Writing From Scratch #1

Writing from Scratch #1

Welcome to Writing from Scratch!

I’ve been writing a long time, and sometimes it feels like I lose the trees for the forest. Writing from Scratch is a chance for me (and you!) to get back to the basics of storytelling.

If you’ve never written a story before, if you’ve never felt like you could come up with one that would be worth writing, my hope is that if you follow along with me here, you will have the confidence and know-how to come up with an idea, build it into a story, and share it with the world.

These posts will be little, easy-to-digest nuggets. At the end of every post, look for a prompt and share your response in the comments!

What Is a Story?

A story can be defined by what it contains: at least one plot, character, and setting, and a style through which it is told.

Story Bits

To begin, let’s take a look at the second smallest unit of a story – the sentence. A sentence is a set of words that conveys a complete thought. And communication is fractal, meaning each part shares the same pattern as the whole. A story and its components, therefore, will also convey a Complete Thought.

A simple sentence is an independent clause, containing a subject and a predicate. It may have any number of phrases attached to it, but in its simplest form, a sentence can be as short as two words.

A complex sentence is a sentence containing an independent clause and at least one dependent or subordinate clause (a set of words containing a subject and predicate but that is dependent on another clause for a complete understanding of its meaning).

A compound sentence is a sentence containing at least two independent clauses.

And a compound-complex sentence is a sentence containing at least two independent clauses and at least one dependent or subordinate clause.

Plots are exactly the same as sentences. A simple plot can be broken into two parts, a subject and a predicate, or, better, a problem and a solution. It can then be complicated or compounded with additional plots.

Next week, we’ll look at what exactly we’re talking about when we’re talking about plots.

Share in the comments:

How else have you heard “story” defined? What aspects of storytelling are you most interested in? What makes a story worthwhile to you?

If you want to read more, you can check out the over 80 posts on my website, theferalcollection.com

Writing from Scratch #5: The Inquiry Plot

The Inquiry Plot

The problem of an inquiry plot involves a question that needs answering for its solution. The classic is Whodunnit? But any who, what, where, when, why, or how style questions can provide the problem for an inquiry plot. Traditionally, try-fail cycles in an inquiry plot come in the form of following clues which can lead to more clues (or questions) or end up being red-herrings that have caused a set back in solving the riddle.

Let’s look at the classic mystery “A Night of Fright is No Delight,” Scooby Doo! Where Are You? Season 1, episode 16. (I went a little overboard on this one, but it’s just too fun!)

If you haven’t seen this classic episode, then a quick background is that the gang has been invited to spend the night in an allegedly haunted house for the chance to receive a part of an inheritance along with four other possible heirs.

The Question: Who is the Phantom Shadow?

First Clue: Cousin Simple disappears and a message from the Phantom Shadow threatens everyone in the house.

First try: the gang mocks up a fake Scooby in bed to tempt the Phantom Shadow into attacking while Scooby and Shaggy hide outside the bedroom window. Fail: No, the Shadow attacks the real Scooby and Shaggy, and they and Velma get separated from Daphne and Fred in a spooky cave under the house.

Second Clue: Velma, Shaggy, and Scooby find some footprints in the cave.

Second try: they follow the footprints in hopes they will lead to the Phantom Shadow. Fail: No, the footprints lead them to a bunch of Civil War memorabilia, and a flying Confederate uniform starts chasing them.

Third try: when they’re cornered by the flying uniform, Scooby tries to intimidate it. Fail: yes, the goose inside the uniform is intimidated and flies away, but they are no closer to discovering the identity of the Phantom Shadow.

Third Clue: the goose chased them into an elevator, which they take up to Cousin Slicker’s bedroom.

Fourth Clue: all the other potential heirs have gone missing.

Fifth Clue: a creepy organ begins to play

Fourth try: the reunited gang follows the sound of the organ. Fail: Yes, they find the organ, but there is no one playing it anymore.

Sixth Clue: a music book with the words “feed the organ and watch the floor” written on it.

Fifth try: Scooby plays the organ to see if the floor does anything. Fail: No, nothing happens to the floor, and the walls start closing in on the gang.

Sixth try: Scooby plays several combinations of keys to stop the walls. Fail: Yes, the walls stop closing in, but the floor still hasn’t changed.

Seventh try: Per Velma’s insight, Scooby plays the notes F-E-E-D. Fail: Yes, the floor opens, but there is a creepy staircase leading to who knows where

Eighth try: the gang follows the trap door to find out what’s happening. Fail: yes, they find coffins that have the bodies of the potential heirs inside, but two Phantom Shadows corner the gang and Scooby faints

Nineth try: the gang runs away and shenanigans ensue. Fail: Yes, they get away, but they didn’t find out who the two Phantom Shadows are.

Seventh Clue: Shaggy touched one of the Shadows and came away with green paint on his hand.

Tenth try: Fred concocts one of his classic traps and Fred, Velma, and Daphne attempt to lure the Phantoms into it. Fail: Yes, the Phantoms’ appear, but Scooby screws up the trap.

Final try: Scooby and Shaggy make due with the screwed up trap and chase the phantoms. Solution: they finally capture the Phantom Shadows and discover they were the lawyers, Creeps and Crawls.

Prompt: write a flash fiction with an Inquiry in which the plot-problem is the question “who ate the last piece of chocolate cake?” The character, setting, genre, and stakes, as well as what is preventing them from easily answering the question is up to you. This simple plot could be the basis of a picture book or a horror story.

If you want to read more, I have over 80 posts on my website theferalcollection.com

Submitted via Google Form:

I am quite intrigued about how animals seem to have higher tolerance for pollution and germs while humans seem to lose it. Animals still just eat off the ground and drink straight from streams. However isn’t that exactly what our ancestors did? I absolutely do realise the world in the past also was less polluted than now. But past humans and animals did that in the past in the same environment, while in the present day environments only animals do this and humans can’t. Yes, animals and humans are of course always getting sick, but animals have way less access to healthcare than humans and manage to thrieve while humans need all this heathcare. Also, it is very evident in humans in human communities lacking healthcare being worse off. But with animals, I don’t seem to see the problems occuring as I’d expect for almost no healthcare for them. At least in this way.. the only biggest issues are like lost of land/hunting, and if health is the main issue? Basically, no heathcare affects humans worse than wild animals. And attitudes are if humans eat something off the ground it’s panic, an animal.. nope. So for actual story writing, I want to address these things in my story where both people and animals are time travelling. Also, I suppose how environmental changes would affect these out of time people.

Feral: there are a lot of assumptions in your ask that just don’t hold up.

Assumption #1: Animals have a higher tolerance for pollution and germs than humans do. Animals do get sick and die. In the case of pollution, higher pollution in a given area is more indicative of human life than animal life. Humans and our domesticated pets are the creatures living in cities with horrible smog conditions and the like, and while pollution definitely causes illnesses and disabilities in humans, one of the reasons you don’t see wild animals as much in these areas is because the development and pollution it causes has killed them off. As for germs, it is true that in industrialized countries, humans are probably more susceptible to germs, bacteria, viruses, etc, due to the inhibitions sterilized environments place on the development of natural immune systems. But animals still get sick and die, too; they may not die as frequently from illness as humans (I have no data one way or another), but I would argue that many also just don’t live long enough to die of illness over another cause.

Assumption #2: Animals eat straight off the ground and drink from streams, and that’s what our ancestors did. Our ancestors always cooked - eating straight from a raw carcass means more bacteria, more difficult digestion, and less calories. And it’s very likely that humanity didn’t exist before cooking, and only exists because of cooking. Our reticence to drink directly from natural water sources has a lot more to do with human pollution than any naturally occuring bacteria; see the multiple cholera outbreaks in history. Also, a polluted water source will usually kill the animals that live in that water source, the decaying carcasses of which further pollutes the source, and animals drinking from that source will also absolutely become sick.

Assumption #3: Humans can’t forage and drink from streams in the same way animals can in not overly polluted environments. There is a whole community of wilderness survival experts who disagree with you. The knowledge of what is and isn’t safe to eat and drink isn’t taught to us by elders anymore (again, in industrialized places), but that doesn’t mean we couldn’t learn it and survive just fine.

Assumption # 4: Animals don’t require healthcare the way humans do. Animals also don’t pack themselves into crowded stadiums during worldwide pandemics and otherwise tend not to do stupid shit that will almost certainly cause them harm. A broken leg on a wild land-based animal is a death sentence, so access to healthcare would definitely keep more animals alive. We know this because we offer animals healthcare - wildlife rehabilitators exist. Meanwhile, a broken leg, even in a human community without good or any healthcare options, would probably not result in death.

Assumption #5: Wild animals thrive. Not really. I mean, there are populations that do better than others. This is often due to human intervention and interaction. Prey animals will “thrive” when humans have killed off all their natural predators. Scavenging animals will “thrive” when there’s plenty of human food waste and refuse for them to eat. An invasive species will “thrive” after humans introduce them into an environment where they don’t have any natural deterrents to population growth. An animal community “thriving” is very different from a human community thriving. And an animal community that is afflicted by a virus is far less likely to survive it than a human community. Here’s a list of mass animal die-offs that occured just between January 1 and June 1 of 2015; literally tens of millions of animals dead in 5 months.

Assumption #8: You don’t see these problems occuring or dead animals all over the place therefore, wild animals are not dying everyday everywhere from disease and pollution. You probably do not live in a place where you see massive wild animal populations; the thriving wild animal populations you claim exist are in your imagination. In a truly balanced, natural ecosystem, homeostasis is achieved; you have neither mass die-offs nor population explosions. But due to human intervention in the environment, those ecosystems are becoming far less visible. And most population centers don’t have nearly the wild animal populations necessary to make any judgements based on anecdote and personal observation on how wild animals survive or don’t.

Assumption #7: Humans eating off the ground as a “panic” response due to environmental reasons. This is 100% societal. We have moralized cleanliness. Eating something off the ground is seen as demeaning and dirty, and you have to be in really desperate straits to do it. You know, unless you follow the 5-second rule. Because that’s totally how germs work. If I drop something on my kitchen floor while I’m cooking versus outside while I’m grilling, there isn’t really a difference except that I feel gross about eating the thing that dropped on the ground outside that I immediately picked up even if there is nothing that is actually harmful on it - meanwhile my kitchen floor could absolutely have bacteria on it because I’m really lazy about mopping.

I think a lot of what you’re putting forth in this Ask is more socialized or due to industrialization than having anything to do with wholly naturally occurring environmental factors.

As for how the narrative will address these things, that’s a plot issue that I don’t have any advice on, but I hope this has given you some food for thought.

Writing from Scratch # 11: Compound Plots, Part 1

Compound Plots, Part 1: Episodes

Like complex plots, compound plots have two or more plots put together, but unlike complex plots, in compound plots, the plots can be split apart and still work as a Complete Thought.

The first way to compound plots that we’ll go over is via episodes. So, we first we need to straighten out some terminology. There is a current trend in storytelling that could be called anti-episodic (there are pockets where this is not as much the case, like crime and mystery books and television); instead what’s really popular is “serialized” storytelling. What people generally mean when they talk about episodic versus serialized storytelling is that an episodic style has a different unconnected, self-contained plot every episode or book and that a serialized style has every episode or book contributing to one very large season or series spanning plot. As with most any binary, what we’re actually looking at is a spectrum – Harry Potter has a self-contained plot with every novel, but overall, every novel contributes to the plot of Voldemort’s resurrection and final death.

Supernatural is a really interesting case study because it lasted so long and it started before the anti-episodic trend took hold. So, you can see the early seasons, especially the first season, very firmly on the episodic side of the spectrum with its monster of the week format and it slowly became more and more serialized to the point where an unrelated monster of the week was anomalous and generally warranted some kind of in episode commentary by a character.

When I talk about episodic compound plots, I’m kind of talking about this idea, but it’s squares and rectangles. Or maybe squares and quadrilaterals. What I’m talking about is that one plot-problem will be solved, and then another plot-problem will arise. What the episodic-serialized debate is talking about is the causal relationship between those plot-problems. There are some serialized series that do not have episodic compound plots, but most of them do.

Continue Reading on WordPress

Review of The Dresden Files: Peace Talks (spoilers ahead)

This review is gonna be slightly different than my normal reviews as I am the only Paules Sibling of Awesome who reads The Dresden Files, so I have not talked through my thoughts with B beforehand. I also don't see the necessity of providing a rating for a book that is the sixteenth in a series (not counting the short story collections) - clearly I enjoy the books. Spoilers ahead!

So, the peace talks in question went about as disastrously as expected knowing Harry Dresden was involved, but obviously I didn't expect that. Years ago, Jim Butcher promised us an apocalyptic trilogy to end the series (titled Stars and Stones, Hell's Bells, and Empty Night, in case you missed it), but I never figured we'd actually get to a point where that ending seems in sight.

My big fear going into this was that Karrin Murphy would not survive. I was pleased to see that a) she did and b) she was as badass as ever, despite her injuries from Skin Game. Of course, who knows what will happen in Battle Ground, but really my only hope is that Murphy makes it to the end of the series. Just Murphy and Harry at the end of things, just as they were at the beginning.

Continue Reading on WordPress

Writing from Scratch #1

Welcome to Writing from Scratch!

I’ve been writing a long time, and sometimes it feels like I lose the trees for the forest. Writing from Scratch is a chance for me (and you!) to get back to the basics of storytelling.

If you’ve never written a story before, if you’ve never felt like you could come up with one that would be worth writing, my hope is that if you follow along with me here, you will have the confidence and know-how to come up with an idea, build it into a story, and share it with the world.

These posts will be little, easy-to-digest nuggets. At the end of every post, look for a prompt and share your response in the comments!

What Is a Story?

A story can be defined by what it contains: at least one plot, character, and setting, and a style through which it is told.

Story Bits

To begin, let’s take a look at the second smallest unit of a story – the sentence. A sentence is a set of words that conveys a complete thought. And communication is fractal, meaning each part shares the same pattern as the whole. A story and its components, therefore, will also convey a Complete Thought.

Continue Reading on WordPress