Besides an Outline... What else do I need to write a story?

[jjabrams55]

This will probably be the last post I make here, since all the info I require I know have, except this: Do I need anything more than an outline of my story to write a book. I will cue you in to what I already have done:

Outline: Checked. Obviously. The core is the classic hero tale that is liked by everyone. It's about conflict, and conflict boils down to only three categories in ALL stories really. Man against man, man against his environment, and man against his/herself. You can even have all three if you want. That's why life itself is epic (heroic), it DEFINITELY has all three. Then you make at least three major turning points in the story that lead to the resolution of whatever conflict you chose at the beginning. The rest is filler that should still mean something and can even be entertaining. That's all a story is really. It's simpler than some make it out to be as if were or needs to be something very complex.

World-building: Check. Probably over-checked.

Characters: Check.

Science Research: Check. I do this whenever I don't know something. Write what you know really means to research stuff so you KNOW it well enough to write about it without making up too much.

Editing: Not yet. But am aware of this and know to do it. So check. Haven't written anything to edit yet. And believe me, I'm not afraid of 'killing my darlings' (look phrase up if you don't understand it). What's most important is a well-written work with a good story. Nothing else matters nearly as much. I don't care what anyone says, writing and storytelling are not the same thing. If that were true, everyone with a pen and paper would be published authors who make a living off writing stories. Most can write (school helps), but storytelling is not taught in Kindergarten through 12th grade, so most don't know how... unless they choose to take it upon themselves to learn it.

Spelling/grammar/using words artfully: My strength is spelling, so that won't be an issue (for anything that is there is google). Grammar is also not an issue, since google can solve that too if I have a question. I know enough not to write, "Jim lied on his back." It should read, "Jim lay on his back." Lie is a verb, the act of laying, while lay used here is passive. Using words artfully is something I have researched, and I know about similes, hyberbole and what not. For what I don't know... once again... google.


So what I'm really asking is... what comes NEXT after you have an outline and a world you have created. Do you just start writing? And after you have written a bunch, what comes after that? Editing? Probably the last thing you would ever do is read your own work all the way through, since you already know it so well.

I just want a list of steps you/anyone should take after they write an outline all the way through the end of the writing process for writing a story. Like 1-10 or whatever or however many steps it takes.

I have tried to find this info online... but invoking sturgones law (98% of everything written in scifi is junk), most of it is utter garbage (people not telling you quickly/concisely/wasting your time/wanting you to buy their book/classes).

I know this site has authors... so please, if you wish, help me out here. I am all for being concise and helpful, as that is what I have always tried to be. Currently I 'think' I have all I need, but I have a sneaking suspicion there might be something I'm overlooking... that's where you guys and gals come in. Thanks in advance : )

 

[Cory Swanson]

If you really are JJ Abrams, then you don't need my advice.

My best shot at this question is that there are no secret ingredients, yet, at the same time, there are. Writing is an art. It's full of tricks and turns and it takes a lot of time and effort to learn.

So, young grasshopper, it's time to start your journey. Put pen to paper and start writing. When you have something, show it to people. Have a tough skin when you do. It's hard to hear how much you suck, but it's totally worth it. Do notice that we have a great critiques board here and you will get great advice there. But you have to write something first.

I might suggest warming up on some short stories. I put the cart before the horse on my first try and wrote an all out book. Now I'm backing up and trying to hone my style and find my voice. Plus, it's easier to get your family and friends to read shorts, and you get feedback quicker.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

Every writer is different. All you need to tell a story is a medium to tell it - whether that is a set of ears or a piece of paper or a computer screen that depends.

My advice is just start and don't think too hard about it.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Seconded. You need to write to tell a story. It's easy to get bogged down and never start.

Just write

And then seek beta readers and whilst they maul it work on something else. Then edit.

 

[Zebra Wizard]

As a newbie my number 1 thing i find most useful is to get others to read your stuff (which can be hard if you writing a big lengthy work), then learn to use criticism well. Never argue/defend against any negative feedback. Just learn to identify what is useful and what is not, and analysis your work critically.

If you do it well, then negative feedback becomes the best feedback.

 

[VinceK]

In my experience, what you plan to write is rarely what you publish. Creative spontaneity can be great asset, don't smother it with process. You have an idea for a story so write it. Your story will take on a life of its own, you will fight with it, despair of it and at times want to strangle it, but eventually you'll forget it's just a story.

The rest is filler that should still mean something and can even be entertaining.

Filler is used to patch holes. Everything you write should be entertaining.

 

[The Judge]

Spelling/grammar/using words artfully: My strength is spelling, so that won't be an issue (for anything that is there is google). Grammar is also not an issue, since google can solve that too if I have a question. I know enough not to write, "Jim lied on his back." It should read, "Jim lay on his back." Lie is a verb, the act of laying, while lay used here is passive. Using words artfully is something I have researched, and I know about similes, hyberbole and what not.

Um... I hesitate to correct you in the circumstances, but "to lie" as in "lie down" means in this context (since it has many shades of meaning) to put/have oneself in a prone position, and does not mean "the act of laying". "To lay" is a different verb (with, again, several meanings/shades of meaning) -- though increasingly it's being used incorrectly by those who know no better -- but due to the way the words originated, the past tense of "to lie" just happens to be "lay". So "lay used here is passive" is also not correct: it's just the verb being used in the past tense -- I lie down, I do lie down, I am lying down; I will lie down, I will be lying down; I lay down, I have lain down. The difference between the two verbs lies (ha!) in the presence of an object, so "He lies down/he lay down" ie he puts/put himself in a prone position, and "He lays the pen on the table/he laid the pen on the table".

For what I don't know... once again... google.

Unfortunately, sometimes one doesn't know what one doesn't know, in which case Google is of little help.

I'd respectfully suggest that researching something and understanding something can be two very different things, in the same way that knowing the theory of driving a car is very different from actually being able to drive. "Using words artfully" is in my experience something that comes with practice, and a lot of it, and some writers never learn, no matter how much they write -- see Dan Brown (though it doesn't appear to have done his sales any harm).

Probably the last thing you would ever do is read your own work all the way through, since you already know it so well.

In fact, you will need to read it all the way through time and time and time again. And then read it some more. That's rather the point of editing.

As to what you do next, as everyone else has said, you write. What happens then depends on what kind of writer you are -- ie writing in one go and editing the first draft thereafter, or write-edit, write-edit as you go along -- but you'll need to get several hundred thousand words under your belt to become proficient at it.

Incidentally, I notice that although you've mentioned simile and hyperbole, you don't mention getting to grips with such things as POV, info-dumping, dialogue, characterisation, and pace, all of which are important, even more important than using words artfully -- see Dan Brown again. There are a plethora of threads on these subjects so you might find it helpful to read a few of them. There is also The Toolbox which deals with these and many other issues.

I wish you well on your journey, but I don't think it's going to be quite as easy as you seem to believe it to be.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

I wish you well on your journey, but I don't think it's going to be quite as easy as you seem to believe it to be.

I've followed jj's posts with some bafflement recently, but I would echo The Judge's comment, which I would upgrade to "I don't think it's going to be possible." I would also add this: when you write, don't forget the characters amidst all the blam-blam, heat sinks and jolly fast space ships.

Oh, and thanks for not bothering to remain part of our community now you've exhausted us of advice.

 

[Vaz]

Whiskey

Insomnia

Sacrificial Wombats

(Not in that order)

 

[Wruter]

Sacrificial Wombats

I use armadillos personally. Easier to get the stains out.

 

[Venusian Broon]

Sacrificial Wombats

...jeez, I knew I was doing something wrong. The instructions were in tiny writing and smudged badly. What am I to do with a dozen Sanctified Wombles?

 

[Vaz]

Destroy their leader and take his place?

I would.

 

[Brian W. Foster]

This will probably be the last post I make here, since all the info I require I know have, except this

Man, now I have to clean all the coffee I spit out off of my computer screen ...

I've been writing fiction seriously for over five years. In contrast to the OP, I don't feel like I have nearly all the information that I require ...

 

[Phyrebrat]

When you say this will be your last post, do you mean you don't need us anymore!? <sniff>

It's not my call, but I certainly wouldn't disappear from chrons. You'll learn something new most days. And what about other beginner writers who might benefit from some of your experience.

I think it's helpful to think as writing as a journey not a destination. You can always improve.

Don't leave

pH

 

[Dave Barsby]

The best advice is probably to write and see what comes out. Then read and edit. Then write again. I much prefer this approach to researching a paint-by-numbers way on how to write, like you seem to be doing. Prose can be taught. Structure can be taught. Imagination cannot. And a story doesn't need at least 3 major turning points, it just needs to be what it is.

So don't keep checking how to write. Just write.

 

[Elventine]

I don't think I have anything to say... after all you "know everything" already...

 

[zmunkz]

There is little need to repeat what @The Judge and others have said, so I'll only add: despite the detailed preparation you have already done, all the real learning and work begins once you start writing, so be prepared to find yourself right back at the beginning. We'll all be around to help if you choose to return...

 

[jjabrams55]

Seconded. You need to write to tell a story. It's easy to get bogged down and never start.

Just write

And then seek beta readers and whilst they maul it work on something else. Then edit.

Um... I hesitate to correct you in the circumstances, but "to lie" as in "lie down" means in this context (since it has many shades of meaning) to put/have oneself in a prone position, and does not mean "the act of laying". "To lay" is a different verb (with, again, several meanings/shades of meaning) -- though increasingly it's being used incorrectly by those who know no better -- but due to the way the words originated, the past tense of "to lie" just happens to be "lay". So "lay used here is passive" is also not correct: it's just the verb being used in the past tense -- I lie down, I do lie down, I am lying down; I will lie down, I will be lying down; I lay down, I have lain down. The difference between the two verbs lies (ha!) in the presence of an object, so "He lies down/he lay down" ie he puts/put himself in a prone position, and "He lays the pen on the table/he laid the pen on the table".

Unfortunately, sometimes one doesn't know what one doesn't know, in which case Google is of little help.

I'd respectfully suggest that researching something and understanding something can be two very different things, in the same way that knowing the theory of driving a car is very different from actually being able to drive. "Using words artfully" is in my experience something that comes with practice, and a lot of it, and some writers never learn, no matter how much they write -- see Dan Brown (though it doesn't appear to have done his sales any harm).

In fact, you will need to read it all the way through time and time and time again. And then read it some more. That's rather the point of editing.

As to what you do next, as everyone else has said, you write. What happens then depends on what kind of writer you are -- ie writing in one go and editing the first draft thereafter, or write-edit, write-edit as you go along -- but you'll need to get several hundred thousand words under your belt to become proficient at it.

Incidentally, I notice that although you've mentioned simile and hyperbole, you don't mention getting to grips with such things as POV, info-dumping, dialogue, characterisation, and pace, all of which are important, even more important than using words artfully -- see Dan Brown again. There are a plethora of threads on these subjects so you might find it helpful to read a few of them. There is also The Toolbox which deals with these and many other issues.

I wish you well on your journey, but I don't think it's going to be quite as easy as you seem to believe it to be.

I don't think I have anything to say... after all you "know everything" already...

There is little need to repeat what @The Judge and others have said, so I'll only add: despite the detailed preparation you have already done, all the real learning and work begins once you start writing, so be prepared to find yourself right back at the beginning. We'll all be around to help if you choose to return...

I will only correct where necessary:

1. I well know I will never know all there is to know about writing fiction. Every writer that ever was wrote with incomplete knowledge. I just wanted to know enough to begin. It's all to easy to get bogged down in research (as much as I learn and enjoy it). Several of you have said what I already felt like doing... just start writing.

2. For the record, I have written stuff before. Yet that was a time when I had no idea what an outline was... as as any writer knows... writing a bunch of pages with no real plan can come back to hurt you later on. I don't want a debate about outlines vs no outlines, but I will say that for all the skill of Stephen King, he tends rely on ex deus machina (pulling stuff out of nowhere to resolve the story, supernatural or otherwise) to save the day at the end. That is a natural tactic to employ when you're not using any outlines to prep your work ahead. Obviously... I favor outlines. Without them is torture for me.

3. As for what palmer said, I actually favor character over BOOM BOOM action everywhere. But character alone won't mean a thing if there is no conflict for the characters to work on. Like I have said here/elsewhere, I know scifi tropes well. With my work I will explore them through their logical implications. Here's one: Star Trek has it, Star wars has it. If everybody can fly FTL with starships... and starships actually follow REAL maneuvering (they never do in ST or SW), what happens? You'd think you would get a lot of relativistic kill vehicles and burned up planets. Yet think about it... really.

Pop scifi tends to use trebuchets to launch the equivalent of nuclear bombs. Basically, they are using outdated tech for the tech they are already using. All tech scales up... especially when you have have FTL/warp tech.

That's what I will do. The reason fleets can't just warp in and burn a planet into a smoking crater is because planets can shoot gravitric beams that drop them out of warp at FTL speeds. Thus the fleets never even arrive unless a planet permits them to get there. There are ways around this... one of them is by simply flying the long hard way... at slower than light speed. Which won't stop a fleet from the planet from warping in to stop the invader fleet which got stalled.

To be sure, I don't totally ignore physics... I just compensate for it... and make sure the reader knows that. I'm not doing a repeat on ST. I'm doing ST how I would do it. No ships fly like airplanes here, and the only nacelles they use allow them to... divert their momentum. Which means they can make forward or reverse shifts in their momentum in an instant. Which makes delta v much less of an issue. Gravitric dampeners keep the crew from becoming chunky salsa all over the walls, but it does let a little g-force bleed through in the pulse it takes to change the ship's momentum. About 4 g's is felt opposite the direction of the new momentum (fore or aft). This allows for ease of reaching planets and also for ease of starships chasing each other. I don't like airplanes in space because such maneuvers offer ZERO advantages over just linear changing of momentum. A straight line is the fastest way to make course corrections, even though orbits will still kick in afterwards.

 

[zmunkz]

I think there is a lot of wisdom in how Socrates defines an educated person, and the more we acknowledge how little we really know, the more we set ourselves up to learn. Just food for thought.

In any case, if the question is simply if you have enough to start, the answer is definitely "yes."

The reason fleets can't just warp in and burn a planet into a smoking crater is because planets can shoot gravitric beams that drop them out of warp at FTL speeds.

Perhaps this is not the thread for it, but how can a planet detect a FTL ship approaching? The very principal here is that the ship is moving faster than any information or signal that might betray its whereabouts or intentions, no? In other words the earliest possible indication of an approaching ship would be the ship's arrival.

 

[jjabrams55]

I think there is a lot of wisdom in how Socrates defines an educated person, and the more we acknowledge how little we really know, the more we set ourselves up to learn. Just food for thought.

In any case, if the question is simply if you have enough to start, the answer is definitely "yes."



Perhaps this is not the thread for it, but how can a planet detect a FTL ship approaching? The very principal here is that the ship is moving faster than any information or signal that might betray its whereabouts or intentions, no? In other words the earliest possible indication of an approaching ship would be the ship's arrival.

I make tech to do what current physics can't do. I don't assume that current physics is the end-all, because science is a WIP. So along with FTL/warp, they have FTL sensors, with limits of course so they aren't too OP.

FTL sensors: Have a 7 LY range. Common ships travel a LY per hour max. FTL sensors can cover 7 LY in only 7 minutes, which gives plenty of time to detect a common ship coming your way. The hypergravity beams that drop ships out of warp/FTL also can travel a LY per minute.

More expensive ships can travel a LY per minute, at the expense of longer recharge times and shorter overall travel time before requiring a full charge (7 LY in 7 minutes is great, but that means you have to wait 7 hours to charge up if you wanna travel another 7... or less if you want less). The advantage common ships have is they don't have to charge nearly as often and give you more travel time (42 LY cap before it needs a full recharge, which only takes 42 minutes, or less if you want less than a full charge).

[/QUOTE]


BTW, I checked what you said about lay vs lie. You were right. Thanks. I may use you guys for that later assuming I don't just find it on google. I think I got the wrong answer before from someone else online. But I just researched thoroughly and now understand the concept.

Thanks again judge.