SckizoBoy said:
... historical fiction (oh what a surprise, given the above) isn't that well served IMO, because there is quite a fine line between blind distortion, merely maintaining the chronology and strict adherence to recognised events/motivations/participants which a lot of people find dull/dry (I don't agree, since there's a certain challenge to be had in writing a story that is both completely true and dramatic). Anyway, it is a line that is not well walked by the vast majority of authors. At least from what I've read (though to be fair, they were on subjects very close to my intellectual heart, so I'm inclined to be critical).
The true challenge with writing along these lines is keeping things in the right context moreso than in the right timeline or accurate to the events. To me, narratives are powered by protagonists and their personalities. History often has a lot contextual tidbits and precise events that apply themselves rather ably to the events. Concurrent events and historical plans of interest had a lot of moving parts, orchestrated often across huge interconnected times.
To me, I feel like historical retellings, or historical fiction, is better left to the people who take an active interest in it. My first love will always be the assemblage of words, so trying to take someone else's pride and joy and do it justice seems like it would overtax me a fair amount. Possible, but probably not something I'd do regularly. I'll keep the idea in mind, though. I love the premise, and if I find a subject I can immerse myself in, I suspect there could be a lot of good coming from it. Even taking fictional history, like the fictional Empty Fort Strategy employed by Zhuge Liang [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy#Zhuge_Liang], would make for an interesting tale if written well.
It's unlikely I'll have an immediate use for this idea, but I like it, and if I can find a worthy subject, I'll be certain to try to include it. The idea is pretty excellent.
SoManyCrimes said:
Whatever kind of serial you choose, my main advice would be to make sure you give proper consideration to how your chapters end. There should be a strong incentive to keep reading after each one, but too many overt cliffhangers can become tiresome.
That's one of my concerns for doing a serial. I fully intended to have a blanket beginning and ending point, and the chapters will only serve to push the characters in the direction they need to go for the ending to make sense and the characters themselves to want to pursue whatever method gets them through their conflict.
However, like any given serial, there needs to be some interest in getting to know where the next chapter leads. I've never been a fan of big, reaching cliffhangers, so I wasn't really chomping at the bit to do them. I figured there would be a few knee-jerk endings or surprise hangers, but it's hard to craft any narrative without a little bit of mystery tied to the end, so it's probably inevitable at some point. Hopefully I don't end up doing it too badly.
And I certainly appreciate the input of a professional.
Queen Michael said:
Instead, write about something that interests you and make us want to read about it.
That's always been the plan. This thread is as much about genres as it is about elements. To me, strong characters make up great parts of stories, but writers like Neil Stephenson and Scott Wooding both have done marvelous work with setting that make me realize that there's a lot of charm to be found in the world as well as the individuals. Couple that with Douglas Adams' sense of narrative tone and language, and you get a sense that there's always some new element to practice, absorb, and attempt to incorporate.
Jux said:
I think the idea of wilderness survival isn't done a whole lot, but I'm not sure how interesting it would be.
My outdoor knowledge is actually abysmal. I don't think I could do this without royally mauling the subject material. Sorry.
Giest4life said:
3) I quite enjoy archetype characters if they are well written and are contextually justified. I find it annoying when writers try to make their characters multi-dimensional to a non-nonsensical degree.
4) I don't find socio-political themes interesting. I find themes that transcend history to be much more appealing than those that trying to tell me to support a certain side fighting over some ancient lines in the sand in the Middle East.
To me,
Homestuck is a personification of that first problem. The writing is so helter-skelter. To me, I find people fit into tropes fairly reasonably, but they'll always have contradictions and unique nuances. I always try to make characters that fit that bill.
To that end, I'm more concerned with interpersonal things rather than socio-political ones. I've never been much of a sociologist, so trying to command a people within a narrative seems like it would be too ticklish to cover in any meaningful way.
DoPo said:
(2) What do I want to see more of? Well, three words: cyberpunk, cyberpunk, and cyberpunk. If you're not into that, then, I'd really appreciate some more humour. You know what I mean - something H2G2 or Discworld-like, thogh maybe not to that extent, if you want some seriousness, but just injecting humorous bits would still be appreciated.
Ooh, cyberpunk might be fun. I also had a recommendation for futuretech, which would fit comfortably there. I'm still considering what to do with it, but this is an idea I'm pretty comfortable doing. Humor in writing is tough, I find, but I always try to include it.
triggrhappy94 said:
I WANTED TO POST THIS THREAD!
Sorry about that.
As I mentioned earlier, I'd like doing alternate/fictional history, but it's not a subject I'm intimately familiar with, so it would be challenging for me to do it effectively. I haven't ruled it out, though. I might draw inspiration from history, which would be much more workable for my skillset.
