"How do I words?" OR "The writing advice, critique, and discussion thread!"

[Quirk]

Also, I really liked that Quirk. It felt like "John Dies At The End" mixed with a bit of Pratchett.

This is, without a doubt, the best possible compliment.

@ Ace - Well, you have seven base conflicts. Character vs. Character, Nature, Machine, Self, Supernatural, Society, Destiny, or any variation or combination thereof. If you want a villain but don't want a cliche, I'd advise going one of two ways: Write the antagonist as if they were a protagonist. Give them some motivations, explain why they do the evil things they do.

Or 2) Throw depth out the window and make them as fun and memorable as you can.

And example of the first would be Cersei Lannister. An example of two would be Ladd Russo. Both are wonderful villains.

[Namboto]

First person.

/thread


Alright, yeah, there are lots of things that I enjoy greatly about first person. It lets me picture the world I create with a vision that is personal. I can never NOT value that. I find it easier to focus on the details I wish the reader to notice like that, by positioning myself where I want the reader to be. I've known people that don't like it, but I find it TOO useful. Not that I have not tried other methods, like monologue. I really enjoyed writing that one. But...FIRST PERSON MAN. FIRST. PERSON.

My current project is in first person, but I like writing in limited third as well (I blame Harry Potter for that one). With limited third you can take some liberties and explain a bit of a character's backstory without making them seem like they constantly dwell on that. This same thing makes first person reflective perspective handy too.

Whoop, finally a thread for casual writing.

Even though I don't really have any literature to contribute.

But casual conversation is always good.

So do you guys have any ideas for a novice writer who is trying to form ideas for a story? I have a pretty good idea of the main characters and setting, but only a loose concept of the plot. It's difficult because half of the things I think of end up becoming knock-offs of Homestuck, which is why it is particularly hard. Also conflict. Conflict is probably the reason why I'm having trouble with plot. I'm just not sure how to integrate conflict. Just inserting a mad supervillain is forced, lame, and cliched.

Ahaha, I need to sort out the conflict in my current project too. I know generally what they're going up against, but don't have the specifics down just yet.

As for villains, try to make them believable. If he's crazy, why is he crazy? Does he think he's evil? If so, why does he do what he does? If not, how does he justify his actions.

Also, a sympathetic villain can be a powerful tool. A good example of one such villain is Nox, from the french cartoon Wakfu. He spends the entire first season sucking the life force out of things and slaughtering people, but in the end you find out

show spoiler

hide spoiler

that the only reason he did it was to get enough energy to travel back in time and stop himself from becoming what he was. Had he succeeded, everyone he killed would still be around and he'd have his family back (it was the loss of them that drove him to it in the first place). Unfortunately he failed, only traveling back 20 minutes instead of the 200 years he needed.

It was a rather dark ending to the first season of a children's cartoon, but it was spectacular writing.

[Ace of Dark-Hearts]

Yeah, it's hard knowing generally what you want to write about, but not having any particular conflict to jump in your lap and fit the bill.

Whenever I try to sit down and organize my thoughts, I always find myself subconscious emulating a lot of the elements from Homestuck, which is REALLY annoying. The abridged premise is a band of kids assemble by fate to repair the universe/multiverse/everything/blah/blah/blah, which already is very suspiciously similar to Homestuck. I just can't help myself taking to the idea of Cast Calculus (quite literally, too. All of my main characters are based on digits).

[Thedumbcat]

Okay so I've been reading this sparingly as I trying and do graphics but I was for some help with how to remember spelling. I love to casually write and imagine stories in my head but I do wish to rely less on spell check. I also have a little trouble with grammar. This is my English assignment and I'm starting to have doubts about it. Sorry I don't know how to do spoilers.

I chose this cartoon because its ironic and makes me laugh and I believe the author is trying to make the point that they brought this debt on themselves. Using his style and techniques he intrigues readers and makes them want more. The author express's his thoughts on the idea by using something that looks like faeces whilst showing great ideas they invented. He sets up his thoughts and ideas clearly all the while he makes certain people laugh and others cry in frustration making this a well written political cartoon.

The cartoonist Peter Nicholson uses his humour and drawing skills to put together a rather amusing political cartoon. His cartoons are rather elaborate using multiple pictures to make the bigger picture more understandable and funny. With using this elaborate setting he implements irony and sense of the countries failure. The whole idea of their failure is because of the massive European Sovereign debt they have collected. That being said the debt is what happens when a lot of the European countries combine all their money and debt together. In the cartoon you can see caricatures of these countries and some of them in possession of cleaning utensils which puts a spin on your perspective on them. In this political cartoon it challenges peoples views by caricaturing the leaders of countries and having them hold cleaning products. It warps your views because you don't see the leaders of countries cleaning and its like imagining Julia Gillard in an apron.

The tone of this cartoon is rather ironic and he humours the fact that something that was once great civilisations who created dominated this world. His point of view is very obvious and you can see it from the tone, he really does think what they did is stupid. He also believes the other countries don't want to help but are forced too as you can see the expression on France and Germany's faces. His techniques are caricatures and implementing irony and he uses this to his advantage when he drew France and Germany's face. His irony is in good use especially for causing a an impact on the readers. The readers will either love this or hate it because you either laugh or get offended that the artist is making the debt look like faeces.


In conclusion I believe that he had all the reason to write it and the cartoon makes people laugh a lot and in the end I liked this cartoon a lot it made me laugh and understood the massage well. I believe that most people who read this will notice it because of its settings and the look of the 'dog food.' All in all I laughed and hope to find something as funny in a political cartoon.

[Thedumbcat]

Okay so I've been reading this sparingly as I trying and do graphics but I was for some help with how to remember spelling. I love to casually write and imagine stories in my head but I do wish to rely less on spell check. I also have a little trouble with grammar. This is my English assignment and I'm starting to have doubts about it. Sorry I don't know how to do spoilers.

I chose this cartoon because its ironic and makes me laugh and I believe the author is trying to make the point that they brought this debt on themselves. Using his style and techniques he intrigues readers and makes them want more. The author express's his thoughts on the idea by using something that looks like faeces whilst showing great ideas they invented. He sets up his thoughts and ideas clearly all the while he makes certain people laugh and others cry in frustration making this a well written political cartoon.

The cartoonist Peter Nicholson uses his humour and drawing skills to put together a rather amusing political cartoon. His cartoons are rather elaborate using multiple pictures to make the bigger picture more understandable and funny. With using this elaborate setting he implements irony and sense of the countries failure. The whole idea of their failure is because of the massive European Sovereign debt they have collected. That being said the debt is what happens when a lot of the European countries combine all their money and debt together. In the cartoon you can see caricatures of these countries and some of them in possession of cleaning utensils which puts a spin on your perspective on them. In this political cartoon it challenges peoples views by caricaturing the leaders of countries and having them hold cleaning products. It warps your views because you don't see the leaders of countries cleaning and its like imagining Julia Gillard in an apron.

The tone of this cartoon is rather ironic and he humours the fact that something that was once great civilisations who created dominated this world. His point of view is very obvious and you can see it from the tone, he really does think what they did is stupid. He also believes the other countries don't want to help but are forced too as you can see the expression on France and Germany's faces. His techniques are caricatures and implementing irony and he uses this to his advantage when he drew France and Germany's face. His irony is in good use especially for causing a an impact on the readers. The readers will either love this or hate it because you either laugh or get offended that the artist is making the debt look like faeces.


In conclusion I believe that he had all the reason to write it and the cartoon makes people laugh a lot and in the end I liked this cartoon a lot it made me laugh and understood the massage well. I believe that most people who read this will notice it because of its settings and the look of the 'dog food.' All in all I laughed and hope to find something as funny in a political cartoon.

[Quirk]

Whenever I try to sit down and organize my thoughts, I always find myself subconscious emulating a lot of the elements from Homestuck, which is REALLY annoying. The abridged premise is a band of kids assemble by fate to repair the universe/multiverse/everything/blah/blah/blah, which already is very suspiciously similar to Homestuck. I just can't help myself taking to the idea of Cast Calculus (quite literally, too. All of my main characters are based on digits).

Hmm... Suggestions for un-Homestuckification...

1) Cast calculus and patterns aren't necessarily a bad thing, but if they're taking you too close to Homestuck for your liking, drop them. Rebuild characters from scratch if you have to.
2) Figure out a main antagonist or antagonistic force. If the kids are trying to save the universe, why is the antagonist trying to end it?
3) What are the unique bits of your universe? Just get some of the basic ones down, and build off them. Apply characters to setting, create conflict.

[Ace of Dark-Hearts]

Hmm... Suggestions for un-Homestuckification...

1) Cast calculus and patterns aren't necessarily a bad thing, but if they're taking you too close to Homestuck for your liking, drop them. Rebuild characters from scratch if you have to.
2) Figure out a main antagonist or antagonistic force. If the kids are trying to save the universe, why is the antagonist trying to end it?
3) What are the unique bits of your universe? Just get some of the basic ones down, and build off them. Apply characters to setting, create conflict.

Nah, I'm in way too deep with these characters. I've already made the art and fleshed them out. The characters, though, aren't PARTICULARLY Homestuck-y, except for the fact that four of them are kids.

As for 2+3...I guess I haven't ever thought of doing it that way! The way you put it seems so simple. Perhaps I'm trying to make too detailed connections without getting everything down first. If I work on the main conflict, then apply that to the setting and characters, that would probably work much better than the other way around.

Thanks for the help!

[kholhaus]

Ace, no one would call you out on having four kids as the main cast.

That's actually a pretty well-spread character layout believe it or not.

I don't think anyone would make that connection unless they really thought about it, and even then, to call you out on it would be way idiotisanity.

[Quirk]

If I work on the main conflict, then apply that to the setting and characters, that would probably work much better than the other way around.

It can go either way. If at any time the plot seems to be running thin and needs a jumpstart, look to see if the setting can offer any potential source of complications.

Say your intrepid heroes have just defeated on of the Big Bad's major minions, and now there doesn't seem a lot to do in the plot. But there's a goblin nation over thataways, just mentioned before but never explored. Maybe the king just got assassinated. What consequences does this have on the rest of the story?

[Ace of Dark-Hearts]

Ace, no one would call you out on having four kids as the main cast.

That's actually a pretty well-spread character layout believe it or not.

I don't think anyone would make that connection unless they really thought about it, and even then, to call you out on it would be way idiotisanity.

Oh, okay, that's good.

It can go either way. If at any time the plot seems to be running thin and needs a jumpstart, look to see if the setting can offer any potential source of complications.

Say your intrepid heroes have just defeated on of the Big Bad's major minions, and now there doesn't seem a lot to do in the plot. But there's a goblin nation over thataways, just mentioned before but never explored. Maybe the king just got assassinated. What consequences does this have on the rest of the story?

Hmm, that's true.

I guess the main goal of this story I am trying to write (which is actually a comic, I hope that's okay to discuss here, hah) was to be similar to Homestuck (in terms of complexity, characters, and small details like the whole grand scale universe fixing idea) without being obviously related to Homestuck in anyway.

[Nameless1]

A little random but these are probably some of the best words of advice I've heard.

"If ever you get stuck, have someone burst into the room with a loaded gun"

[kholhaus]

I understand where you're coming from.

You want a story that's really complex to follow, yet utterly simple once you know what it's about?

[Ace of Dark-Hearts]

I understand where you're coming from.

You want a story that's really complex to follow, yet utterly simple once you know what it's about?

Yeah basically. Like, it involves a lot of dots that don't make sense at first, but once you connect them you see the whole picture.

Discussing this is actually helping me a lot.

[Nameless1]

This'll seem a bit odd as advice, but I would suggest writing the big revelation "everything falls into place/makes sense now" before anything else, then go back and write the rest of it based on this.

[Ace of Dark-Hearts]

This'll seem a bit odd as advice, but I would suggest writing the big revelation "everything falls into place/makes sense now" before anything else, then go back and write the rest of it based on this.

No, not really actually. I've seen this in a few writing tutorials. I just am not sure where to begin on an ending. (Sorry for the oxymoron, haha)

[Portalboat]

I have a question that I'm not entirely sure is in the right place here: How do you write annotations?

I'm only asking because apparently it's SUPER IMPORTANT for School and English (I honestly couldn't care less about it otherwise), and we've had some pretty big assignments based on annotations that have affected my grade. The trouble is, I don't think about what I'm reading, and make connections and that stuff. I just enjoy the book. Since my teacher says that she can't help me (which in my opinion is a sign that you're doing something wrong), what do you guys have to say about it?

[Quirk]

Annotations...well, if you're using it for research, and I don't know why you'd use them elsewhere, you simply write down a summary of what information the book provided and how you used it in the paper.

[Nameless1]

@nameless - you mentioned the quote about the two guys with guns bursting into a room whenever the plot needs help, before you edited your post.

What if it was always the same two guys, and then someone wrote a story about it from their perspective?

Wait, did I edit it out or something? Fuck!

Also, gah I suddenly have the urge to write that story!

[Ace of Dark-Hearts]

Annotations are a summary of someone's thoughts while they read. Try forcing yourself to stop every few sentences and just write a question, thought etc.

IMO, annotations are stupid and if they don't help you, than that means that they will only slow you down and interrupt the experience and thought process.

[Portalboat]

That's my opinion, Ace, but y'know, in school, the teachers' word is LAW.

Meaning that an assignment is an assignment and I can't do shit about it.

@Quirk: That's the thing. We're NOT doing it for research. We are doing annotations simply for sake of doing annotations, because apparently they are SUPER IMPORTANT.

[Namboto]

That's my opinion, Ace, but y'know, in school, the teachers' word is LAW.

Meaning that an assignment is an assignment and I can't do shit about it.

@Quirk: That's the thing. We're NOT doing it for research. We are doing annotations simply for sake of doing annotations, because apparently they are SUPER IMPORTANT.

I've almost never used annotations in my english classes, and I always end up doing fine. It does stink if you have to do it, but it's not too hard. Just write down some very obvious conclussions or rewordings and you're good.

[Portalboat]

See, I could do that, but my teacher says that they have to be 'level 3 and 4' depth of knowledge questions., So it CAN'T be obvious.

[Ace of Dark-Hearts]

See, I could do that, but my teacher says that they have to be 'level 3 and 4' depth of knowledge questions., So it CAN'T be obvious.

My #1 solution to English class:

Bullshit everything. Just talk fluffy talk and throw something vaguely insightful, and you're golden.

[Nameless1]

My #1 solution to English class:

Bullshit everything. Just talk fluffy talk and throw something vaguely insightful, and you're golden.

This should be the solution to ALL writing assignments, if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.

[midfieldAttorney]

This should be the solution to ALL writing assignments, if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.

Big words and esoteric metaphors FTW. If you make yourself sound artsy and deep they think you know what you're talking about, even if you don't know yourself.