I can't write.

[kitchen_kink]

Two weeks ago I was doing great. Consistent, every-other-day-at-least work on the novel. Now I can't start it up again.

I wonder if this medium is sucking up my writing energy. Yesterday I spent about an hour and a half writing that post, and it strikes me that I could have used that time to continue my fictive, yet life-based, process on my novel.

It makes me wonder, also, if I shouldn't find some way to make this medium into a collection of connected, publishable essays. I've certainly done some of my best writing on here, just free-forming, expressing my thoughts about the insane and sublime experiences I've had, especially in the past year. I'd just be afraid that everyone would think I was trying to do the next Bridget Jones. Though as water_childe mentioned, long before Bridget Jones there was Anais Nin. Maybe I should pick those diaries up.

Literary types speak: if you want to express your life in writing, in a publishable way that other people will want to read, what form do you prefer it to take, or better, for a broader segment of you, what form to you prefer to read? Do a life and the beliefs and themes of the writer come across better when there is a plot and characters and adventure to support it? Or do you enjoy reading long, philosophical/emotional musings ala Proust? I just want to sit down and write a bunch of stories from my life, but I keep feeling a need to find an overarching, basically fictional story in which to couch them, some place from which the stories spring in a character's mind, some arc that they take us through. Perhaps I am being too postmodern. Or too un-postmodern! Who knows. I keep trying to write this novel about my uncle, with myself as the main character, and I keep stalling out. It seems like a great idea: exploring the truth of this narrator through her concentration on one character in her life. But it's so hard to get through the plotty bits that I don't know if it's worth it!

On the other hand, whenever I start something that is just a free-flowing personal idea, I think it turns pedantic and boring, and there's no focus to it, and because I don't know where it's going, it also stalls out.

Grr.

Comments

[harlequinaide.livejournal.com]

Years ago I read an article. The title was something like, "I Have Discovered The Secret to Good Writing." I remember sitting on the train with my magazine (the kind I convinced myself for years that REal Writers (tm) didn't read, when in fact it's like being a professional in any profession: you read the trade publications) and eagerly devouring this article.

It all boiled down to one word, the authors maintained: Plot. Stories (or movies or poems)without plot were boring. They could be the most well written thing this side of Hemingway, but if there was no plot, no one would want to read them, editors would recycle them and even we, in time, would curse ourselves for their existence. I was livid. "Of course you can write stories, or anything else, without plot," I cried. "As long as they're well written and interesting, that is enough."

Then I started thinking about my own reading. What do I like to read? Do I actively dive in to any text that is purely cerebral and theoretical? Hell no. Even if the plot is internal, the conflict within one person, having some kind of plot, having "things" (whatever those are) happen, is essential.

To look at what you want to write, they say, look at what you read. There are people who write philosophical essays, but even the bost of those have some kind of forward motion, going from point A to point B.

Just my thoughts. I'm going to think more about this, and about what kinds of things still capture a reaader's imagination without having some kind of forward momentum (and I'm not just talking about the Greks invading the Frells, or Rocky laying the smack down on Mr. T, here, there is lots of internal conflict, or conflict between ideas, but it's still conflict). Thoughts?

[dietrich.livejournal.com]

I wish I could emulate, in writing, the voice of my college playwriting prof, but I can't. I'll do it in person for you sometime, complete with bugging eyes and enthusiastic hand-gestures. But what he always said was that the first thing you had to figure out when you were writing a play was "What's the CAHHHHNflict?"

It's true. It's not so much that I don't want to include plot and conflict as that I have trouble identifying what it is straight off. If I write more anecdotally and just explore my character's conflicts that way, I sometimes get frustrated and stop. If I define it straight off and decide to write *to* that, the writing comes out flat.

I think the first way is better for me, though...

Re:

[harlequinaide.livejournal.com]

So, when you have an anecdote, look at your characters. "What does Fictional Kam lack that she wants?" Even if it's peace of mind, it's still a goal. Then, "what does FicKam plan to do to get it? What stands in her way?" You don't need to answer these for the whole piece at once, but for every scene it wouldn't hurt to know going into it.

Now, the hard part. Once you think you know, let it change. If you decide that FicKam wants a balogna sandwich, and what she really wants is to mourn the death of her cousin Rex, she'll tell you. And she might even use the balogna sandwich to do it.

I feel like I'm telling you stuff that you probably already know. Maybe I'm reminding you, maybe I'm being pedantic and annoying. I dunno. Hopefully I'm giving you some ideas. I know that, as I'm talking about this to you, I'm figuring out how to apply it in my own writing, and how to tell my students about it. So I could do this all day. :-)