variation of course.

There's a large number of TV shows & films where the Chick IS the Leader
these days.
And NCIS has a real lady Geek (Abbi).

 

[Sean Renaud]

I don't watch NCIS may I assume you're talking about the hot goth chick? Cus hot damn.

That said the 5 man band is specific, if you don't fit you don't qualify and lots of shows don't have a 5 man band. Hell more often than not you don't.

The Chick is not the leader. She can't be. The chick is not (strictly speaking) about gender. An assertive female (say Black Widow because the Avengers are not a 5 Man Band without bending the rules) is not a chick nor the leader.

 

[Nathan_Brazil]

I'm not sure anyone has brought this up...
Before you start your piece, know how it is going to end. Map out all of your characters before you even start. Don't let your novel write itself, and you can keep better track of which character offers each reveal.
When I see a serialized piece and the author says, gosh I don't know how this will end, I shudder.

 

[Hypoxia]

When I see a serialized piece and the author says, gosh I don't know how this will end, I shudder.

I sometimes know quite well how the story ends; the hard part is getting there. My most difficult right now is a fictionalized historical account of two actual naturalists with well-documented lives -- except for the parts I must invent to bring them together and start them on their journey. It's my first period piece, and tricky. I was not there. I must depend on secondary sources and erratic visualizations.

Another story has a good opening and a surprise ending, and a great empty in-between that I must improvise to fill. I had a similar predicament, but worse, with my BRIDE OF KONG series. I *thought* I knew the ending but when I got there it was not right, so I copped out with a series of alternate endings. Sometimes life is like that.

One advantage of a semi-auto- and -biographical 'journal' piece: we know what happens at any point and can edit as needed to spice it up or trim it down. Pure invention is much harder. Cue the formula plots...

 

[Nathan_Brazil]

For an experienced author, it is less of a concern. Yes, I have read some nice stories written this way, but...
Writer's block usually happens when you haven't done your foundation before you build your house.... Knowing how you are going to get from A to Z helps you remain 'in voice', helps you avoid block, and keeps you from introducing the man with the black hat in chapter 14 to bail you out of a plot hole.
Your results may differ.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Oh! Stories can write themselves if you know how to do it. And its simple to do.

When I encounter space, with nothing to write, I let it lie till the material comes. That said, the material often arrives soon but 5 years elapsed on one occasion, and the empty space was filled by a simple end that was perfect for the story.

 

[legerdemer]

Actually, I think there are two issues I've been thinking about. One, how to not sound like me as much and two, how to make characters distinctive. My muse definitely needs to be loosened. Thank you!

Don't worry about "sounding like you." That's a little thing called: style. Embrace it and go!

The two issues LadyVer pointed out are related, aren't they? I often have to get the story down and then come back to differentiate the voices of the characters from each other, even if it's fairly subtle - just enough so it's not one voice speaking through two (or three or four...) heads. And sometimes I feel I haven't quite gotten to where I should have.

The way in which I do this, and the way I place the characters in their setting and move them along the plot line, that's where I feel my own particular style comes out.

What say you, Ducky?

 

[sr71plt]

I'm not sure anyone has brought this up...
Before you start your piece, know how it is going to end. Map out all of your characters before you even start. Don't let your novel write itself, and you can keep better track of which character offers each reveal.
When I see a serialized piece and the author says, gosh I don't know how this will end, I shudder.

If I had to write fiction like this, I wouldn't bother. What gives me enjoyment in writing is watching what unfolds. I agree that an ending should be in mind before starting, but not necessarily THE ending. Although I have some idea of some of the characters before I start and some idea of traits they have that are important to the ultimate plot that develops, defining/limiting who the characters are going to be is the kiss of death and invites you to include irrelevant minutia on characters in what ultimately happens in the work as well as pressuring you to limit opportunities and possibilities as the story unfolds. Discovery on the journey is everything to me and I don't need or want it all pinned down before I start.

Yesterday I wrote a story for Halloween. I "knew" what the ending was before I started, and it was one of the hooks of the story. When I got there, I knew it wasn't a reader-satisfying ending or, in my own mind, the best one (I'm not particularly wedded to satisfying the reader if I'm not satisfied with the ending). The ending now does a big U twist of the tail and I think the story is better for it--and it didn't come to mind until I got there. There also were more characters in the finished story than there were in story plans and two more scenes than in the original plan.

I wouldn't write fiction any other way. I had to stay in that box writing nonfiction for years. It was a job; it wasn't entertaining to me.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

well everyone's different.

I find if I set out and just wing it, I end up with chaos. Not my scene. Especially characterization. The plot can be more free wheeling but if I began with vague characters the whole thing is thrown off.

Im not one to enjoy surprises or the "process" of writing. It has to be worked out in my head first for the most part.

Dialogue is awesome. Youll never know until you try.

QUOTE=sr71plt;71131192]If I had to write fiction like this, I wouldn't bother. What gives me enjoyment in writing is watching what unfolds. I agree that an ending should be in mind before starting, but not necessarily THE ending. Although I have some idea of some of the characters before I start and some idea of traits they have that are important to the ultimate plot that develops, defining/limiting who the characters are going to be is the kiss of death and invites you to include irrelevant minutia on characters in what ultimately happens in the work as well as pressuring you to limit opportunities and possibilities as the story unfolds. Discovery on the journey is everything to me and I don't need or want it all pinned down before I start.

Yesterday I wrote a story for Halloween. I "knew" what the ending was before I started, and it was one of the hooks of the story. When I got there, I knew it wasn't a reader-satisfying ending or, in my own mind, the best one (I'm not particularly wedded to satisfying the reader if I'm not satisfied with the ending). The ending now does a big U twist of the tail and I think the story is better for it--and it didn't come to mind until I got there. There also were more characters in the finished story than there were in story plans and two more scenes than in the original plan.

I wouldn't write fiction any other way. I had to stay in that box writing nonfiction for years. It was a job; it wasn't entertaining to me.[/QUOTE]

 

[sr71plt]

Right. Everyone is different. I write, first, to entertain myself. It's just nice to be able to share it and even make money from it.

I have no idea how your reference to dialogue fits in in your response.

 

[MatthewVett]

One way I (attempt to) do it is to give my characters a few strong traits at the start to keep in mind when writing their voices, like "snarky" or "easily discouraged," and maybe a bit of slang or something to differentiate them. I think it helps. As I write, they usually get more developed than that, but it's a good baseline to keep in mind.

George Miller did something similar in Mad Max: Fury Road, where each of the five wives started out with a single adjective for their personality, and he went from there.

 

[LWulf]

I'd suggest a writer's resource I posted once to help in developing different "voices" but more people seemed to think it was a horrid idea.
The picture link that helped explain it was even truncated.

The reason it's so hard to not make all characters like yourself, is because you are writing it. It's like when someone talks about a dream, where a dream lover does this and that.
In my mind, I'm thinking, you DO realize that you aren't linked to a dream world wide web, and it's just you in there dreaming with you?

What everyone has basically defined, of which I'm not adding more to it but explaining it differently, is that you have to give some form of defined personality to each character. Then give them some variance. Is a grouch always a grouch? ...well, unless it's someone in the GB, no they aren't, but they usually have a trigger. USE that fact to develop other characters the grouch interacts with. More importantly, use your own triggers. What makes you into a grouch? You know your own triggers quite well, and the type of people that trigger them, exploit that concept, but give it selectively to one character alone.
THAT will set the one character apart from the rest.

Aside from that, like characters flock together. Grouches don't mind other grouches, friendly people like to hang around other friendly people, but that's when they are on their own personal time. Add in a location where people congregate and where personalities clash, like at work or a bar, and sure enough, you have the fixings for an interesting dialog between characters.

 

[sr71plt]

Take up acting before you take up story writing. Then you'll naturally be able to slip into distinct and separate roles with your characters when you get around to writing fiction.

Also, be sure you understand what element(s) of the story you are emphasizing (plot, character, theme, setting--and, for erotica, arousal/sex). A short story isn't the same mode as a novel. You don't have to fully develop each and every element in a short story. Maybe overdeveloping the characters in the particular story you are writing is not benefiting the story.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

It doesn't, I was responding to LV.

You'll never know who you sound like until you say something. So write and then look at it afterwards.

Right. Everyone is different. I write, first, to entertain myself. It's just nice to be able to share it and even make money from it.

I have no idea how your reference to dialogue fits in in your response.

 

[HeyAll]

I always use the TV show analogy:

Just imagine your favorite tv show. You know how the characters talk & react.

Writing a story is the same thing in my opinion. Just think of the character you want, and think, "what would this character do or say under this circumstance."

So if it was a tough female character, her reactions & dialogue would be totally different than a submissive female.

 

[PervOtaku]

The Five Man Band only works as a team however and not for a total cast.

Usually the team is the total cast. Note that I'm kind of broadening the terms here, you don't have to have an adventuring team to have a group where every character has a fairly distinct quirk that defines their personality and role. A lot of sitcoms do this especially, but anything with an ensemble cast leans in that direction.

Sometimes the roles each character plays in the plot helps define what their character quirk ought to be. But don't force it either, this can also be one of those things that overthinking it or trying too hard has the opposite effect from what you are trying to do.