Come and introduce yourself in the Welcome Forum – we’re all dying to meet you! :)
Litopia
We’re delighted you’re here! You’re just a few clicks away from joining the ‘net’s oldest community for writers… and certainly the friendliest. Click the “Register” button to create a free account. See you in the Colony!
-
Clichés & Tropes! Can’t live with ‘em, can’t live without ‘em! Share your opinion in the latest Craft Chat, live now until Saturday
The first sentence....
- Thread starter Paul Whybrow
- Start date
@Steve C
It's important because if the end isn't reflected by the beginning, the story may not be meeting the expectations of the reader. If the story starts with a concept of 'life, the universe and everything', but ends with 'jazz is a devil in blue jeans', the mark is missed. It's because the reader understands that the end comes from the beginning and will reflect the sense of the story question. Of course, the right writer could make a case for just that scenario if the middle is a build from one point to the next like a word game until it makes complete sense -- but would a reader like or understand it?
Because stories are [generally] written for readers, it's incumbent on the writer to know what they expect and to meet most of those expectations in a new and compelling way without losing them along the way.
I expect a story to have a beginning, and a middle, and an end. There are so many stories by so many authors where one of these pieces is missing. I probably won't read their work again because they lost my respect by not meeting my expectations.
It's important because if the end isn't reflected by the beginning, the story may not be meeting the expectations of the reader. If the story starts with a concept of 'life, the universe and everything', but ends with 'jazz is a devil in blue jeans', the mark is missed. It's because the reader understands that the end comes from the beginning and will reflect the sense of the story question. Of course, the right writer could make a case for just that scenario if the middle is a build from one point to the next like a word game until it makes complete sense -- but would a reader like or understand it?
Because stories are [generally] written for readers, it's incumbent on the writer to know what they expect and to meet most of those expectations in a new and compelling way without losing them along the way.
I expect a story to have a beginning, and a middle, and an end. There are so many stories by so many authors where one of these pieces is missing. I probably won't read their work again because they lost my respect by not meeting my expectations.
I get that but the quote is silly. Pantsers have no idea where their story might take them so writing the end before the beginning is not an option.
- Awards
- 1
True, everyone's writing style is different, and it's wrong to try to impose your opinions on another writer. It could cripple a burgeoning writer. I bet Stephen King never wrote that way...
I don't think it matters whether pantser or not. Once the first draft is finished, the story question posed at the opening is disclosing the point where the story ends, because the question has been answered.
I don't remember where it came from, but this says the same thing, but different:
A story is a metaphor, and raises a question that takes the whole story to answer.
So, when you get to the end, it means you can tighten the beginning to be aligned to the question to ensure the reader knows the story has both ended by finding the answer to the question, and met their expectations of what the ending should feel like.
Sounds like a good way to write nothing at all or confine the story to a single sentence 
I think if she can get this far, she knows what she's talking about.
www.france24.com
US author Joyce Carol Oates wins France's richest book prize
US writer Joyce Carol Oates, so often a bridesmaid for the Nobel literature prize, won France's richest books prize Monday.
www.france24.com
Of course, you are right. Clever people often want to say things in clever ways, (it reinforces their cleverness) then wonder why they have been misunderstood.
What's a pantser?
A plotter plans out their story (even if it changes on the run) and a pantser flies by the seat of the pants without a plan (even if they have to stop to do research or 'think about things for a while').
There are many writers who say they're pantsers (Mr King, for this example, is one of them), but when you know his history and education, you find that he's learned all the stuff about planning (things like structure, language, etc., studied poetry and literature) and probably learned it was easier to do it in his head. Once you know something well enough is the time to let go of the lessons and make a unique signature, perhaps?
Planning is more about finding the high and low points and progression markers to get to a satisfying end. If pantsers fly ahead until they get to the end and then have to go back to fill in all the points where a higher or lower point is needed and fix the beginning to determine what the question needs to be to ensure the reader understands how the end answers that question, it is only backward planning.
In the end, it's all about reader expectations, not how a writer gets a story on paper, and whether planner, pantser, or plantser is irrelevant at that point. In my opinion, anyway.
Ah, ok. Well, I'm a pseudo-pantser, then. My notes mostly consist of things that I have to write down for the sake of continuity. Spelling someone's name right, for example. I like the quote from Neil Gaiman , "The second draft is where you make it look like you knew what you were doing all along."
Maybe, however, my first draft IS the planning session. Maybe it's a matter of perspective.
Maybe, however, my first draft IS the planning session. Maybe it's a matter of perspective.