by Andreas Eschbach

"To aim for simplicity is a very good strategy, especially for tools. A hammer, for example, is a simple tool. A screwdriver, too. Sometimes we come across these "universal" hammer + screwdriver + scissor + pencil + "you-can-even-steam-your-suit-with-it"-tools, but I have never ever seen any of them in the toolbox of a professional."

I'd like to share some thoughts and experiences about how I write.

I don't have a fixed way of writing my novels, but usually there is a very early phase where I simply scribble notes on paper. Then there is the moment I decide to put my effort towards a certain novel project, and after that, I write a lot into files, because you can reorder things there and add everywhere, something you can't do on paper. And then there is the moment, when all the ideas and sub-ideas have reached the "critical mass" and it's time to start to develop the chain of events, usually known as plot. And from that moment on, I would like to use StoryLines in the future.

I have to admit that I ignore the "Character" section completely. I usually develop my characters in various ways, sometimes with Sol Stein's WritePro FictionMaster, sometimes "free-wheeling" - basically I maintain a simple text file where I collect everything I know about my characters and condense it to a description. I maintain a second text file where I collect ideas about what has to happen in the story. (I ignore the "Locations" section as well, but I consider it may be helpful for scriptwriters.) What I did when I gave StoryLines a try was to put these two files together and import it into the Project Notes.

(By the way, what a great idea to be able to create new cards just by marking text in the Notes window and pressing CTRL-N - wonderful! "C'est géniale!")

I tried a lot of the available demo versions of software for writers, just out of curiosity. Most programs require you to answer tons of questions, and after you've done that, they spit everything you have written back in tons of reports. But most of this is no help, it's a distraction. These programs keep you from actually writing, even from actually developing the story.

The amazing thing in Sol Stein's program "WritePro" is that you don't have to answer lots of questions about your story or characters - you work on them almost all of the time. And that is why it's useful, I think. (It provides indeed practically no help for the task of putting the pieces into the right order - because Mr Stein does not believe in "plotting", I assume.)

I came to the conclusion that whatever a piece of software does, it is important to avoid everything that might be a temptation to confuse analysis and synthesis. The biggest single mistake most people make is to believe that by analyzing a good book you can find out how to write one yourself. A lot of software is based on this assumption. They provide an in-depth analysis of a successful novel or movie as an example (sometimes several) to prove how their formula, because it fits with the example (that is: has been made fit), is able to create a masterpiece. But all analysis is interpretation, nothing else. And every writer knows that interpretation is something that comes after the work, not before.

As I mentioned, I used "Power Structure" to develop my latest novel (which will come out in fall 2003). It started in a promising way, but in the end, instead of having a fully developed story that only needed to be written, I ended up with the most inconsistent and unsatisfying first draft I've ever written. I had to do a lot more of re-work and re-writing than usual until it was finally satisfying. Why? I thought about this a lot. I think it was partly because of the temptation to interpret something that has not yet been written. "Power Structure" provides a lot a edit fields titled, let's say, "What does Character X learn throughout the first Act?", which seems to be a big inspiration at first glance. Wow, I should really consider this! So you write in, for example: "X learns to be more open to the needs of others."

The trap is that your subconscious might get a feeling from that that the work is done already. You might forget completely to show that. To illustrate that by events, by something that happens. Or you illustrate it, but you don't realize that in the big picture, the pieces don't fit together well. (It might be partly my own fault, but I had a lot to struggle with the program, and usually I am not bad at using software.)

In StoryLines, I have no other possibility than to add a card or two. Maybe I add a card saying "He walks by a beggar without taking notice" somewhere in the beginning and another saying "He walks by a beggar, stops suddenly, turns and gives him money" in the end. Maybe I add a card - or a *cloud* someday (:-D) - with a question like "How has he changed?" It is a good thing that I have few alternatives to adding cards, that is, working on the story itself instead of on anything else. Instead of interpreting it already. (OK, I could make a note in the project notes. But this just does not feel like having it done. It's more a to do-list, and that's OK.)

Working with small cards is an old technique and has been used by many writers in the past. Its only drawback is that in the real world you soon come up against limitations: no wall and no window is big enough, especially not if you insist on arranging cards on story lines in different colours! This limitation is one that your program takes away, and it also does the chore of writing all the notes on the cards together in the right order. It leaves the thinking to the writer, and that's good.

© Andreas Eschbach, 2003

Andreas Eschbach is a bestselling German author; one of his novels has recently been made into a film. You can find out more about Andreas Eschbach at his web site, www.andreaseschbach.de.

Back to the top at Writer's Café