Forum Posts Feed
Snowflake et al.
View this topic | Back to topic list
Posted by 22111
Dec 6, 2013 at 08:53 PM
1)
In this CT thread, on pages 3 and 4, the “Snowflake method” was mentioned:
http://www.outlinersoftware.com/topics/viewt/5128/10
As Franz said there, the method is straightforward, the software is not really needed.
There is a lot of insight to be found on amazon.com, by entering “snowflake method”, both with (143) reviews of
Writing Fiction For Dummies by Randy Ingermanson (Snowflake Method creator/inventor) and Peter Economy
and (273!) reviews of
Outlining Your Novel: Map Your Way to Success by K. M. Weiland (Jul 1, 2011)
(in both cases, I’m speaking of the reviews, not of the books).
My opinion: It’s not sufficient, but that does not make it wrong. And its creator acknowledges that its an iterative process (and that means, “how much meat to be put to characters, etc., in early stages? and how much outlining is there to be done before writing?”)
2)
Another link from Prof. Kühn’s blog:
I remember many others, very detailed ones from Heinrich Böll among others, or from Garcia Marquez; in the link, the Heller spreadsheet is remarkable for its size (A2 or bigger) and clarity (how often might it have been rewritten in parts?), the Mailer matrix for its real-life character (sheet of paper, adjacent element will not withdraw to make room).
Since there are so many other examples, I would be thankful for further links; also, somebody should make a splendid coffee table book out of such (there are several such books about writers’ studies/desks, of much less interest here.
Also, some Kühn notes (no illustration) about
http://takingnotenow.blogspot.be/2011/12/charles-dickens-plan-sheets.html
and even on a quite different but also fascinating aspect:
http://takingnotenow.blogspot.be/2011/09/holderlin-and-version-control.html
3)
An interesting aspect in the above facsimile examples: Few coloring, not so much “timeline”, “which person in which scenes” and all that, but we are speaking of novels, not Hollywood screenplays here.
At the opposite of the straightforward approach in 2) above (scroll down to see the screenshots):
(Attention, for Mac there is “Story Expert”, much more developed, 200$, whilst for Windows, you only will get “Pro”, 150$ - both are on sale currently, for some 30 or so $$ less.)
Here again, the observations of 1) above apply, but I suppose some ex post analysis, post 1st, 2nd… 10th draft (iterative again) with such methods (in Dramatica or in other tools mentioned in this forum) is highly advisable if a planned Hollywood blockbuster is not meant to become a turkey.
4)
Well, it’s called Dramatica, after all, not Epica, right? Even though there might be intersections, cf. “The Hero’s Journey” concept (Joseph Campbell).
Now for the “let your characters guide you” concept (with or without previous planning) and which might indeed be far better in many cases of epic writing, and in “arthouse” films, too, than too much planning in situational/action terms:
A fine example for such development is given by Jeremy Leven in a not-so-good Rob Reiner (“When Harry Met Sally”, 1989) film, “Alex & Emma” (2003, some interesting reviews on imdb.com).
5) NOT RELEVANT HERE, so please skip:
Reviews on imdb.com, e.g. giving the fact that the true story behind is Dostoievski’s and his typist’s.
I remember many such “story within story” packages, but I’ve forgotten all of them, so I would be thankful for some hints/links to others of this kind.
It’s quite normal though that “the story within” is not of good quality (let alone something like “Harry/Sally”), since it’s “sacrificed”, it’s “given away”, instead of being sold as a product of its own, so it’s almost always some minor thing having been “recycled” this way.
As I have said some days ago, from a technical pov, both “Tonio Kröger” and “Death in Venice” (and even some other, lesser novellas / short stories of this authors) could have been integrated into “Buddenbrooks”, but Thomas Mann was very well advised to “cut them off” and publish them as integral works, instead of committing the double error of blowing up his big novel even more, and of sacrifying two first-rate novellas.
So, “story within story” novels or films should better be sure of becoming real blockbusters if they dare “sacrifying” any (second) first-rate story within.
But from a “writers’ lovers’ pov”, such a scheme, even in lesser specimens of their kind, is always of high interest…
...as is any story that details creation, here in writing, but of course, no one will have forgotten the about-4-hour version (and it must be that one!) of Jacques Rivette’s “La Belle Noiseuse” (1991)
For this kind of tale-telling, too, I’d be thankful for sources (links, possible books…).
Both genres are totally fascinating, and “Alex & Emma” brings both in one film.
And of even less relevance here:
Of course, the film-within-film was quite ridiculous, and since the first-degree action wasn’t that good either, this package bombed; arthouse filmgoers will probably remember some avantgarde French films, like “Diva”, “Les amants du Pont-Neuf”, or “Subway”: Perhaps such real fresh secondary scenes - within an all-american context, no problem - would have had some more appeal: In fact, the “couple” in that apartment was rather subdued, classic, old-fashioned, and then going constantly back to some even more “legacy” material?! All the more so since the same actors play in both versions, which means that in the 1920 story, they “regressed” even more: not that appealing neither for young cinemagoers nor for the older crowd, since they go to the cinema in order to feel young. Hence the need of a VERY MODERN second-hand story in this film, in which those same actors could have proven that in their imagination at least (= the “ego ideal”, cf. the writer’s total passivity vàv the mob, waiting for their next/final visit), they were quite active/modern/up-to-date/really young.
Perhaps then the film would have bombed, too, just my 2-cents without thinking a week long about some better story. (And then there was some tongue-in-cheek humour, but far from enough, even of that kind only, let alone some “meat” to it all.)
Anyway, I’m fond of both the “story-within-story”, and the “story how to create a story” concept, so if there are some sources to one or both, please let me know.