I'm thinking of writing a novel.

[chris the cynic]

So, as the title says, I'm thinking of writing a novel. If I follow up on that thinking my plan is to dump it in this thread as it is written. Now I know what you're thinking:

Wait, aren't you the guy who tried to write a novel, got 93 thousand words into it, stalled out, looked back on what you wrote found the quality to be lacking, and haven't managed to continue or revise it since?

Yes, yes I am. Well remembered. I hope to return to it at some point. (And nearly went crazy yesterday when I thought I'd lost almost 50,000 of those words.)

So what makes you think it'll work this time?

A very simple thing will be different this time. That was supposed to be a good novel, preferably a great novel. This new one I'm talking about will be a bad one. Probably spectacularly bad. Possibly as bad as Abduction by Rodman Philbric and Lynn Harnett. Well, hopefully not quite that bad.

The idea is not to intentionally create a bad novel, but rather to create a novel at an unreasonably fast pace. The result is almost certain to be bad. Especially since I've had an ongoing case of writer's block for years.

I intend to start it sometime around this Friday and finish before the 19th of January.

The idea for writing a novel in such a stupidly short time is taken from the recently ended National Novel Writing Month which I found out about a few hours before it ended. What happens in National Novel Writing Month is that people write a novel in a month. If they finish they win, the prize is bragging rights.

So anyway I intend to write a novel (and work on the Narcissus walk through for TNM at the same time.) Anyone have any thoughts about this insane endeavor? Anyone else want to write a novel during the same period?

-

Also, remember what I said about years worth of writer's block? That hasn't ended, which means that if you've got a good idea for a plot, or characters or whatnot that you'd like to see in a bad novel throw them out here before Friday and I may put them in a bad novel for you. Depending on how things go I might still do it if you present them after Friday.

If you do have suggestions you should know that I prefer externally motivated stories to internally motivated ones. Some extreme examples of the difference:

Battling demons - External.
Battling 'personal demons' - Internal

Saving the world from aliens - External
Saving yourself from yourself - Internal

Dealing with a ubiquitous conspiracy - External
Dealing with the paranoid schizophrenia that causes you to believe in a ubiquitous conspiracy - Internal

Also, as Jonas points out, I'm apparently an irredeemable softy. Do with that what you will.

[bobby 55]

My first thought would be do it. Perhaps the need for putting ideas to paper quickly may help you overcome your writers block.

[Jaedar]

I'm going to tell you what I tell everyone with writers block:
Just Write

As for suggestions, I would say you should write about what you know. Stock advice yes, but still very useful.

[justanotherfan]

Well, I'd burn out if I decided to write a novel, quickly, along with writing other stuff.

Still, I agree, do it. Damn the quality, and start writing again. If you don't write, your writing won't improve and you'll have nothing written to improve.

A friend told me quite seriously that I should write a nonfiction book. I laughingly titled it How You Should Do Things. I've done some creative writing privately, and I have a few fans, but I'm certainly not sure where to take it.

If you absolutely need a start, I noticed your examples center around generic conflict with large groups of unknown enemies. That, and I think purely external fiction lacks depth. Based on that, I'd suggest a novel where a protagonist (and a very small group of like-minded individuals) confront a group of enemies that is not ubiquitous, but strong because of blending in and non-pure-evil villain status. You can get a lot of external action, while still getting an internal process ("Is that an enemy? Maybe our receptionist is actually an enemy! Why am I thinking aloud?") without getting bogged down with internal self-focused conflict. Substitute any enemy in there, like terrorists vs. terrorists, science spies, small-country government/guerrilla conflicts, start-up company warfare in 2130, whatever.

[Grammatolatry]

DOOOO IT! Go for it! Go go go!

I'm an avid reader of sci-fi and fantasy, but I don't think I could ever write a book myself because then I'd know what happens. There wouldn't be the thrill of reading it for the first time.

[TheConEgo]

Good luck if you do end up writing it.

I always sucked at writing myself - so I won't pretend that I can give you good tips.

[Jonas]

Talking cat.

This is my only character idea. It is the only character idea you'll need.

[JC_Helios]

Talking cat.

This is my only character idea. It is the only character idea you'll need.

They should also shoot lasers, and possess laser-honor

*expects no one to get the reference and watch the topic descend into anarchy over: "honour vs. honor".*

[chris the cynic]

If you absolutely need a start, I noticed your examples center around generic conflict with large groups of unknown enemies.

That was basically so they could be paired up with internal things. Fighting demons fits well with fighting personal demons. Saving the world from aliens has the same "Saving X from Y," construction as, "Saving yourself from yourself." Actually originally that was just going to be saving the world / saving yourself, but that was too vague as saving yourself could be an entirely external thing depending on what you are saving yourself from.

Also the examples were intentionally extreme. ("Saving the world from aliens" instead of "Saving the farm from Monsanto" or "Saving the house from termites." Though I suppose all of those are large groups of enemies too.)

The one about conspiracies was because we should all be Deus Ex fans.

That, and I think purely external fiction lacks depth.

There is certainly an argument to be made for that. Stories about people without inner conflict tend to be a lot less complex than ones about people who have it. If you look to the recent discussion of Battlestar Galactica you'll see me arguing that Admiral Cain lacks depth because she devotes herself entirely to one thing and one thing alone without hesitation or second thoughts. As a result she never really has anything interesting happening internally. All of her conflict was external and she responded to it all the same way: with violence. Even if the external force was making a good point and happened to be a close friend.

As I said, I'm expecting this to be bad, so if I end up with a cast of characters no deeper than Cain that's not a problem. Not that I plan to shoot for that or anything.

All of the above said, you might have missed my point. Note the might, the might is important. There is a reason I said internal vs. external motivation instead of character driven vs. non character driven. With a few exceptions all good fiction is character driven. It is just that there is a very large difference between a character driven story about *looks at examples* fighting aliens and a character driven story about fighting addiction.

-

[Added:]
Is this some sort of magic talking cat, or a cat with a device like the one the Darwin had in Seaquest allowing it to talk, or just some sort of bizarre hybrid cat which has vocal cords?

[Jonas]

You're the writer. You decide.

[chris the cynic]

If you leave it in my hands it'd probably end up as a person with cat ears or something like that because that's a head that's easier to get into than the incomprehensible mind of an actual cat. At this point I shall turn to Sanctuary and say, "If you could teach a lion to speak, you still wouldn't understand him."

[Jonas]

Well it's up to you whether to make the best of the concept or squander it carelessly.

[bobby 55]

For the sake of humanity, don't name the cat Felix.

[Jonas]

But don't name it Felicity either, I'm reserving that for a special feline character.

[Morpheus]

My first thought would be do it. Perhaps the need for putting ideas to paper quickly may help you overcome your writers block.

I'd agree with this. I'd do it and see what happens.

The idea is not to intentionally create a bad novel, but rather to create a novel at an unreasonably fast pace. The result is almost certain to be bad. Especially since I've had an ongoing case of writer's block for years.

Yeah it wouldn't be very good as it needs to be thought out first, the characters, backgrounds of the characters, looks, apearance, personallity etc... then you have to work out how the characters relate to eachother. But if you can come up with ideas quickly, it should be no problem starting something, if you have time to do it, but from experience, I have got side tracked with other things when writing that I forget what I am writing when I get back to it.

I am writing a book, been 3 years and only 20% done and 150 pages. This is a long project that could take well over 10 years to complete, but Its no ordinary book, its a book on butterflies and moths (two books, one on each, volume 1 is on butterflies, volume 2 is on moths) I have been taking hundreds of photos of moths and butterflies over the past few years, more about it is here: http://www.davesleps.110mb.com/Daves_Books.htm

But nature books can take years of research before any writing is done.

I remember writing a horror story when I was 7, I found it recently, it had about 70 pages and most of it didn't really make sense (well I was 7 and spelling was ad) I set it in a toys 'r' us store where a group of kids (my friends then) got locked in at night and the toys and everything came alive and started attacking us. When I was 9 aa group of us were actually going to make a short film of the book, we had everything ready, except we couldn't get a toys 'r' us store, plus we had no idea how to make toys and stuff come alive, so it failed.