booksay
This is the nonfiction story of one man's quest to publish a fiction novel:
Chapter 49: The Right Way to Write?
writing I saw something interesting over the Labor Day weekend.
I was watching a documentary on the film Magnolia, and it's writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson quoted a hero of his. His hands waving flamboyantly as he spoke, acting out what his words inferred, he compared writing to ironing clothes: You do one part, and then you redo the trail end of that part, but move a little further along. Then you go over the end again, and move further still.
I loved this analogy, because it describes what I did with Running Electricity. I felt bad doing it this way, because Stephen King's memoir seems to strongly disagree with it. Stevie prefers to write everything, put the manuscript in a drawer for months while he works on something else, and then return to it fresh, and review what he's done then.
I don't like to do that. Call me impatient, but I like to see the fruits of my labor immediately. Sometimes I write something and I think, "Oh, that's great," and I want to reread it to make sure it is, in fact, great, and I like to, at that moment, try to perfect it. Is that ridiculous and arrogant? Will I dillute the writing by going over it too many times, and thereby taking out the original oomph of surprise and creativity? I don't know.
It is how an Academy Award nominated scriptwriter works, but not one of the best selling book authors of all time. So which is the right way? Perhaps their isn't ONE right way. Perhaps it's whatever works best for each person.
Or perhaps Paul Thomas Anderson would have won his Oscar if he followed Uncle Steve's philosophy.
Like the number of licks it takes to get to the center of a lollipop, the world may never know.
But please tell me your thoughts on the subject. I'm dying to hear from you, instead of simply living on this blog through my voice all the time.
I was watching a documentary on the film Magnolia, and it's writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson quoted a hero of his. His hands waving flamboyantly as he spoke, acting out what his words inferred, he compared writing to ironing clothes: You do one part, and then you redo the trail end of that part, but move a little further along. Then you go over the end again, and move further still.
I loved this analogy, because it describes what I did with Running Electricity. I felt bad doing it this way, because Stephen King's memoir seems to strongly disagree with it. Stevie prefers to write everything, put the manuscript in a drawer for months while he works on something else, and then return to it fresh, and review what he's done then.
I don't like to do that. Call me impatient, but I like to see the fruits of my labor immediately. Sometimes I write something and I think, "Oh, that's great," and I want to reread it to make sure it is, in fact, great, and I like to, at that moment, try to perfect it. Is that ridiculous and arrogant? Will I dillute the writing by going over it too many times, and thereby taking out the original oomph of surprise and creativity? I don't know.
It is how an Academy Award nominated scriptwriter works, but not one of the best selling book authors of all time. So which is the right way? Perhaps their isn't ONE right way. Perhaps it's whatever works best for each person.
Or perhaps Paul Thomas Anderson would have won his Oscar if he followed Uncle Steve's philosophy.
Like the number of licks it takes to get to the center of a lollipop, the world may never know.
But please tell me your thoughts on the subject. I'm dying to hear from you, instead of simply living on this blog through my voice all the time.
Matthew Ulmer @ BookSay
Recent Visitors
Bookmarks