Intuitive
There are a lot of things I do in my life that I have no idea how or why. I just do. Mom things, for example. My kids can come to me time and time and time again with stomach aches, for example. I feel foreheads, press bellies, ask questions, and 99% of the time say, "You'll be fine; it's something you ate." But that 1% when they come to me and I know, I mean REALLY KNOW "something" is wrong, you would think I was the chief of surgery on E.R. I fly into action and just "know" what to do, who to call, etc. Some of this, of course, is the result of years of mothering, or years of reading up on ailments when someone in my family is sick. It's having Crohn's disease and thus knowing a lot about "gut" ailments. And some is intuitive.
Yesterday, for example, I saw a babysitter trying to console a 7-week-old baby. She changed him, he didn't stop crying. I knew he was hungry--it was that kind of wail--and his mom fed him and handed him back to the babysitter. And the baby kept crying. Baby Girl asked about it, and I said, "He needs to be held differently; that's not a Mama Hold." Which I was quite certain was true. Most of the time I can get any baby to sleep. The secret is to project calm and not get ruffled, and the secret to THAT is intuitive.
So it is with writing. I had sold--not kidding--four novels before I ever saw the following three letters on a writers' board: GMC. I thought it was some movie channel akin to AMC. In fact, I didn't bother to look it up or even ask. I sold another two books before I found out they mean "Goal, Motivation, Conflict" and it came from some workshop.
When I write a book, I think in arcs. If you ASKED me, I mean probingly asked, I might be able to tell you, "Character A starts out this way. By the end she has changed to that way." But I really don't ever consciously think of that. It's a journey, and I just tell my story. I pour out the story until it's complete.
Now, really? I wouldn't HAVE this blog if I honestly didn't know anything about process or characters or themes or symbolism. But when it comes to telling my story, I FEEL it more than I explain it. I intuit it.
I have writer friends who are the opposite. They use GMC models and worksheets. They devise all sorts of outlines and character sketch interviews (they really interview their characters!). And it's always whatever works. I just can't work that way. But I am curious . . . what devices do YOU use?
Discuss. :-)
27 comments:
This is complicated, but I think you and I are in the same (perhaps leaky) boat.
When I'm actually writing, I'm not really thinking too much about all the logical, rational things I actually DO know about what makes up a good story. Yes, I might actually conceptualize that, yes, the main character needs to be pro-active and not have things happen to them. I'm aware intuitively when there might be a problem with the pace, but I use my knowledge of technique to realize there are X number of ways to solve that problem and I sift through them to find what I hope is the best one.
When I sit down to write my blog about writing, I do actually realize that I have a conscious, intellectual grasp of most of the techniques necessary to make good fiction. But when I'm actually writing, I'm mostly in the story, I'm mostly the main character or the POV character. I've internalized most of the techniques. I don't say, "Okay, let's count how many times I used an adverb."
But I've also sort of trained myself over the years to try and get it right the first time through. My rough drafts are pretty good. They need work, they're rough, but "IT" is mostly there. And that comes from practice, practice, practice.
One of my beta readers commented that he'd recently read a manuscript by an aspiring novelist and although the idea was good and the line by line writing was okay, the guy just didn't understand story structure. And the compliment he gave me was that it was obvious I did.
Well, some people are born with it, but the rest of us read a few million books, read a lot of books about writing, and more importantly, wrote and wrote and wrote.
I think it's okay if your intuition is informed by experience and knowledge, after all. :)
I'm writing a novel for the first time. Everything I've written and published are essays and opinion pieces and articles. And I've been successful with that.
But with novel writing my instincts are non-existent! I am constantly visualizing my character and story arcs, to make sure the key elements are present. Is chapter 15 (my chapter from hell that is making me crazeeee) consistent with where my MC has come so far?
My intuition comes into play when I allow myself to remember...to know...that I can write, even when I think I can't. That my story has entertained and interested my beta readers, and it's a matter of tweaking this new craft of mine.
I have to listen to my instincts and intuition. When I do not, I'm always sorry.
I've tried interviewing my characters. It lasts about 2 minutes. Then I have to write.
I like the way you put it, Erica. That you FEEL the story. If I'm not writing from that feeling place, then it just doesn't work.
Oh, Erica. You have hit on a subject that ruffled me when I first heard it - the GMC. Like you, I was so completely clueless (why everyone insists on throwing around call letters is beyond me - right up there with OMG!) Anyway, I once belonged to a local romance chapter and we did a mock agent presentation in preparation for an upcoming NJRWA conference. I had scheduled appointements with three agents, so I wanted to be ready.
There I was with my blurb in front of me. I read it off and the "mock" agent at first said, "Wow!" and then she said, "But what's the GMC?" I had no clue. Thereafter she hammered me, saying the I HAD TO KNOW from start to finish, what the GMC was.
Okay, so this is getting long winded, the point is that I have since found that playing by some contrived writing guidelines such as "Gotta know GMC from start to finish" doesn't work with me. Like you and Mark, I know my stories, motif/theme, and I rely on my intuition to get it in the right place.
P.S. I've since let my RWA membership lapse, not because of the GMC, but that it stopped being a good fit for me.
Hi Mark:
I agree. We process all that knowledge into what then becomes second nature, perhaps?
E
Hi Amy:
Donna Hayes (CEO, Harlequin) once did an interview in which she was photographed next to my cover of Spanish Disco with a line "Our novels are not formulaic" (or something like that) . . . anyway, people like to think you can write a romance as A + B = C and voila. But that feels stale. So yes, I think you have to go with the gut.
kath:
I really dislike when people make writers feel like there's only "one" way to do it. I do think a writer needs to perfect his or her pitch, but I have NEVER, in my life, had an editor ask me about GMC. Ever.
E
Liz:
I can't interview them either!!!
E
I'm totally a feeler. If I read about a technique, I have to process it away from the story and let it settle into my subconscious. I can't use a manufactured technique in a story... it feels too wooden.
Besides, a whole lot of a story is timing, pacing and flow. I can't plan that; I have to feel it. Sometimes I've read a story to critique, and all I can think is like, a beat is missing here.
I have that intuition about understanding kids and their motivations, fears, and issues.
We certainly don't want cookie-cutter novels, but Goal-Motivation-Conflict pretty much has to be there for Story to be there. Doesn't it?
I approach it intuitively as well, but I think GMC is a solid model for showing how drama works.
Intuition, totally. Like you, I didn't know what a GMC was until fairly recently. I don't like under the hood much, I just drive.
spy:
I'm a Feeler on most personality charts.
E
Jude:
Maybe. But it's a chicken/egg thing.
And I cannot imagine an editor asking what's your GMC, lije Kath said. There must be a hundred ways to think of it--the Hero's Journey, for example. Or whatever works for the writer, without boxing it into a technique.
E
Alyson:
LOL! That's a neat way to think of it! I don't look under my hood much either.
E
Erica:
Definitely a chicken/egg thing.
While I can't imagine an editor actually using the term GMC, I'm sure the slush piles are full of manuscripts lacking sufficient conflict and tension, and/or with characters whose goals and motivations are not clearly enough defined. So I think GMC is a nice simple tool for those us trying to break in, a good point to consider while working through drafts.
I don't even think of it as a technique, really. More of a reminder to keep the tension taut and the characterization consistent.
I try to plot and arc as much of the characters and the story as I can, so I have an idea what is going to happen, to whom, and by when in the story. That way I can stop trying to "get it right" and just let the story develop, let the characters grow, inside of the sandbox I have set them in.
I feel like that works best for me... at least I feel less confused about the story as I write it. Although there are a few times in each story that I do get completely blind-sided by something I did not expect. Makes it more fun that way.
Erica, thanks for the GMC reassurance. For a bit I thought it was just me, a girl who believes that the "GMC" unfolds without my knowledge. ;)
ewoh:
I love getting blindsided every once in a while. It reminds me of how the process is so much more than what a book or "how to" on writing can ever tell you.
E
kath:
It's not just you. :-)
E
Jude:
I hear you. I've always been a "what works for you."
E
I don't set up a character to grow out of their original shell or persona. As they proceed through their various conflicts and are able to resolve those conflicts, then they grow. Its not a consciousness thought for me.
While writing I sometimes get a burst of an idea that if I make this particular character act in a way that is different than their usual routine, then I have an "ah ha" moment and realize that this character is growing through his or her actions. This in turn opens up further avenues of conflict and resolution movements.
I'm so glad there are many of you who write intuitively like me. I have read all the articles about how to write, including GMCs etc. but I break out in a sweat while reading them and can't breath. Analysing the creative process kills the creativity - at least for me. And gives me a panic attack.
Interviewing my characters doesnt' work for me. I've tried.
Usually the story just pulls me along on its own. If I look back do I see that people have um..grown? Yeah, I think so.
And I think I'm still learning.
Barbara:
Your description of your process--VERY much like mine. Those "Ah ha" moments when writing . . . I adore when that happens!
Suzanne:
LOL! Me, too.
E
Hi Aimless:
As I said . . . the tools can work for some people, but for others, I guess it feels like imposing something rigid on their work or it feels . . . strange or stifling in some way.
E
GMC *shudder* All those boxes give me hives!
Post a Comment