Wednesday, January 9, 2013

Depth and distance in writing.

I scanned the typewritten copy of DEVILTREE into digital format and am now going over it to check for spelling, taking out the page breaks and so on.

First of all, the biggest change I noticed is that I wrote in very long paragraphs back then.  I think blog writing has converted me into smaller paragraphs.  So much so, that I may go through and actually shorten some of the paragraphs.

Secondly, the writing is very polished.  Very readable.  This is a book that probably deserves to be published.

Third, the writing is a bit more formal -- less colloquial.  I think the blog has loosened me up quite a bit.  That isn't necessarily a good thing.  It seems to me that the more formal approach feels like a "book."  It creates a small distance as if this is something very detached, and then draws you back in hopefully with the writing.  In other words, the surface distance allows you to sink deeper into the story.

Whereas being casual may at first seem more approachable, but is more on the surface.  It never draws you completely into that other world.  The ideas of distance and depth are something I'd never thought about before, frankly.

In other words -- the more formal writing distance (even the longer paragraphs) may at first require that the reader commit more to the story, but it draws them into it deeper.

The more casual approach is easier for the reader at first, but keeps the story somewhat on the surface.

In many ways, I'm learning to trend back to the way I used to write.  Creating the slightly formal  distance, the third person narrative, then trying to replace it with language and  imaginative elements.

It's turning out the biggest differences between the way I used to write and the way I write now are the work methods and of course the advanced technology.  The advanced technology allows me to be as prolific as I want to be.

 I'm not afraid to just write and see where it leads.  At the same time, I'm also trying to be aware of where it leads and what the premises are.  Which is a contradiction I'm trying to embrace.






6 comments:

Duncan McGeary said...

I just thought I'd be a better writer after 25 years. I'm a more confident, knowledgeable and experienced person now. Right?

It turns out, if anything, I had to relearn some of what I once knew. I was totally immersed in writing back then, which gave me an advantage. It was only when I became totally immersed this time that I felt like I regained some of my chops.

Nearly Human turned out to be the battlefield. So many mistakes, so many missteps.

I've struggled with it for so long I'm determined to produce it -- but i keep holding off, thinking there is someway to fix it.

Duncan McGeary said...

There may be a book that could be written in the same manner as I write my blog, but I haven't stumbled across it yet.

What works in short chunks doesn't seem to work for a novel.

Leitmotiv said...

what software are you using that turns an image into editable text?

Duncan McGeary said...

I'm not sure what you mean.

There is some program that reads the typewritten words and turns them in digital. Or it's a two part process or something.

Sorry I don't know more.

Leitmotiv said...

The former: "some program." You said you scanned in some old typed stories and then began to edit them. Well unless you were using photoshop to edit a jpeg (which would be excruciating), then I assume that you were using software that "scanned" your jpegs for words, converted them to text, and you then edited that text.

Duncan McGeary said...

Yeah, I think that. You'd have to ask Aaron.

Better than having to retype the whole thing.