Part of an ongoing series discussing Dennis Palumbo's Writing From the Inside Out (Transforming Your Psychological Blocks to Release the Writer Within).
"It's Alive"
To be honest, I don't have much to say about this chapter. One idea stands out - that writing is a living thing. "A dialogic process in which you and your writing create together that which is being written." p. 30
He goes on to talk about the moment you know your work is truly alive - when it's time in the story for a character to do or say something and the character rebels. "The character has taken on a life real enough to conflict with your carefully determined plans for him." (p. 31)
What's interesting to me about this is that I've heard both sides of this. Authors love to talk about their characters taking over, but I've also heard craft gurus claim that it's nonsense; that if you plot our your story carefully there's no room for that.
So what do you think? Do you let your characters take over, or do you have it all planned out in advance and refuse to change?
My characters are pretty well planned out, without taking over. Some sort of outline, as well as research, usually informs their behaviors. I wonder sometimes if when a writer says the character takes over that maybe the author just hasn't plotted ahead or outlined to foresee this. And so the character's action seems its own, but really isn't?
ReplyDeleteHi Joanne. Thanks for being so loyal in stopping by.
ReplyDeleteI hear what you're saying about preplanning. I think it was Larry Brooks at storyfix.com that first made me think of it that way.
I'm not sure enough people are reading here to get a good sense but I would love to hear from people whose characters talk to them.
One way of looking at it - and I think this is what Palumbo had in mind - is when the author is trying to force a character to do something because of that plot. She's created such a well-developed character that at some point she realizes the plot-required behavior is inconsistent with the character. I imagine many authors would be able to see this in advance, but I know I've often been surprised by an idea midway through. It's not that I didn't plan in advance but that I couldn't really see how something was going to work out until I actually worked through it.
The teacher in me thinks this is a learning styles thing. I always have to do something first before I can truly see the whole picture.No matter how I try to plan, I'm a visual person - I need to actually see how it plays out and then improve on it.
Hi Mary,
ReplyDeleteI've heard from authors who are huge plotters that the characters do rebel and if they accept and make plot changes it actually makes for a better book. I believe it is because of what you said about well-developed characters. And the characters find plot holes and rebel as a way of pointing them out.
I'm a free bird plotter. I ask my characters what happens next and they tell me. It works for me and I have fun watching other writers pull their hair out and wave their fists at me for doing it that way. ;)
I can't say that I've had a character "take over." I loosely plot, with the knowledge that sometimes things will change, but I know where I want to go. Thanks for the great post!
ReplyDeleteNancy, I have to admit to being a free bird plotter myself (though I've never heard it called that before). I always loved the description Jo Beverly uses - Flying into the Mist. It sounds so much more graceful than Pantsers.;)
ReplyDeleteI think it goes to the learning styles thing I mentioned above. Although I have a general outline, I'm not really capable of plotting in detail in advance.
Yes, Julie. That sounds similar to what I do. Thanks to everyone who stopped by today to join in the discussion. I love when you make me think deeply or in new ways.
ReplyDelete