# Where do you start your story?



## Dark (Oct 31, 2010)

Do you begin by developing characters first or do you develop the plot and then the characters?


----------



## Sam (Oct 31, 2010)

I start at Chapter 1 and begin writing. Whatever happens, happens. 

My stories are predominantly plot-driven, however, so the characters are usually developed in how they react to the situations that are thrown in front of them; which, more often than not, are copious and always difficult. Nothing establishes character better than having every horrible thing in the world befall you and emerging the other side unscathed.


----------



## Bruno Spatola (Oct 31, 2010)

I just start writing. . .I write a line that I like and stick with it, then I give the person (if there is a person involved) a name, and I stick with it.

I start as if I'm writing the beginning, the very first chapter. . .what I intend to be the first chapter any way. It _never_ becomes the first chapter, but I find it easier to write as if it was. 

I used to write like this:

Chapter Names: The Sea Man, A.W.O.L.

Characters: Bob, Tim, Peter whatever.

Locations: London, Essex, St.Petersburg

Important Objects: Lucky Coin, Bust of Lincoln.

Mood: Dark, Macabre etc.

Character Traits: Pete - Controlling, Morbid obsession, Highly Strung, Arrogant etc.

Those are examples by the way, that's a blueprint for the worst book of all time. 

Any way, that doesn't work. My characters and story tend to refine themselves over time naturally. I've found planning can be a very bad way of going about it, and trying to develop characters before you've even written them into a book just spells disaster. I end up changing every single thing I wrote before hand. It probably works for some.

I write much more naturally when I sit in front of a fresh new page with a cup of tea and wait for the ideas to come . 

I love that moment when you _just_ find your stride and start typing away like a madman. One of my favourite parts of writing.


----------



## S1E9A8N5 (Oct 31, 2010)

There's no special order.  You just write which ever works best for you.



Sam W said:


> My  stories are predominantly plot-driven, however, so the characters are  usually developed in how they react to the situations that are thrown in  front of them; which, more often than not, are copious and always  difficult. Nothing establishes character better than having every  horrible thing in the world befall you and emerging the other side  unscathed.


 I'm the same way.  

With reading more these past few years, I find myself putting books down more because they don't hold my attention unless there is some kind of internal or external (preferably both) conflict going on.  I absolutely can't stand it when the author spends pages and pages on false conflict.  Characters that are just standing around talking to one another, going to parties, or fighting when it's not moving the story forward at-all.  It actually makes me angry sometimes because the story idea is so intriguing that I want to continue reading but nothing is happening.


----------



## Scarlett_156 (Nov 1, 2010)

A story starts either with something I see in real life, or a scene I see in my head.  There's always just a scene at first, whether imagined or real, that kinda sticks out. It can be just a little snippet of something, too--one novel I wrote when I was a kid started with me watching some boys playing football on a hill.  Another series I started on a few years ago started with a conversation I had with an unusual friend who was staying at my trailer at the time. 

That's all it really is, just bits and pieces.  I start thinking about these little bits and pieces of things that sort of swirl around in my brain, and eventually a story will start to coalesce around them. To add interest to the story, side-plots, conflicts, etc., I just dip into various experiences I've had, or stories that I've heard other people tell, and add those. 

This is of course the case with fiction, where a story has to be fabricated. 

If I'm not writing fiction--writing about something that is known to me, that I wish to inform others about or use as entertainment--then I have to pretty much STOP myself at a certain point.  If I am writing about a band that I've seen that I really like, for example. then I'm probably going to have to edit about 2/3 of the article out to get the editor even to look at it.


----------



## Drzava (Nov 1, 2010)

I just mash all the keys on the keyboard randomly and when something intelligible comes out, voila!  Story!


----------



## Woody (Nov 1, 2010)

One of my biggest ambitions is to write a great fantasy novel. I used to play a lot of AD&D and wrote some reasonable scenarios for gaming. Map making comes easy for me, characters and names don't cause me any problems and I see some great scenes in my head. Why do I find it so difficult to write a story? I always shy away from plotting and maybe I try to over plan; wanting to see the whole story in my head before committing to paper. Do you think it would be better to begin with short stories or plunge in and try to fully develop one of my ideas. You're advice would be much appreciated.

regards

Ralph.


----------



## Sam (Nov 1, 2010)

You could try short stories, but I can tell you there's a world of difference between writing shorts and novels. Two very disparate things, funnily enough. My advice would be to jump in head-first and start writing your novel. Even if it turns out to be a mess, it's a learning experience, and very few writers' first novels turn out to be great.


----------



## Woody (Nov 1, 2010)

Hi Sam,

thanks for your speedy reply. Very often I picture a scene, vivid and strong, with mood and feeling. It can be an event or a character but one scene doesn't make a story. In you're opinion does solid plot develop good characters , good characters drive the plot forward or do you have to find a middle ground.


----------



## Scrivener (Nov 1, 2010)

I try a balance of both character and plot development, though I often end up listing more to the character side.

If you lean more to character development, just be careful not to fall into telling the character's life story before starting into your story. Unless, of course, your story is about that one person's life story...


----------



## Sam (Nov 2, 2010)

Woody said:


> Hi Sam,
> 
> thanks for your speedy reply. Very often I picture a scene, vivid and strong, with mood and feeling. It can be an event or a character but one scene doesn't make a story. In you're opinion does solid plot develop good characters , good characters drive the plot forward or do you have to find a middle ground.



I'd be inclined to say "find a middle ground" but I think that solid plot is a great tool for developing characters. One famous author said, "Throw the kitchen sink at them and see what happens". 

Let's say you have a neighbour called "Jim". He's the nicest guy you could meet. Pays his bills on time, works nine-to-five as a lawyer, and has a great relationship with his family. There's nothing really there which a reader can connect with, but when you start to throw him into the mire, that's when character reveals itself. For the interests of keeping it to my genre, his wife is murdered by a gang whose leader he failed to keep out of prison. Thus starts a trail of revenge. That's great character-building. How far is he willing to go to avenge the death of his wife? How will it change him? He could be squeamish at the beginning and not really want to hurt these people, but when they keep stonewalling him, he becomes enraged and tortures them to find out who killed his wife. 

By having him as a normal Joe at the beginning, and now as a man forced to embrace his dark side, you create empathy with the reader. But it's still driven forward by the plot. Most thrillers, for instance, are not character-driven, despite what people may argue. The plot drives the story forward, in my opinion. And when it comes to thrillers, I don't buy the book for the characters. I buy it for the story. I'm not sure what your genre is. It might be that you're writing the kind of thing that lends itself to strong characters.


----------



## S1E9A8N5 (Nov 2, 2010)

Woody said:


> Do you think it would be better to begin with short stories or plunge in and try to fully develop one of my ideas.


Well the sensible thing to do would be to develop one of your ideas at at time.



Sam W said:


> You could try short stories, but I can tell you  there's a world of difference between writing shorts and novels. Two  very disparate things, funnily enough.


1. Novels = longer.
2. Novels = more characters. 

It doesn't really seem like too much of a difference to me.  

Novels in my opinion are a bunch of short stories that chronologically connect with one another.  So why not work on the scenes you do have and with the characters in mind, come up with other scenes that take place in the world you've created.  Take your time and pace yourself.


----------



## Sam (Nov 2, 2010)

3. More plot-lines. 
4. More POVs. 
5. Tying up loose ends. 
6. Having everything make sense at the denouement. 
7. Keeping the reader interested. (Shorts are easier to do this because they usually don't exceed 10,000 words). 
8. Knowing that it isn't just enough to have a start and a finish. Getting there is the hard part. 
9. Pacing. 
10. Judging lengths of chapters so the reader doesn't spend their time wondering when a break is going to come. 

There is a huge difference between shorts and novels. It's not just a matter of writing a bunch of short stories that chronologically connect. It all has to make sense by the time you've finished. I still don't think writing a short story prepares you for writing a novel. With a short story, you know the ending's around the corner. With novels, you have to be disciplined. One's a sprint, the other's a marathon.


----------



## S1E9A8N5 (Nov 2, 2010)

Sam W said:


> 3. More plot-lines.
> 4. More POVs.
> 5. Tying up loose ends.
> 6. Having everything make sense at the denouement.
> ...


Number 1.



Sam W said:


> I still don't think writing a short story prepares you for writing a novel. With a short story, you know the ending's around the corner. With novels, you have to be disciplined. One's a sprint, the other's a marathon.


 And how do you propose you become disciplined?  There are plenty of people out there that have never had a history of writing and they wrote a novel.  Whether it's good or not is besides the point.  Anyone can write a novel.  It's challenging but not impossible.  You familiarize yourself with the genre you want to write, use that as a guideline, and just write.  Through drafts and editing you make everything connect. It's only difficult if you make it difficult.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 2, 2010)

> Anyone can write a novel.



Have you written one? Because if you haven't, then I can't take what you have to say about it very seriously.


----------



## S1E9A8N5 (Nov 2, 2010)

JosephB said:


> Have you written one? Because if you haven't, then I can't take what you have to say about it very seriously.


 Whether I've written one or not means nothing.  You simply have to sit your ass down and write.  Pen to paper or fingers to keyboard.  Plain and simple.  Some people have better vocabulary than others.  Some people possess a talent at writing better than others.  And some procrastinate by making the entire process more complicated than it is.  But *anyone *can write.  That's a fact.


----------



## Sam (Nov 2, 2010)

S1E9A8N5 said:


> Whether I've written one or not means nothing.  You simply have to sit your ass down and write.



That's like saying: "Anyone can plumb a house. All you have to do is get some copper-piping, solder, and a gas-torch and you're good to go".  It isn't that easy. If you haven't written a novel, well, I'm sorry but you aren't the most qualified person to talk about whether or not it's easy. 



> Some people have better vocabulary than others.  Some people possess a talent at writing better than others.  And some procrastinate by making the entire process more complicated than it is.  But *anyone *can write.  That's a fact.



Of course anyone can write. Can anyone write something terrific that holds a person's attention for four hundred pages? No. Therein lies the difference.


----------



## S1E9A8N5 (Nov 2, 2010)

Sam W said:


> That's like saying: "Anyone can plumb a house. All you have to do is get some copper-piping, solder, and a gas-torch and you're good to go".  It isn't that easy. If you haven't written a novel, well, I'm sorry but you aren't the most qualified person to talk about whether or not it's easy.


Plumbing requires skill.  Writing doesn't.  If you know how to construct a full sentence, you can write.  And I never said writing a novel is easy.  I said it was challenging but it's only difficult if you make it difficult.  All these beginner questions (that I'm guilty of asking as well) are procrastinating questions.  Just sit and write.  It's not going to be easy.  It's not going to be perfect.  It's going to be bad.  It's going to be a mess.  Through drafts and editing comes the perfection.  Dare to write badly.  We learn from our mistakes.  The only person that's holding you back is you.  "The first draft is always shit" - Hemingway


Sam W said:


> Of course anyone can write. Can anyone write something terrific that holds a person's attention for four hundred pages? No. Therein lies the difference.


So are you saying that only books that hold the readers attention get published?  Because there are plenty of books on the market that don't do a good job at _that_ but they find their way on the shelves anyway.


----------



## Scarlett_156 (Nov 2, 2010)

^^^ I think that your point is valid; maybe you might have qualified it a bit by saying also that anyone capable of writing can write a novel. It might be a stretch for someone with an extremely severe learning or cognitive disability to write an entire novel, but that's not an automatic disqualifier, either. We take it for granted that not all novels, or in fact very many novels of all novels written, will see publication, just as we do that many really awful novels for some strange reason do get published and even sold into the thousands of copies. 

None of those things really factors in, however--if you are capable of writing at all, then theoretically you are capable of writing a novel.


----------



## Sam (Nov 2, 2010)

S1E9A8N5 said:


> Plumbing requires skill.  Writing doesn't.  If you know how to construct a full sentence, you can write.  And I never said writing a novel is easy.  I said it was challenging but it's only difficult if you make it difficult.  All these beginner questions (that I'm guilty of asking as well) are procrastinating questions.  Just sit and write.  It's not going to be easy.  It's not going to be perfect.  It's going to be bad.  It's going to be a mess.  Through drafts and editing comes the perfection.  Dare to write badly.  We learn from our mistakes.  The only person that's holding you back is you.  "The first draft is always shit" - Hemingway



Are you suggesting that writing doesn't take skill? That they aren't people who were born to be writers? There is learned talent and there's innate talent. A person who is a natural at something will always trump someone who takes time to learn it. Writing is not about constructing a full sentence. It's about being able to create a piece of work that will grab a reader by the scruff of the neck and keep him/her enthralled until the very last page. That isn't a learned skill. It's a born ability. Even the best constructed sentence can still be boring. 



> So are you saying that only books that hold the readers attention get published?  Because there are plenty of books on the market that don't do a good job at _that_ but they find their way on the shelves anyway.



Who mentioned publishing? The publishing industry works on marketability, not talent. _Twilight. _I rest my case.


----------



## S1E9A8N5 (Nov 2, 2010)

Scarlett_156 said:


> ^^^ I think that your point is valid; maybe you might have qualified it a bit by saying also that anyone capable of writing can write a novel.


That's what I meant.  Sorry.



> It might be a stretch for someone with an extremely severe learning or cognitive disability to write an entire novel, but that's not an automatic disqualifier, either.


That is true.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 2, 2010)

S1E9A8N5 said:


> Whether I've written one or not means nothing.  You simply have to sit your ass down and write.  Pen to paper or fingers to keyboard.  Plain and simple.  Some people have better vocabulary than others.  Some people possess a talent at writing better than others.  And some procrastinate by making the entire process more complicated than it is.  But *anyone *can write.  That's a fact.



Anyone can paint a painting or design a house or write a song or perform heart surgery.

It's the end result that counts. So I could go on and on about any of these things, but without firsthand knowledge -- or some result I can point to, how I think it should or could be done -- or who can or can't do it is just speculation and doesn't really count for much. It's about the finished product -- in this case a _completed_ novel. 

Don't take it personally. As interesting as it might be, I don't put much stock in what most people on forums have to say about novel writing unless they've written a novel or we're discussing an actual in work in progress.


----------



## S1E9A8N5 (Nov 2, 2010)

Sam W said:


> Are you suggesting that writing doesn't take skill?  That they aren't people who were born to be writers? There is learned  talent and there's innate talent. A person who is a natural at something  will always trump someone who takes time to learn it. Writing is not  about constructing a full sentence. It's about being able to create a  piece of work that will grab a reader by the scruff of the neck and keep  him/her enthralled until the very last page. That isn't a learned  skill. It's a born ability. Even the best constructed sentence can still  be boring.


You're contradicting yourself.  You're telling me writing takes skill  but then you're saying writing isn't a learned skill.  Then you're telling me there is acquired talent and innate talent.  Then you end with saying it's a born ability.  So which is it?   Do people possess natural talent?  Of course.  Do I believe people are  born to be writers? No.  I don't believe people are born to do  anything.  To say writing is only a born talent, is a bunch of BS.  But  if it gives you a sense of purpose to believe that, that's your choice.


----------



## Bigfella (Nov 2, 2010)

Someone told me once that all good writing comes from the characters

I still don't have the foggest idea what he meant.


----------



## caelum (Nov 2, 2010)

When I sit down to start a story, I generally have a good idea of what is going to happen.  It's not all there, but I can visualize where I want to go.  The writing then becomes realizing those dreams.  Sometimes, I know all the major plot twists that my characters will go through at the outset.  Other times, I have no idea where the story will go.  The benefit to premeditating the plot is stability.  You're less likely to make tangled, loosely connected scenes without an overall direction.  However, there is some spontaneity and delightful chaos to just winging a story.


----------



## Woody (Nov 2, 2010)

*Food For Thought*

First I'd like to thank everyone for some great input, the comments have been a great help.
My passion is fantasy and some of my favourite authors seem to perfectly blend plot, characterisation and good old fashioned story telling. From what I've read here maybe I just need to develop an idea, take it where it wants to go and worry about the technical stuff if the work warrants it.
Once again thank you for you're advice, onward and upward,

Regards 

Woody.


----------



## Kon-el Kent (Nov 2, 2010)

Personally I find plotting out the story first really helpful. To me character really comes from ones action so you need to know what those actions are going to be. You need to know what kind of conflicts the protaganist is going to face.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 3, 2010)

I don't think it makes a bit of difference which comes first. A life event or a news story could inspire a plot. A random encounter with someone could inspire a character. I think prescribing to some method, or trying to, based on what should come first would only be a hindrance.

For me, as soon as a story idea pops into my head, the characters seem to come with it, mostly realized. If a character comes to me, I immediately imagine that character in some situation, and that may lead to a plot. It's something spontaneous -- more chicken and egg than anything else. It's usually only after I've written something that I can trace the inspiration for a plot or character -- and which came first is irrelevant, even if I could say for sure.


----------



## MEShammas (Nov 4, 2010)

S1E9A8N5 said:


> Well the sensible thing to do would be to develop one of your ideas at at time.
> 
> 
> 1. Novels = longer.
> ...


 
You either:

1. Have never written a novel before.
2. Have never finished writing a novel before.
3. Have never written a short story before.
4. Have never attempted to write at all before.
5. Are kidding.
6. Some combination of the above.


----------

