|
|
Post by Daniel on Dec 3, 2015 16:47:46 GMT -5
Randy Ingermanson's latest newsletter had an interesting craft article on concept and high concept. It was timely because I'm currently working on the story world for the project I'm co-authoring with Susan. The article is in Section 3 of his newsletter if you'd like to read it for yourself. He quotes Larry Brooks extensively on the subject, and then boils all the details down to this: “Concept is the idea that makes your novel freaking cool.” I loved that. Also, "Concept is the main freaking cool idea for the story, before you add characters and a plot." The co-authored project (which desperately needs a working title) is at the perfect place for us to seriously think about the base concept and how it can be made freaking cool. We were considering several approaches, but in retrospect, some were cool, but none were freaking cool. After reading Randy's article, I took another shot at the concept and ran my thoughts by Susan. Between the two of us, we expanded on my initial thoughts and came up with something I'm seriously excited about. Hopefully readers will be too. Randy suggests that we should make it part of our writing process to stop and look at our work with the intention of adding cool stuff. I've done that with plot, character, magic, and settings, but I don't think I've ever looked at a series with the idea of making the overall concept freaking cool. I'd argue that Anne McCaffrey did that with her Pern series. It was the concept that brought me back to her books multiple times, not the individual characters or stories. I think Jim Butcher managed it with The Dresden Files, although his concept (modern wizard helping cops solve paranormal crimes) was smaller in scope. What do you think? Do you put much thought into concept? Did Randy's article appeal to you or give you ideas for your current/future projects? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2015 17:59:46 GMT -5
Very cool, Daniel. I'm planning my next series so this is very useful.
|
|
|
|
Post by lindymoone on Dec 4, 2015 5:05:54 GMT -5
I like this idea. Freaking cool concepts.
As long as there are no zombie sharks, I'm in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Miss Terri Novelle on Dec 4, 2015 10:29:31 GMT -5
I totally agree with you about the Pern series. And even when she pulled the curtain back within the story and showed how the dragons were crafted, how the concept of them was crafted, it was freaking cool. The woman was a master at creating character driven stories with cool concepts. And while I love the books she wrote with her son and the ones he wrote alone in her world, he doesn't quite have her magic touch. To Dresden's concept, I would add the following: Dresden saves the world--tells no one.  Have you read anything by Lynn Flewelling, Daniel? She's a trad pubbed Maine author whose Bone Doll books are quite interesting. They're loosely connected to her Nightrunner series and though I haven't read them in awhile, she plays with some very interesting concepts in terms of gender roles in her books. I had the chance to meet her in person ten or twelve years ago, right when her son had just come out and she told me how much his sexuality had impacted her work. I think this is timely, though. Since I'm reworking a few things in Earthbound and adding more to the concept is just what it needs. |
|
|
|
Post by Becca Mills on Dec 4, 2015 11:33:40 GMT -5
I love Lynn Flewelling, Laura, though I've only read the Nightrunner series. Awesome writer.
I'm really jealous authors who can toss off freaking cool concepts. Serious envy. Neil Gaiman is one, IMO. Ilona Andrews is another.
|
|
|
|
Post by Miss Terri Novelle on Dec 4, 2015 11:46:08 GMT -5
Check out the Bone Doll. It's set in the past relative to Nightrunner and has historical ties. I had the first three Nightrunner books autographed but someone borrowed the 3rd and never returned it. But, I'm behind on the newest books. We chatted for quite some time at a writer's thing I helped a friend put together (my friend did the lion's share of the work, I mainly ran errands and stuff).
|
|
|
|
Post by Becca Mills on Dec 4, 2015 11:53:55 GMT -5
Check out the Bone Doll. It's set in the past relative to Nightrunner and has historical ties. I had the first three Nightrunner books autographed but someone borrowed the 3rd and never returned it. But, I'm behind on the newest books. We chatted for quite some time at a writer's thing I helped a friend put together (my friend did the lion's share of the work, I mainly ran errands and stuff). Very cool. Yeah, the Bone Doll books have been in my TBR list for ages. Problem is that I don't read anymore.  |
|
|
|
Post by Daniel on Dec 5, 2015 8:38:51 GMT -5
Thanks for the tip on Lynn Flewelling, Miss Terri Novelle . I took a peek at Shards of Time on Amazon and it looks interesting. I didn't find anything titled Bone Doll. Were you referring to her Tamir Triad series, which starts with The Bone Doll's Twin? That looks good too. I'm sure the Dresden concept deserves a lot deeper treatment than I gave it. Butcher's integration between Faerie and Earth as well as his High Council were significant elements of his concept. However, the basic idea of having a wizard consulting with the police was what drew me to it originally. Of course, a freaking cool concept can't stand alone. You need great characters to breathe life into it. A great stage with no actors is only interesting for a few moments. |
|
|
|
Post by Becca Mills on Dec 5, 2015 17:07:29 GMT -5
Thanks for the tip on Lynn Flewelling, Miss Terri Novelle . I took a peek at Shards of Time on Amazon and it looks interesting. I didn't find anything titled Bone Doll. Were you referring to her Tamir Triad series, which starts with The Bone Doll's Twin? That looks good too. I'm sure the Dresden concept deserves a lot deeper treatment than I gave it. Butcher's integration between Faerie and Earth as well as his High Council were significant elements of his concept. However, the basic idea of having a wizard consulting with the police was what drew me to it originally. Of course, a freaking cool concept can't stand alone. You need great characters to breathe life into it. A great stage with no actors is only interesting for a few moments. Hmm ... maybe the ones Laura was referring to aren't called "Bone Doll." I know the ones she means, though. They're a sort of prehistory for the Nightrunner books. |
|
|
|
Post by Becca Mills on Dec 5, 2015 17:09:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Miss Terri Novelle on Dec 5, 2015 18:12:30 GMT -5
That's them. I've packed all my books up and didn't take time to look up the name of the series.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deano on Dec 6, 2015 5:47:44 GMT -5
If I don't have a high-concept, the book doesn't get written. Every novel I've ever done has one - I suppose I just write for the commercial audience.
|
|
|
|
Post by Miss Terri Novelle on Dec 6, 2015 9:56:07 GMT -5
In addition to the book recommended in that blog post, I was just reading about concept on another forum and this book was mentioned. I snagged a copy and started reading it last night. It's a pretty good nuts and bolts primer from what I can tell by the first couple chapters. www.amazon.com/Got-High-Concept-Dynamic-Fiction-ebook/dp/B003VYCAGO |
|
|
|
Post by lou on Dec 6, 2015 11:08:07 GMT -5
If I don't have a high-concept, the book doesn't get written. Every novel I've ever done has one - I suppose I just write for the commercial audience. I was thinking something similar, but for me, it's "I write what I want to write," and I must have pretty lowbrow tastes, because that's what interests me. |
|
|
|
Post by Daniel on Dec 6, 2015 11:34:24 GMT -5
If I don't have a high-concept, the book doesn't get written. Every novel I've ever done has one - I suppose I just write for the commercial audience. I think most of us start with a concept that captures our imagination. I know I have. As you say, the book doesn't get written otherwise because I wouldn't be inspired enough to write it! What excited me about the Ingermanson treatment of the subject was that he elevated the importance of refining concept until it goes from interesting to exciting. In the past, refinement has been a natural side-effect of world-building for me, but I can't say that I've really sat back and worked on the concept itself until it achieved "freaking cool" status. I'm extremely detail oriented and tend to get lost in the minutia. I've generally viewed concept as an environment for character development and a setting for plot. At some point in the development of the story, character and plot take center stage and concept becomes the backdrop. Now I'm thinking that a well-developed concept might be just as important as character or plot. I'm sure your reaction to that realization is "well, duh," but what can I say? Your writing instincts and sensibilities are undoubtedly more developed than mine. (And I don't mean that in a snarky way--I have tremendous admiration for your writing instincts and sensibilities.) Sometimes the way information is presented makes a big difference in how I internalize it. It's not like I haven't read about concept before. Brooks's other books go into it extensively (it is the first "core competency" in his book Story Engineering). Brooks dedicates about ten pages to it in Story Physics. In Writing Fiction for Dummies, Ingermanson doesn't write about concept explicitly, but his section on formulating a "story line" addresses it obliquely. In Writing the Breakout Novel, Donald Maas talks about premise before getting into anything else. Those are just a few examples. But honestly, I think it was Ingermanson concluding that your concept should be "freaking cool" that turned on a light bulb for me. |
|
|
|
Post by Becca Mills on Dec 6, 2015 23:43:00 GMT -5
What excited me about the Ingermanson treatment of the subject was that he elevated the importance of refining concept until it goes from interesting to exciting. In the past, refinement has been a natural side-effect of world-building for me, but I can't say that I've really sat back and worked on the concept itself until it achieved "freaking cool" status. I'm extremely detail oriented and tend to get lost in the minutia. I've generally viewed concept as an environment for character development and a setting for plot. At some point in the development of the story, character and plot take center stage and concept becomes the backdrop. Now I'm thinking that a well-developed concept might be just as important as character or plot. This is very well said. I think it describes me, too. The problem with coming up with a "freaking cool" concept is that it requires true originality in genres where an awful lot has already been done. That's difficult. To take the Ilona Andrews example, there's been sooooo much urban fantasy, including urban fantasy set in real locales, a la Dresden (Chicago). Usually these books take the approach that magic (or the supernatural in general) has always existed as a secret subculture; most people just didn't know about it. But Andrews has this great concept that's totally different: magic and tech are opposing poles, and the pendulum of human expression swings slowly back and forth between them throughout history. When it gets too far in one direction, it switches back. So at some point in prehistory -- beginning of the iron age, say -- tech became ascendant and magic largely vanished from the world. But by late 20th century, the pendulum had swung too far to the tech side, so a "shift" happened, leaving magic ascendant. Tech just stopped working: airplanes fell out of the sky, tall buildings collapsed, and the internet died. This on its own is a brilliant explanation of how Atlanta got to be as it is in the books, and the wide-openness of the set-up means that literally ALL supernatural traditions can show up. You can have vampires and shifters and rakshasas and witches and minotaurs and dragons and gods and skinwalkers ... anything. But there's a further twist: since the shift happened recently, the world is experiencing "post-shift resonance," which means tech and magic are flipping back and forth at unpredictable intervals (usually days, but sometimes hours). So, sometimes you can use your gun and your gasoline car, but sometimes you'll need your sword and your mule. Great way to juice the plot, right? Whenever you need to throw a wrench in the works, you just have tech or magic disappear in the middle of a battle, or whatever. I am 100% sure that I will never come up with a concept as cool as the above. It's friggin' genius. |
|
|
|
Post by lindymoone on Dec 6, 2015 23:58:40 GMT -5
I am 100% sure that I will never come up with a concept as cool as the above. It's friggin' genius. (sorry about messing up your quotes, Daniel and Becca!) Becca, I'd love to try Ilona Andrews. Where would I start -- what book? |
|
|
|
Post by Daniel on Dec 7, 2015 14:30:21 GMT -5
The problem with coming up with a "freaking cool" concept is that it requires true originality in genres where an awful lot has already been done. That's difficult. I can't argue with that. I'm not sure I'm up to the challenge, but I'm willing to give it a shot. Even though it sometimes feels like everything has been done, I believe having a large collection of ideas to draw from makes it easier to come up with something new. Susan and I have been sifting through many ideas drawn from books or shows that have similarities to what we plan to write. What we produce won't be just like any of them, but it will undoubtedly be influenced by them. To give you an idea, here are some of the influences that have come up in our conversations (in no particular order): * Heroes * Lost Girl * The Dresden Files * Person of Interest * Supernatural * Buffy the Vampire Slayer * G vs E * Alphas * Sanctuary * The Ternion Order * The Vaetra Chronicles |
|
|
|
Post by whdean on Dec 8, 2015 0:12:52 GMT -5
The problem with coming up with a "freaking cool" concept is that it requires true originality in genres where an awful lot has already been done. That's difficult. I can't argue with that. I'm not sure I'm up to the challenge, but I'm willing to give it a shot. Even though it sometimes feels like everything has been done, I believe having a large collection of ideas to draw from makes it easier to come up with something new. Susan and I have been sifting through many ideas drawn from books or shows that have similarities to what we plan to write. What we produce won't be just like any of them, but it will undoubtedly be influenced by them. To give you an idea, here are some of the influences that have come up in our conversations (in no particular order): * Heroes * Lost Girl * The Dresden Files * Person of Interest * Supernatural * Buffy the Vampire Slayer * G vs E * Alphas * Sanctuary * The Ternion Order * The Vaetra Chronicles Alright, so half a bottle in, I should assert without evidence that one of the things I do fairly well is come up with shit--mostly solutions to esoteric problems, I admit. But still, I never looked where people have looked before, except to see what's been done before. The last place to look for new things is old things. You have to read something else entirely if you want to get outside the box. Try military history or just some book on a foreign culture. ETA: If you want some suggestions for absolutely bizarre stuff, let me know. |
|
|
|
Post by Daniel on Dec 8, 2015 8:24:45 GMT -5
But still, I never looked where people have looked before, except to see what's been done before. The last place to look for new things is old things. You have to read something else entirely if you want to get outside the box. My strengths are in analysis and synthesis. When I use the term "influence" related to "old things," what I mean is that I break them into pieces and throw them into a pile along with all of my other life experiences. I agree with you that history can be a great source of transformative ideas, as can philosophy, superstition, technology, and just about any other subject of study. Those bits go into the pile too. I don't think it is a good idea to go too far outside the box because I believe readers need familiar mental touchstones to remain oriented in the story world. In fact, I think a story world is more compelling if you can make it feel familiar to readers while you wow them with freaking cool differences. I'd rather work inside a box filled with options that let me synthesize something both recognizable and original. Perhaps we're saying the same thing. It may be a matter of degree with regard to originality. I doubt that any so-called original modern novel could be broken down into original components. |
|
