4 ms·

> I start by writing a brief, extremely dull short story ...about three pages ... I refine it for weeks... > that small story contains a full, straightforward

by LeonB 7y ago

> I start by writing a brief, extremely dull short story ...about three pages ... I refine it for weeks... > that small story contains a full, straightforward account of the case my detective must solve, told in simple English. It enumerates who committed the crime and why, how they covered it up, and all the stuff of mystery novels: clues, red herrings, false leads, bloody knives, mysterious scars, anonymous notes, midnight rendezvous — in short, all the details I know I’ll have to omit from the real book I write, the actual mystery novel. This is gold. Thank you.

fenomas 7y ago
Interestingly, it's quite similar to how Raymond Chandler taught himself to write - he took a popular short story (by Erle Stanley Gardner I think), wrote an outline of its plot, and then wrote his own story from the outline and compared it to the original. He clearly didn't keep up the process for his original works; it's interesting to wonder what the result might have been.
- potta_coffee 7y ago
  Benjamin also used a similar process to learn writing. I've been meaning to try it, but I'm a huge procrastinator.
- ggambetta 7y ago
  I did the same, except with Dan Brown. I wrote a bit about this process here: https://gabrielgambetta.com/tgl_swiss_trains.html https://gabrielgambetta.com/tgl_swiss_trains.html Every time this comes up, someone asks to see the actual spreadsheet. I've shared it here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HdlD_tmmm1D0zX1JgXzFVSFB9nk6LT_DMDnsIPugl0M/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HdlD_tmmm1D0zX1JgXzF...
  - WA 7y ago
    Cool, thanks for sharing!
cschmidt 7y ago
I remember reading a 3-5 page novel outline that Arthur C Clarke published in one of his short story collections. It was dull, but an interesting insight into his process. I can't seem to find a reference to it now.
- avian 7y ago
  "The Sentinel" collection has a bunch of Clarke's early short stories, some of which he later developed into novels: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/149070.The_Sentinel https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/149070.The_Sentinel
nkrisc 7y ago
I've come across some mystery stories (mostly the occasional episode of TV series) where my guess is the writers for a particular episode could have benefited from this approach. If your story doesn't make any sense in a matter-of-fact format like this, I won't make a lick of sense when told properly. This seems like a fantastic way to gauge the soundness of the story you want to tell.
mxcrossb 7y ago
It seems like solid advise, but not sufficient? Having wasted many hours watching tv mystery shows, I’d say that just because the crime is coherent, doesn’t mean it’s compelling. Though it for sure helps, I thought his comment about “is it good enough for serial” is nice advice (unless you want to be subversive of course). But for me, what matters is the sequence of clues. Too many time it’s just talk to person a, talk to person b, etc, until they hit a “dead end” until the magic revelation/piece of evidence solves it. But for me a real compelling mystery has every piece along for the entire ride. And that’s not really related to the core crime that you sketch out.
- LeonB 7y ago
  It’s definitely not sufficient, but it’s valuable advice because it shows the very starting point, the foot of the ladder. So often advice assumes you’re already at a location very far up the ladder. But yes, crafting those big revelations is a different and more advanced skill.

by LeonB 7y ago

fenomas 7y ago

Interestingly, it's quite similar to how Raymond Chandler taught himself to write - he took a popular short story (by Erle Stanley Gardner I think), wrote an outline of its plot, and then wrote his own story from the outline and compared it to the original. He clearly didn't keep up the process for his original works; it's interesting to wonder what the result might have been.

potta_coffee 7y ago
Benjamin also used a similar process to learn writing. I've been meaning to try it, but I'm a huge procrastinator.
ggambetta 7y ago
I did the same, except with Dan Brown. I wrote a bit about this process here: https://gabrielgambetta.com/tgl_swiss_trains.html https://gabrielgambetta.com/tgl_swiss_trains.html Every time this comes up, someone asks to see the actual spreadsheet. I've shared it here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HdlD_tmmm1D0zX1JgXzFVSFB9nk6LT_DMDnsIPugl0M/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HdlD_tmmm1D0zX1JgXzF...
- WA 7y ago
  Cool, thanks for sharing!

cschmidt 7y ago

I remember reading a 3-5 page novel outline that Arthur C Clarke published in one of his short story collections. It was dull, but an interesting insight into his process. I can't seem to find a reference to it now.

avian 7y ago
"The Sentinel" collection has a bunch of Clarke's early short stories, some of which he later developed into novels: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/149070.The_Sentinel https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/149070.The_Sentinel

nkrisc 7y ago

I've come across some mystery stories (mostly the occasional episode of TV series) where my guess is the writers for a particular episode could have benefited from this approach. If your story doesn't make any sense in a matter-of-fact format like this, I won't make a lick of sense when told properly. This seems like a fantastic way to gauge the soundness of the story you want to tell.

mxcrossb 7y ago

It seems like solid advise, but not sufficient? Having wasted many hours watching tv mystery shows, I’d say that just because the crime is coherent, doesn’t mean it’s compelling. Though it for sure helps, I thought his comment about “is it good enough for serial” is nice advice (unless you want to be subversive of course). But for me, what matters is the sequence of clues. Too many time it’s just talk to person a, talk to person b, etc, until they hit a “dead end” until the magic revelation/piece of evidence solves it. But for me a real compelling mystery has every piece along for the entire ride. And that’s not really related to the core crime that you sketch out.

LeonB 7y ago
It’s definitely not sufficient, but it’s valuable advice because it shows the very starting point, the foot of the ladder. So often advice assumes you’re already at a location very far up the ladder. But yes, crafting those big revelations is a different and more advanced skill.