Zombie Darlings

[crookedletter]

"Kill your darlings" isn't exactly a truism I live by, but I do think it occasionally has some merit. I'm an avowed pantser: I like to write in an exploratory way, getting to know my characters by putting them in rooms together and see what my subconscious decides to do with them. The result can sometimes be a meandering story, one that runs away from me a little bit and has to be trimmed into submission once I have some idea of where I want it to go.

One recent example, on a long-simmering work in progress I had the main male character taken to a spa and convinced to get a massage. My plan wasn't to have anything sexual happen: unwanted massage parlor incidents have a little too much real-world prominence to be high on my list of sexy things to write about. The idea was more to get the guy out of his comfort zone, get him vulnerable.

But the scene ended up sort of writing itself, and I let it. I knew even as I was writing it that it didn't really fit within the narrative arc of my story. But I enjoyed writing it, and I think it turned out pretty good. It's long, for what it is: from stepping into the spa to the post-payoff haze is over 3500 words.

The point is, I have to cut it. I know I do. It's a long diversion, it adds almost nothing to the story, and right now it's weighing down my draft.

But I can't kill it. Not entirely. I'm considering making it standalone, sort of a long stroker -- insofar as such a thing exists -- or repurposing it into something else.

I've done this with some other things, too: written them for one story, pitched them out because they don't fit, only to find later that they fit within some new work in progress, with some creative reshaping.

I'm curious about other writers' experience with this. Do you kill your darlings* outright and irrevocably, do you leave them in, or do you find ways to repurpose them?

* this isn't intended to be a defense of the expression, which I think people feel strongly against. But we all have to cut shit from our stories, right?

 

[MillieDynamite]

Kill Your Darlings isn't exactly about plot deviations. It's about adverbs first (and still Stephen King manages to have well above the average in Horror), and sentences that do nothing for the story that should be cut. Sometimes, a sideways turn in a plot can serve a purpose, especially in mysteries. But everything in a story should serve some purpose in the overall tale, if only to provide a moment of relief from a barrage of bad things happening to characters.

 

[crookedletter]

Kill Your Darlings isn't exactly about plot deviations. It's about adverbs first (and still Stephen King manages to have well above the average in Horror), and sentences that do nothing for the story that should be cut. Sometimes, a sideways turn in a plot can serve a purpose, especially in mysteries. But everything in a story should serve some purpose in the overall tale, if only to provide a moment of relief from a barrage of bad things happening to characters.

I had a feeling I should use a different term; I just liked the phrase "zombie darlings" too much and stuck with it. Maybe apt for the subject matter.

This isn't my understanding of what the expression means. It means that sometimes you have to cut things you're fond of because cutting them will serve the story. Whether that's an extra word, an extra character, or chapters 20-30 in a 40 chapter novel.

 

[TheWritingGroup]

What lots of writers do is save the good-but-not-part-of-this-story scene for later reuse in a different one. Brandon Sanderson talks about doing this all the time.

--Annie

 

[lovecraft68]

Serious question, why do you have to cut it out? There is no word limit here, you're not getting paid, you were compelled to write it, keep it.

Anytime I hear Kill your darlings I think of King saying it and that he hasn't killed any darlings in 30 years, he just rambles on and on.

 

[yowser]

What lots of writers do is save the good-but-not-part-of-this-story scene for later reuse in a different one. Brandon Sanderson talks about doing this all the time.

--Annie

I'll second this motion. You know if the scene belongs or not, and you seem confident about that. But if writing it was such a kick, surely it is a seedbed for another tale.

 

[crookedletter]

Serious question, why do you have to cut it out? There is no word limit here, you're not getting paid, you were compelled to write it, keep it.

Anytime I hear Kill your darlings I think of King saying it and that he hasn't killed any darlings in 30 years, he just rambles on and on.

It's definitely an option, and one I'll continue to consider as I write the story. If ultimately I feel like it fits I will put it back in. But right now it feels like a bloated distraction, it pulled the story in a direction that makes it harder to continue. Right now it feels like the story is better without it.

To be clear, I'm not interested in "killing my darlings" just because that's a thing people say and so I feel I have to follow it. I'd never cut anything unless I really believe doing so will make the story better.

But it can also be kind of freeing to cut something like that. You put it some other file so it's saved for later use, but then you hit that delete key and the story is suddenly lighter and thinner and feels like it can go anywhere.

 

[12oclocktales]

You mean that great aside you wrote before having to tell the reader, “Meanwhile, back at the ranch . . .”

Yes, I’ve done that on occasion, though never 3500-words worth, usually to get a funny bit in or give a character a clever observation or two (“funny” and “clever” to me, at least). A few times after admiring them in edit after edit I’ve bit the bullet and took them out and used them, or close proximities, in future stories. There are some I’ve never gone back to at all. It sounds like you have the makings of a separate story there, something to develop and maybe keep for a rainy day.

 

[MrPixel]

I'm wrestling with this at this very moment. Wrote a scene and its development, then realized it was taking me further away from the conclusion that was a little overdue. Don't know if this particular scene is worth keeping since it requires a certain combination of characters in the setup, one unlikely to be repeated.

I have another such clipping - not too big, though, only 1000 words - where the main point was reduced to a small paragraph in another context. Still going to keep it because it explains a character, but it breaks LitE's non-consent rules (traumatic rape scene). The MMC loves this character as do I, so maybe some day I'll have a chance to use it.

 

[iwatchus]

I am trying a different approach to writing my current novels, giving me more time away from them before doing a major rewrite, hopefully to give me more willingness to trim out more of the fat (story-wise). Just after writing a piece, I am still too attached to it to pull the plug when it should be.

 

[TheWritingGroup]

But it can also be kind of freeing to cut something like that. You put it some other file so it's saved for later use, but then you hit that delete key and the story is suddenly lighter and thinner and feels like it can go anywhere.

In writing one story, I ended up cutting out an entire 3,000 word courtroom scene. It was fun to write, it revealed character, I still like it.

It also brought the story to a dead halt. Even worse, it was right at the beginning, almost guaranteeing that many readers would get bored and click Back.

Bits of it have been dropped back in as short flashbacks as the series progressed.

--Annie

 

[Kelliezgirl]

What lots of writers do is save the good-but-not-part-of-this-story scene for later reuse in a different one. Brandon Sanderson talks about doing this all the time.

--Annie

That's great advice.

 

[Britva415]

Regarding clichés like kill your darlings, show don't tell, Chekhov's Gun, eschew adverbs, etc. there are many more:

I think that the job of these clichés is not to instruct us to adhere to them.

I think that their job is to give us permission to. To dare to, especially when conflicted.

 

[THBGato]

I would argue with the premise. 3,500 is kind of nothing. I've seen stories here with much longer disgressions that have still down well. Plus, at the end of the day, you need to write what you want to write.

 

[TheWritingGroup]

I would argue with the premise. 3,500 is kind of nothing. I've seen stories here with much longer disgressions that have still down well. Plus, at the end of the day, you need to write what you want to write.

Did you just tell @crookedletter to write what they want to write ... right after telling them you disagree with their decision that those 3500 words make the story worse?

--Annie

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Regarding clichés like kill your darlings, show don't tell, Chekhov's Gun, eschew adverbs, etc. there are many more:

I think that the job of these clichés is not to instruct us to adhere to them.

I think that their job is to give us permission to. To dare to, especially when conflicted.

I don't think it's fair to call them cliches, because they have value. The key is to stop and think BEFORE you break the rules.

Maybe Chekhov's gun doesn't need to be fired. But understand why it's there, what purpose is it serving in the story?
Take risks, but take smart risks.

 

[Britva415]

I don't think it's fair to call them cliche's, because they have value. The key is to stop and think BEFORE you break the rules.

We're more-or-less on the same page except that I wouldn't call them rules. These aren't like grammar rules which can have exceptions but are still rules. But yeah, awareness and mindfulness and intentionality are where it's at. Apply or disregard them thoughtfully.

And there are people who call them clichés, people who employ them as clichés, people who make them cliché by unhelpfully dogmatizing them, and I do think it's fair to address those things directly in order to challenge their clichéhood.

 

[gunhilltrain]

Serious question, why do you have to cut it out? There is no word limit here, you're not getting paid, you were compelled to write it, keep it.

Anytime I hear Kill your darlings I think of King saying it and that he hasn't killed any darlings in 30 years, he just rambles on and on.

King can do whatever he feels is best, and it seems to have worked for him. But conciseness doesn't seem to be a priority for him. He added back 400 pages for the Complete and Uncut Edition of the Stand for a grand total of 1,152 pages. The 832 page version seemed more than adequate.

 

[MrPixel]

...intentionality... dogmatizing... clichéhood...

...frantically scribbling these down to use in casual dialog in the next story...

 

[Britva415]

...frantically scribbling these down to use in casual dialog in the next story...

immanentize the eschaton

 

[MrPixel]

immamentize the eschaton

I knew it! I knew it! Somebody here was going to quote William F. Buckley sooner or later! His greatest debate skill was leaving his opponents scratching their heads with, "What? What did he say? Was it Klingon or something? How do I respond to that?"

 

[THBGato]

Did you just tell @crookedletter to write what they want to write ... right after telling them you disagree with their decision that those 3500 words make the story worse?

--Annie

Um... I suppose that's one way of interpretting my post!

I was disagreeing with the premise that digressions automatically make a story worse. Plus what often seems to be digression ends up making sense by the end (think of that whole bit about Boo Radley at the start of "to kill a mockingbird" that only becomes relevant at the very end). But even if the digression remains purely that, I've come across very long ones here - about cars, contradictions in Christianity, art, wine, etc. None seem to have stopped the story in question getting a good reaction.

 

[Britva415]

What did he say? Was it Klingon or something?

I think I spelled it wrong anyway

 

[Britva415]

I was disagreeing with the premise that digressions automatically make a story worse

That wasn't the premise, though.

They named their particular problems with this particular digression in this particular story.

As for their question, regarding whether anyone else has difficulty excising while revising, again the presumption isn't that "you're automatically supposed to trim it down," it presumes that the writer has identified something which might need to go, based on that writer's particular problems with that particular digression in that particular story.

 

[Yogma]

I once had a story where I loved the erotic scenes, but by the time I had finished the first draft I didn't like the overall story as it had a heavy revenge theme. The story languished for about a year, until I resurrected it by keeping the erotic scenes but then transformed the rest of the story to be about emotional growth. I was much happier with the final result.