Systems thinking: linear and non-linear.
When I write, I write like an engineer solves a problem. I start with
the problem, introducing it with as much “hook” as I can, hoping to
grab the reader’s attention while she’s perusing the book on a shelf
so she’ll buy the damned thing. I then move forward to reveal the
other aspects of the story: characters, their relationship to the
problem or its solution, the various aspects of their shared dilemma
that weren’t obvious at the start, more details of the setting, etc.
From there, I’m some fraction of the way along and I start thinking
about how to get through to the resolution. The characters work on
their problem, slowly revealing its hidden facets, unveiling their
character traits to either aid or thwart their working through it and
the other ingredients introduced by new actors or its new facets.
Even describing this process here in this post shows me my internal
thought processes are goal directed, where the tacit goal is to solve
the problem rather than to create a tangled and engaging story
containing human drama and twists and turns and beauty along the way.
I’m writing stories like I write computer software — direct, to the
point, deliberately, but my deliberacy isn’t directed toward what I
now perceive as the real goal. I’m writing a problem statement and
then proceeding with a solution rather than writing a story.
In writing my two big works to date, my process has been the above.
But I’m reaching a point in my development as an author where I see
this can only result in stories that may be interesting to some
readers but are far from riveting to all. As in many things in life,
things get much simpler if only one can focus on the true goal
rather on the shallower, obvious one.
Does this process come naturally to some, even as a beginning, but not
so much to the type of beginner I am? Probably. Someone like Stephen
King or John Grisham might have started out thinking of their story as
a story rather than as problem → solution as I seem to have been
doing. Or did they have to learn this vital lesson themselves at some
point? I would love to be able to ask them some day.
In the meantime, regardless of the path taken by others, mine is
leading me to this lesson having written some hundreds of thousands of
words while still traveling along what I now perceive to be the
wrong path. I’m not saying viable and readable stories can’t come
from my original, instinctive way of working. But writing linearly and
then going back to try to add interest, twists, and misdirection later
leads to an inferior result.
I might be turning myself into the centipede who’s asked how he can
possibly coordinate all of those many legs to walk, leaving him frozen
in analytical self-doubt. I hope not.