This rather clever photo was taken by image munky

Well, the title of this post may tell you a slightly different opinion. 

I recently started reading Her Fearful Symmetry
by Audrey Niffenegger.  And what gets me most about this book is how easily it flows.  Flow is something that I’m obsessed with.  If you’re a “stutter” kind of writer like me (may work intensively on something for a few weeks, then fade out, or work on something else, and come back to it) then it can be difficult to maintain a flow.  I’ve been asking myself “If I can’t get into an easy flow in writing something, then how are people going to be able to get into an easy flow when reading it?”  It’s a good question.  Sometimes you can fake it.  I’ve done that by intensively working on smaller sections and fitting them together, smoothing over the seams, building a novel like you would build a wall.  At the end of it, hopefully, you have a nice, structured construct that is solid and sturdy. 

Lets leave the metaphors for now though, I’m not House.  I have read a lot of books that – no offence to the writers – feel like this.  Like I’m reading a wall.  Its not to say that they’re hard to read, or that they don’t flow, but more that they’re very solid pieces of work, and while it isn’t a slog to get through them, I can quite happily read a chapter, then put it down to pick it back up later. 

Going with the Flow

 
So onto …Symmetry.  I’ve been reading this and it is one of those rare books that flows so easily that I get swept up in it, like I’m floating down a river.  It flows so easily that I feel like I’m hardly reading at all, I’m being moved through the story using its own power.  I’m not saying all this in an effort to Kiss Niffenegger’s ass, but it almost feels like I’m being revitalised by this book. 

I’ll explain.  When I read I like to alternate fiction and non-fiction.  Obviously, the non-fiction I read tends to be a lot of hardcore science, or social theory, which is all information overload, and takes me a while to trek through it.  Once I’m done, I can be a bit exhausted from reading, so I turn to fiction, which I find much easier.  It’s a way of taking a break from the heavy stuff.  And sometimes I come across a book which, like …Symmetry flows so easily that it recharges my batteries, and it is also an inspiration.  It reignites my spark, and drives me into the mindset to write. 

The Downside

 
So why do I call it despair?  Well, quite simply because – more so these days than when I was at university – writing doesn’t come that easily to me.  I still have floods of ideas, but getting them down is harder for me.  And while I am well aware that no book is easy to get written, no matter how easily it flows, it can put me in a bit of a downer when I read something so… light. 

Because that’s not the kind of writer I am.  I don’t write stuff that sweeps you up in the flow.  I tend to write things that are elaborate, with multiple storylines going on, and leaping back and fourth chronologically.  I write stuff that’s heavy (not necessarily in terms of subject matter, but in terms of flow) it’s similar to the difference between hard water and soft water.  Swimming in soft water is much easier than swimming in hard water.  And I feel like reading (and also writing) is the same. 

So this is where the despair came in.  Because I know I don’t – and probably never could – write something that flows as easily as …Symmetry.  And I’ll admit, I’m a little envious.  It isn’t however, making me not want to write.  As I mentioned earlier, it has sparked that fire of passion within me again (however briefly) and while I despair that I don’t write with that easy flow, I do write, and I like to think I’m good at it – with what I do anyway – and that is what has inspired me. 

I’ll cut it here, before I drown under any more metaphor…

That’s right, because I’ve been going through my old files again.  Mainly this was to make me feel like I was actually doing something writerly, to get myself some motivation.  And I found another of my old projects.  And started reading through it. 

I know that last time I advised against this, but there was something about this project that just seemed… well, like its time had come.  There are I think, several factors involved with this project that didn’t make me want to delete it/never write again/throw myself off a building.

Image courtesy of Sparticus at Flickr

Collaboration

 
This is I think the first factor.  This project was originally a kind of collaboration.  Collaborating on a piece does have its pros and cons, Matt has also covered this previously.  While different writing styles can clash and ideas can lead to places that you might not want to go, it does give you some kind of motivation to get that next section done. 

This project I discovered was something like that.  At the time, it was something I was writing with, or rather on behalf of, a friend of mine, who isn’t a writer.  He had some ideas for a film, and I had some similar ideas and somehow we fleshed them out and I got them down on paper.  I do run my ideas by him occasionally, since he epitomizes the general demographic of moviegoers. 

So I guess part of it was at the time, I didn’t really take the project too seriously.  It was something fun that I didn’t have to worry too much about, just something to keep the motor running. 

Finding Its Time and Place

 
Sometimes you write something and it’s ahead of its time.  My last “new” project was like this.  I had the character mapped out but didn’t have the story for him, so I put him back in the ideas bank to gestate.  And sometimes ideas can be like this.  That’s why you should keep all your notes and older projects.  Granted, a lot of them will end up in the trash, as I said in my last post on this subject, as they may never find their time.  But sometimes a project will just click into place, it’s right for the mindset that you have at that time. 

And that’s what happened here.  I’d been to see The Last Airbender, and yes, it was truly appalling.  From a production standpoint.  The script was dire, truly amateurish, and there was no pacing, no momentum and it was very weakly structured.  It had just so happened that this was the same weekend when I’d been looking at this file and it prompted me to try and rework it. 

Slice and Dice

Yup.  The thing about old ideas is that there is a lot of stuff in there that will not be suitable.  Rather than try and work it in, just cut it.  I had two major plot lines and they were far too big for one story (yeah, because that never happens with my writing!)  And far from being reluctant to cut the crap, I actually felt liberated.  I didn’t have to have all this extra stuff in there.  This whole subplot about these other characters wasn’t needed.  So off it went.  This can be very useful, because developing this skill, this ability, to painlessly cut stuff that weighs a project down is essential. 

Keep a hold of that stuff though, put it in the ideas bank, because who knows, a few years down the line, it might fit in somewhere else. 

In Conclusion

 
I’m not saying this project is going to go anywhere.  I cant really decide on a format for it, but I’m sketching out the whole story outline, which is something I’ve never really done before (it’s the essential opposite of winging it, like I normally do), which I guess is another valuable skill to learn.  Winging it can be more exciting, not knowing exactly where a project is going, but unless you’re very good at it (I like to think that I am) then you can save yourself a lot of time by mapping out the story.  It’s fun, because this is the first project that I’ve written that I actually know definitively where it ends, and what happens there, and even how I get there. 

Just going to have to run it by my demographic to see how he likes it…

Welcome to part three of my interactive fiction series. So far, we’ve described interactive fiction and it’s history; looked at how you can get into reading it, and how you can get into writing it. There may be some of you still wondering what the big deal is, and that’s fine. You don’t have to like it. But I’d like to have one last go at persuading you. To that end, here are four reasons to try your hand at writing IF.

1. Interaction

Clue’s in the title, folks. This aspect might appeal to you as a reader, and so, why wouldn’t you want to emulate it.

But above and beyond that, it requires a different way of thinking about a story, and a different way of writing. The sheer experience of creating something so different might get you interested; you may carry something back from this experience into your other writing; or you might just consider it another string to your bow.

Certainly, anyone considering writing for video games would do well to have interactive fiction on their cv. It will demonstrate that you understand some of the demands that non-linear, interactive writing has.

2. A unique perspective

Image courtesy of Dar Sevier on Flickr

So what, you might think. Well, I’m not an experienced IF writer, but there are some obvious advantages to this perspective.

The one that is perhaps most obvious is humour. Anyone who has played a text adventure will be familiar with the snarky comments you get back when you do something stupid. As an author of IF you get to make lighthearted fun of the reader (if they try to take a tree, for example).

You can also put your reader completely in the dark. This is not a bad technique for story telling anyway, but here it really comes into its own, as the reader fumbles around, trying to figure out the situation.

Take Emily Short’s Glass for example. When the story starts, you have no idea what your role in the narrative is or what you are capable of. As you try different things it appears that you’re not capable of much at all, and the conversation you’re witnessing seems to carry on without you anyway. Persevere though, and your function becomes clear, and then you can really start experimenting. It’s very satisfying.

One other opportunity, that is perhaps the most difficult to pull off, is to say something about the reader themselves. By giving the reader choices, and using the second person to point the finger, there is potential to hold up something of an interactive mirror to the reader.

3. A unique challenge

We know writing is difficult, but we do it anyway. Maybe we’re masochists, maybe we just relish a challenge. So picture a story with multiple paths through it, maybe multiple endings; conversations that could cover many topics; items that could be put to any use; rooms where everything should be described in detail. These are all very real possibilities in IF, and if you’re chomping at the bit to get writing at the thought of it, maybe you do like a challenge! Just remember, you have been warned!

4. Tiny, bite-sized chunks

Having said that, in some ways IF is suited to those who don’t have a lot of time to squeeze some writing in. Beyond the copious planning and some complicated logic (if required), interactive fiction is made up of tiny little bits. If you’re pressed for time, you can write a couple of item or room descriptions in ten minutes, and still feel like you’ve made some progress.

And there you have it. As always with these lists, there are bound to be more reasons, so hit the comments! I’d be especially interested to hear from experienced IF authors on why they enjoy writing interactive fiction.

Twine (Mac, Windows, Linux)

I’m writing about Twine first because it is the simplest, and therefore the easiest to use. Twine writers produce stories using a graphical interface. Each piece of text is represented within a box, and lines link each box, showing the routes the player might take through the story. The work is compiled in HTML format, and will work on any browser that supports javascript (and has it turned on. That’s practically everyone, by the way).

Twine is very easy to get to grips with.The graphical interface makes it immediately obvious what is going on. Editing is done by double-clicking a box and typing in the resulting form. Creating a new box is as simple as double-clicking in an empty space. Links within the text are defined by surrounding the word(s) in double square brackets [[like this]], and choices outside of the main text are the same, only with a * character in front. And that is seriously all you need to get going.

In addition, problems are automatically flagged by the system, and an exclamation point placed in the relevant box.Because the system is so simple, the only problem can be that you are trying to link to a box that does not exist.

Twine uses a graphical interface to show its simple text and links concept.

For more information, there is a video tutorial series that explains everything you need to know and will definitely help you decide if this is the authoring tool for you.

If you want to “go deep” with Twine, you can add your own HTML and stylesheets. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, then you probably want to leave those features alone (you are basically editing web pages at that stage), but that’s fine, as they’re not necessary to write a story. Aside from this, the major problem with Twine is that it will be too simple for most purposes. Everything is generated in simple HTML, and there is no underlying structure – everything is text and links. What I mean by that is the system has no concept of what a door is, or what it can do; nor a room, object, or player-character for that matter.

Because of this a reader cannot pick up an object and use it elsewhere, for example, and even the simplest puzzle that affects the environment becomes difficult. These things can be “fudged”, but you will have to be strict about the specific route a reader takes through the story. This is more of a Choose Your Own Adventure style story than a text adventure.

Inform 7 (Mac, Windows, Linux)

Inform takes a more writerly approach. In the same way that Interactive Fiction uses a verb-based system to make it easy to play/read, Inform has tried to make its source code like writing English. The theory is that you simply describe what the player sees. The interface is split into two panes, each of which can show a variety of helpful tools and resources. The work that’s produced can be played on any interpreter.

Inform’s coding style is an intriguing concept. Rather than write code as such, you can get a lot done by writing a paragraph. Inform will then interpret what you have written and sort the various objects into types, which automagically have certain properties and available actions associated with them. Take this example from the documentation:

East of the Garden is the Gazebo. Above is the Treehouse. A billiards table is in the Gazebo. On it is a trophy cup. A starting pistol is in the cup.

There are three rooms there, and three objects, each of a different type. The language is very powerful, allowing for all sorts of interaction. And it’s extensible, so if there is something you need, you might be able to find an extension that includes it. You can always write your own of course, but we’re getting a bit hardcore there.

There is a caveat. Just like interactive fiction promises the world with its blinking cursor, writing source code with Inform is not as freeform as it first appears. Although there are many different ways to write the same thing, it is still source code, and beginners will run into problems because they haven’t written things in the “right” order, or they have left out some punctuation that didn’t seem strictly necessary. But once it’s written, the source code is incredibly easy to understand, meaning it’s easy to learn from the work of others.

Inform has a powerful and surprisingly complete suite of tools

Added to that, the documentation is excellent; full of examples, sensibly organised, and viewable alongside your source code, thanks to the two panes of the interface. It is also extremely well-written, managing to be both concise, thorough and informative. It is not often I enjoy reading a manual!

Other tools include a Skein (basically a visual representation of a reader’s journey through the story) a full transcript of any given playthrough, and an automatically generated map of your world. All powerful stuff, if a little intimidating to the beginner.

I have to come off the fence and say that overall Inform 7 is my favourite of the three. For a piece of free software (or any software), it’s impressively complete, and takes a professional look at useability that is missing from the others. The Mac version especially, is a joy to use.

TADS (Mac, Windows, Linux)

N.B. Mac and Linux versions are either old, or more difficult to run. See the download page for more info.

TADS stands for Text Adventure Development System, and is as techy as that sounds. This is a tool for programmers. It is written in a text editor (TADS Workbench is a specially designed text editor for this purpose), and each room, object, interaction, description is defined in a strict syntax. If you are used to code as simple as HTML upwards though, this should not pose a problem. The TADS 3 format that’s produced can be played on any interpreter.

Here is an example of the code (with comments removed), just for the sake of comparison:

entryway: Room ‘Entryway’
“This large, formal entryway is slightly intimidating:
the walls are lined with somber portraits of gray-haired
men from decades past; a medieval suit of armor<<describeAxe>>
towers over a single straight-backed wooden chair. The
front door leads back outside to the south. A hallway leads
north. ”

describeAxe
{
if (axe.isIn(suitOfArmor))
“, posed with a battle axe at the ready,”;
}

north = hallway

south = frontDoor

out = frontDoor
;

+ frontDoor: Door ‘front door’ ‘front door’
“It’s a heavy wooden door, currently closed. ”

initiallyOpen = nil

dobjFor(Open)
{
action() { “You’d rather stay in the house for now. “; }
}
;

If you can vaguely understand what’s going on here, you should be fine. If the sight of it sends you into waves of panic, TADS is probably not for you.

The manual is large, but I found it tended to waffle a bit. As the code is fairly easy to read, I recommend starting a new project on the “easiest” setting and opening the .t file within. This contains a basic structure for your story that you can edit. Most importantly though, it is very heavily commented, and explains each of the lines in the example above, and much more. It’s a great basis from which to start and is very instructive.

You are not restricted to one file of code. In fact you can have as many as you want, allowing you to organise your project how you like. The manual recommends splitting your project up one file per room, for example.

There are various debugging tools available that will be familiar to programmers. Break points will stop running the code at a specific point so that you can check on the status of watched variables. For simple stories, this won’t be necessary, but when it comes to testing complicated logic, they can be invaluable.

Overall, TADS is an inoffensive system for programmers, and you may well find that this suits your way of thinking more than the others.

In Conclusion

And that’s basically the way to choose – pick a system that suits the way you think and start writing with it; see how it feels. The exception is Twine because it is so restrictive that even if you like the graphical interface, it may not produce the stories you want to create. Still, if you are unsure at all if you want to write IF, Twine is an easy testing bed for the form.

As always, I’d like to hear your thoughts on the systems described above. And if I’ve missed one that you like using, please let me know. The comments section is below.

Still not interested? Next week I’ll be writing about some of the unique opportunities that Interactive Fiction has to offer writers, so stay tuned!

This blog post also coincides, kinda sorta, with the release of GET LAMP, a brand new documentary about text adventures. The release date was 2nd August. You can order GET LAMP here.

What’s this interactive fiction lark anyway?

Direction in IF is often referenced with compass points. Image courtesy of ocean.flynn

Interactive Fiction is played on a computer. Instead of simply reading the text, “players” are given brief descriptions of their surroundings and what items are available to them. They then control the action by deciding where to go, what to look at, what to pick up, and what to do with those items. This is done by typing in commands, such as “examine door”, “move rug”, “get lamp”. There is normally some puzzle solving involved, and IF has gained something of a reputation for being difficult (although, I should stress that given the variety of games/stories now available, this needn’t be the case at all – there are plenty of stories that don’t require puzzle solving at all if you want them).

The result is a form that will suck you right in one minute, and chuck you right back out again the next. The immersion comes from the written word. By utilising the reader’s imagination in the same way that a regular piece of fiction would, it is very easy for a player to become involved. Because of its roots as a gaming form, much comparison is made between the blockbuster gaming titles of today and interactive fiction. Today though, the difference between the forms is so great that there is little to be gained from such comparisons. Try comparing darts with football for similar results.

The other side of this coin is that IF will frequently shatter your suspension of disbelief at a few key strokes. Although the blinking cursor gives you the impression that you can type anything, the reality is that these games can only take a limited number of commands. Type anything else and you’ll be presented with, “I don’t understand that” or similar. Jarring. This false promise is something IF has not yet been able to solve, but it’s not a huge problem. Think of it as the price to entry. Besides, typing something obscure can occasionally surprise you with an amusing line or a useful piece of interaction.

A bit of history

A screen grab of Zork I running on Zoom

Interactive fiction started out in the gaming arena. The first “text adventure game” was Colossal Cave Adventure, or simply Adventure in 1976. It’s a simple treasure hunt in a network of caves, and formed the basis from which others would create their text adventures. Infocom are the company most well known for producing these games, most famous among them being the Zork trilogy. Other notable examples include Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy and The Hobbit, both based on novels, of course.

Sadly, as graphical technology began producing more whizz-bang results, the popularity of the form waned and soon became unviable for business. After all, it’s far easier to sell the latest graphics on your television ad or the back of the box than it is to sell text. That hasn’t stopped people producing their own interactive fiction for free though, and there is now an ever-increasing number of IF authors and readers finding a home on the internet. The Interactive Fiction Database has over 3600 games available to download, including all the classics mentioned above.

With such a community, it is not surprising that the variety of the work has also increased. it’s not just about hunting in caves for treasure any more. Take a look at the short list of stories below for a clue as to what’s out there. Many of these stories are prize winners. In the interests of full disclosure, many of them are mentioned in this excellent video introduction to interactive fiction, which I suggest you check out (only ten minutes of your time).

• Bad Machine. You are a robot. You are broken.
• Glass. By Emily Short (a great contributor to IF). Takes place around a single, and familiar conversation, from a unique perspective.
• Lost Pig. You are an ork, chasing a pig on your farm. Hilarity ensues!
• Violet. You’re tasked with avoiding distraction and doing your dissertation.

So, how can I play these games?

I’m glad you asked! Games can either be played on applications that you download and install on your computer, or they can be played in a web browser. Look for the “play online” button on game pages at the IFDB.
As far as applications go, try the following:

• Zoom, for Macs
• Gargoyle, or Frotz for Windows computers
• Zoom is also available for Linux
• Frotz for iPhone! Also available on the app store for free.

And as a special treat for Linux and Mac users, did you know that you might have a text adventure on your computer already? Open the command prompt (Terminal program on Macs) and type the following:

emacs -batch -l dunnet

This gives you a text adventure game called dunnet, written in Emacs. Cool, huh?

So that should be enough for you to get going if you’ve not come across the modern IF scene before. I know that there is quite a hardcore following out there, so if there is anything I should have included, or any false information, please let me know in the comments or on Twitter.

Next week, I’ll be showing you tools you can use to write your own interactive fiction (this is a writing site after all)!

Update

I have just finished playing Lost Pig on my iPod Touch. It’s a great story and kept me thoroughly entertained (although I missed out on one lousy point! Grr!) But the point is that I played it using Frotz for iphone (mentioned above). It’s true that paying IF on your iPhone or iPod Touch is a little fiddly. I often typed things wrongly. But there are features that mitigate this problem somewhat – you can double tap on a word in the text to put it on the command line, and you can double tap on the command line to bring up your command history. There is also autocomplete on commands, though not on object names (presumably because it could unintentionally provide clues).

Overall, a great app that I heartily recommend!

By the way, they are in no particular order other than the order I came across them as I was going through some tweets today. Because I’m lazy very busy.

• Roy Jacobsen
• Dan Wickett
• Alan Baxter
• Joanna Penn
• Iain Broome
• Dana Lynn Smith (bookmarketer)
• Arjun Basu (Twitter-length stories)
• Tales to Bewilder, by Ben Burbank (more Twitter storytelling)
• Publishing Talk
• Sean Platt

If you think you should be on the list, post a comment here with a link to your Twitter page.

Getmewriting on Twitter

Of course you could always follow me to see the latest Getmewriting updates and links to anything I find to do with writing.

I aim to be more active on Twitter in the future and to that end there will be a dedicated Getmewriting Twitter account soon. This will be writing stuff only, so those of you who don’t want to hear about videogames, science and astronomy, skepticism or how great The Dark Knight is (that’s really, really great) can follow that account instead of mine. I’ll let you know through the blog and through Twitter when that is up and running, so check often!

The site itself is well overdue for a social networking makeover, so expect to see easy to use buttons for the major social networks as well as Facebook likes and a Twitter stream that promises to be very useful to all the budding writers out there.

Again, keep your eyes on Twitter and the site for news of these updates.

This cool writerly image provided by geishaboy500. To see the original, follow the link.

I got thinking about this due to a conversation I had at the weekend.  Despite the fact that I write (occasionally) and I have several projects all but completed (damn you endless editing process!) I still don’t feel like a writer.

Yes, ok, this may have something to do with the “not being published” thing, but that aside…  There is part of me, I guess, that still feels like writing is a part time thing, like a hobby, rather than a vocation.  I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with writing in your spare time, just because you enjoy it, and not really writing to get something published, but I’ve always felt a little more serious about my writing.  My first major idea, that I developed when I was about 12 is still on my flash drive, and I do still look over it every now and again.  When I’m in the right headspace for it.  Everything else though has taken a back seat for this serialized project I’ve been working on, and which has frankly, worn me out.

The Stigma

I have no idea why, but I still feel like there’s some kind of stigma attached to being a writer.  Almost as if it’s something to be ashamed of.  Just like every other aspect of creative profession.  I have in the past felt myself cringe when I’ve told people “Oh, I’m acting in this thing” or “I’m writing a book” and the like.  I’ve never had a problem with telling people “Oh, I’m a technician with a touring theatre company” because that’s working with equipment, it’s less namby pamby I guess, coming from one of those grim northern towns where people still remember coal mining and ship building and proper “man jobs” like that.

So why should I feel ashamed of being a writer?  Just look at who the writing world has given us.  Hemmingway, Wilde, Shakespeare, Clancy.  Granted, it’s also given us Dan Brown and the frigging Twilight Saga, which in turn has ruined poor Robert Pattinson’s life, but that’s another issue entirely.

A Full Time Thing

Maybe I don’t feel like a writer because I don’t treat it as a full time thing.  I’ve never made money from it, so I still can’t take myself seriously as a writer.  Or maybe it’s because of what I write about.  This is why I never tell people why I’m a writer.  Because it’s one of the main questions you’re asked.

“What do you write about?”

Sure, the pretentious answer is “love, loss, revenge, betrayal, all kinds of aspects of the human condition.” But I guess that’s because I don’t want to tell people I write stuff with giant space lizards and laser guns.  Because as soon as you mention the words “science” and “fiction” together, most people switch off and lose interest, because they think you’re writing star wars slash fiction.

An Underappreciated Genre

DavidTurnbull uses this image as his desktop to remind him that he IS a writer. Grab the original by following the link.

But is it so bad?  If you forget about Star Wars for a moment (which purists will tell you is science fantasy anyway), lets look at the genre.  Science Fiction has given us Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?, I Am Legend, Brave New World and we cannot leave out Neuromancer.  This is what I always go to because ‘The Novel’ is cyberpunkish.  I dislike the fact that just because a book is set in the future, it is automatically classed as science fiction.  There is a wonderful book by Max Barry called Jennifer Government which yes, is set in the future, but isn’t sci-fi.  It’s satire.  And disturbingly prescient.  A lot like 1984.  It’s the kind of book you read alongside No Logo and makes you realise just how, well, that’s me getting on my soapbox.

I don’t want to feel this stigma.  Just because my serialized project is about time travel (which in this country will make 80% of people you say that to instantly think “Oh, like Doctor Who” and instantly stop taking it seriously) doesn’t mean its geeky sci-fi.  Ok, so my reading material is string theory and chaos theory, but ultimately, it’s a human story.  Which all the best science fiction is.  The titles I mentioned before, Do Androids…, I Am Legend, Brave new World, they are all, at their hearts, about the nature of humanity.

Do you get that from Dan Brown?  No. Twilight?  Please, don’t make me laugh.

Anyway, what was my point?  Am I the only writer out there who feels some degree of shame as labeling himself as such?

It seems not.

Well, in the style of all epilogues, I am going to revisit elements of my previous posts.  Primarily, editing.  Yeah, like I haven’t done that before. 

Sometimes you just have to throw things out. Image courtesy of dolmansaxlil.

I only mention it because I have been in the process of receiving editorial notes.  This in the midst of my rather long “rest” from the whole writing thing since finishing the initial draft of the series.  And while I have been “resting”, and have gotten entirely out of the necessary headspace needed to work on this project, I get notes that equate to “there isn’t enough drama.  Change it.”

OK, so it wasn’t quite that bad, but in the midst of making changes based on these notes, this is what it turned into.  Namely around episodes four and five.  Now, all the way back when I was working on these episodes, regular readers may remember that these were the ones I had issues with the first time round, because I found them inert.  Granted, at the time, I found the source of the drama, but it turns out it wasn’t enough.  So I had to figure out some other way of raising the stakes.  Only doing it in such a way that wouldn’t mean a re-write of the entire series.

Laziness begets Creativity

That’s right, I said it.  I’m not sure how many writers out there feel the same as I do about this matter, but once I’ve got an idea set in my head about the direction a piece of writing is going, I find it very difficult to get myself off that track.  I have many projects that I have written that I’ve mangled in editing just to keep the same incidents on track because I’m so used to thinking of the narrative in that way.  And in a sense, that’s what I had here.  I had the specific incidents set out, and I couldn’t honestly see how I could rewrite it without messing everything else up.  I needed inspiration!

Unfortunately, there was none to be found.  The idea I had for the episode was so thin as it was that I had literally no other material.  I know as a writer this is bad.  Sometimes (especially if you write longer fiction) there are some sections that just don’t speak to you.  They need to happen, but beyond that there is nothing else.  I guess it ties into having everything mapped out, with character back-stories and so fourth, as Matt mentioned a few posts back.

So how do I excite this thing up without throwing it all out?  Sometimes, sadly, that is the case.  You have to throw it out and start from scratch.  I however was opposed to doing that here.  Maybe because I’m lazy, maybe because I had nothing else here, and maybe because I was going blank.  But as I was re-reading, in the vain hope of something leaping out at me, I discovered it.

The Ace in the Hole

Yeah, I have no idea where this term sprung from either.  It makes no sense, but I found mine.  I don’t know, deep down, maybe we all have this, for just such an emergency.  These episodes were about one character, and I’ll be honest, there wasn’t really enough material to support the character for two episodes.  There was however, another character.

On my initial run, writing it first time around, I didn’t pay it much mind.  But it fell into the category of back story for characters, and what happens off screen so to speak.  Obviously, you can’t follow all of the characters all of the time, you jump from scene to scene, but I’ll bet that there are some characters who you’ll map out plot threads for when they’re not the focus of attention.

I used to do this all the time.  I was obsessed with it.  How did this character get here?  What were they doing in the meantime?  If you generate the material (enough rough thumbnails of what they’ve been doing) for characters, then it can give them added weight.  It can give them momentum that drives the story on when it starts flagging.  Obviously it can get boring if you stick with one character all the time, no matter what they’re doing, and sometimes you just need that break.

Let them rest, for Heaven’s Sake!

So that’s what I did here.  There were a lot of things going on ‘off camera’ during these episodes, and I’ll be honest, it was all a lot more interesting than what was going on with the main character (he has a long talk, then he gets laid).  So I just gave him a rest from the attention, moved the camera over here and hey!  I found what was missing.  Of course, it required me to generate new material off the cuff (which I found surprisingly difficult) but that’s another story.

So in summation?  I guess my point is that, for those of you who write longer fiction (especially first person or third person subjective) and you find yourself flagging at some point, then change the focus.  It can be as simple as moving over to a different character for a scene, or a chapter, but it can open up new possibilities which may surprise even yourself.

Pomodoro technique (Mac, Win)

This is here because there are a couple if applications available to help you with the technique. Here is a quick rundown of what Pomodoro is:

• It is a well recognised fact that us humans have difficulty concentrating on anything for more than 20-30 minutes. We suck at focussing. This technique aims to help with this.
• It advocates you work in 25 minute chunks, each followed by a 5 minute break.
• These 25 minutes must be disciplined, focused work, and the breaks genuine breaks.

The pomodoro website explains more (though really, what needs explaining?), and there is a downloadable PDF, too. And here is a Pomodoro app for Macs, which has more features than is strictly necessary, and is definitely worth a look.

Focus booster is usually mentioned alongside the Pomodoro app. It allows you to set 25 minute intervals andshows a bar that counts down. Personally though, I don’t like clock watching and think it rather spoils the point if having an application to do it for you. But, it’s built on Adobe Air, so can be used on Windows or Mac.

Spirited away (Mac)

I have recently started using this app at work, where I can have upwards of five programs open at once. If an open app is not used for a set interval it gets automatically hidden, removing clutter without you having to think about it. You can exclude programs from being hidden with an easy icon in your top bar. Simple and very effective.

MinimOther (Win)

The Windows equivalent of Spirited Away, MinimOther minimises every window save for the one that currently has focus. It does this immediately rather than on a timed basis, so as soon as one window is selected, the others are gone! I recommend using the tab key to move to any other windows you might need rather than fiddling with your mouse (ooh-er).

Think (Mac)

Think is well known in the Mac productivity community, and has a similar agenda to Spirited Away and MinimOther in that it aims to let you focus on only the applications you need and hide the others. Think’s approach is to darken the rest of the screen, leaving only one app highlighted. There are lots of options and you can bring other apps to the fore temporarily if you need to.

Ghoster (Win)

Does the same, but for windows. It blacks out everything else, including the taskbar, which on Windiws 7 is all shiny and flashy and animated and distracting!

Writeroom (Mac)

When all you want to do is write, having a load of other programs hanging around can be distracting. Even the operating systems menus and widgets and doodas can be distracting. Even the buttons and menus if the word processor are unnecessary clutter!

Writeroom gets rid of all of that by just displaying the text. All else fades neatly away until you move to another program or quit the application. The only feature is a very useful word count, which only appears when you mouse over the bottom of the screen. Writeroom doesn’t sound like it should be as useful as it is, but once you start using it, it soon feels necessary, then essential.

You might argue that for such a simple tool it’s rather expensive, and I would not disagree. Still, for thosepeople who were not lucky enough to get Writeroom for free in a MacHeist bundle, there is another alternative called JDarkroom, which is set up as a free version of Darkroom (below), and is Java-based, making it cross-platform.

Darkroom (Win)

Does pretty much the same as Writeroom, but for Windows. I’m sure the green writing is only there to appeal to geeks and retrophiles, but it can be changed to black and white.

Freemind (Java-based)

I’ve blogged about this before, so follow this link for more on how you can use this excellent free mindmapping software. In some ways this is an anti-focus tool, as it allows your mind to wander freely over the “page”, but that’s just what you need when what you’re focussing on is generating ideas!

And there you have it. I’m sure there are many more tools out there, so I’d love to know what tools you’ve found that help you focus on your writing.

Automatic Writing

I must confess, I don’t always (read rarely), stick to my writing routine, but when I do I feel energised, and ready to write! Once I have had a good run of writing days, the next time I sit down to write is so much easier. At the best moments, it is near to automatic. Apparently, a similar effect may be possible through object-based habits.

Jack Cheng recently wrote an article about activity/object association. In it he describes a phenomenon that he calls “habit fields”. These fields are created by constantly reinforced association between an object, and an activity. You can shape the nature of the field, and in return, it can affect your actions.

Memorable Benefits

Neuron image courtesy of Patrick Hoesly

Now, when people start invoking energy fields and the like, a concept starts sounding a little “woo”. But don’t worry, it’s just a metaphor! What he’s actually talking about is the way memories are constructed. Specifically, there are two features of memory creation that are particularly important here: repetition and association.

It’s obvious to anyone who’s learnt a script that repetition is a vital tool to lock down a memory. Behaviour can also be learned through repetition. Video games are especially good at teaching actions, for example. Combo attacks in games require a complicated series of button presses that bewilder at first. But, through repetition, a player soon learns to react to different situations with a variety of combination moves, without thinking about it at all. This is an example of “muscle memory”. Now extend this to less specific behaviours – to a state of mind; relaxed behaviour, productive behaviour, writing behaviour; all can be learned.

Association is even more fundamental. Memories are essentially a series of associations. These can also be learned, of course. You have probably had the experience of a particular smell reminding you of a person or place, even if you have not seen that person or been to that place in years.

Making the connection

Cheng’s idea is that “habit fields” (states of mind or behaviour) can be built around objects through repetition. Stay consistent with the objects you use for certain tasks and the association takes care of itself. Just like the gamer whose fingers perform instinctive button ballets when he sits in front of his console, you can slip into focussed productivity when you settle down in your designated work place to use your designated work tools.

In practice, this process is going on all the time, for better or worse, so you are using it anyway. Being aware of it will help you avoid the obvious pitfalls, and develop good habits. Don’t check Twitter on your writing laptop, or it will gradually become your Twitter laptop!

Think about it for a bit, and you’ll probably see areas in your own life where this already applies. For example, I used to try writing at weekends at my big desktop computer. I was often distracted, and found myself much more comfortable at the dining room table, using the laptop I also use for work.

Given a quick think, this is not surprising. I bought that desktop primarily for gaming, and that’s what I had been using it for previously. The laptop on the other hand is what I use all day for work, and because it’s convenient, I use it to write on the train. The habit field of my laptop then, us one of productive work, including writing. Well, mostly.

Jack of all Trades…

It’s a problem, as Cheng points out, that becomes more pervasive the more capable our tools become. These days every electronic device is a Swiss army knife of possibilities, and the problem becomes one of narrowing those down or restricting those options in order to focus.

Having a dedicated area to write, and restricting your writing to to just that purpose, could take you a long way. Read Cheng’s full article for some other ideas on how to do that, and pop back to getmewriting.com next week, when I’ll have a list of tools to help you focus on your writing. In the mean time, I’d like to know if you have noticed habit fields around the the objects you use.