174 replies to this topic

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

My take on science is, most are indoctrinated into the dogmatic principle that science is objective, unbiased and represents nothing but fact / truth. To have an accurate view and understand science, we must acknowledge that science is subject to conflicts of interest. Separation of church and state is one thing. To have good science we also must have separation of science and state, and separation of science and corporation. Independent and unbiased science free from conflicts of interest is the only way to have reliable science.

Too many respond as if it were a "sin" to question things scientists say on behalf of science, without looking at facts. Conspiracy theorists are like heretics of past eras of history. Centuries past it was heretical to have religious views others than default state sanctioned views. And in this day and age many consider it heretical to question science as if science represented the word of God and were above question. It doesn't matter that a big corpoation like general motors paid millions of dollars to falsify evidence that climate change doesn't exist. Its still expected that people blindly believe everything published in a scientific journal, simply because its science and science should never be questioned, because science is God.

That said, there is plenty of legit science that proves cancer is treatable and there are ways of fighting climate change that are more cost effective & superior than the proposals currently on the table.

Its mainly political science and corporate science which lacks the necessary separation of science/state and science/corporation that says otherwise.

Edited by I Zeratul I, 02 October 2016 - 03:27 PM.

[Mister Blastman]

Sometimes I'll write something and move ahead a chapter or two. But that something I previously wrote may nag at me, gnaw at my guts, like something wasn't just right. And I may ignore it for a day or two, but it still continues to shout.

So I suck it up, I go back, I read it again--my intuition was right. Something was wrong.

Then I re-write.

That's been the last few days for me, in the last part of the novel. Argh. But it's good. I lost focus, I wrote some dreams that were good but are better saved for another future scene, replaced with something far more relevant, trippy and focused on the new centerpiece to my character's environment. When you introduce an alien monster, people want to see more of that monster. Or so my guts tell me. My characters do too. They curse at me and say stuff like, "damnit, I'm not dreaming about family and crap right now! I nearly **** my pants a scene ago and family, really? **** no! I'm thinking of that damn crazy looking thing and what the hell it was!"

Ah well. The life of a novelist.

[Mister Blastman]

Bleak is good. I like bleak. But I try and throw some lighter stuff in-between. One problem I have is finding the right kind of humor. Some people roll their eyes at things others might laugh out loud at.

[Mister Blastman]

So I'm mixing it up a little now in the story. I'm far in, and nasty things are about to happen, and I've reverted to short scenes bouncing between multiple groups of characters, ending each incomplete with their portion of the story to continue.

I figure if I'm going to serve a dish, sometimes the best part is the anticipation. That filet just isn't the same if you can press a button and have it delivered right away to the table. You've got to savor the atmosphere, relish in the smells, and then when the steaming, salted and peppered meat comes soaked in a vat of butter, you want to tear in!

And you do... slowly, with your knife, you carve off a chunk, and the rich, grass-fed slice of heaven melts in your mouth, warmth spreading across your tongue. Anticipating the next bite, your eyes roll back in bliss, and you don't want the first mouthful to end.

Okay, I'm exaggerating. But if you hand it to them right away, what fun is there in that? The trick is how soon? Too long and the readers get annoyed. Too soon and they don't care...

[Mister Blastman]

Hah I love that idea. I bet it was a big shock when they got there, and I wonder how many readers still hated him after? Or do they just hate you?

I don't have 'mechs in anything I've written, but I do have some robots. In fact, robots are a prevailing theme of the current novel, though I don't show them often. I've got a fight coming up where I will... well, systematically murder most of the main characters. I'm just going to see where my mind takes me--maybe I'll go overboard, maybe I won't.

[Mister Blastman]

Yeah it's fun, but I don't do it often. That doesn't mean my body counts aren't high--they often are, but this time around I have no choice. It must happen and I lament what I must do, but the awful despair must get even worse. So much awful stuff has happened already that I think I'm going to try and make some of the upcoming fights exciting. The pacing at the end of the book certainly is different from the rest.

I never had robots(well, aside for starships with AI) in my first novel but there's a reason for that--which this one explores.

I love Asimov, but there's a worst case scenario for robots, too.

Edited by Mister Blastman, 18 October 2016 - 08:56 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

Getting stuck sucks. I know exactly how the rest of the book is going to play out. My problem is the chapter I am in--it must happen. But I'm missing the motives of why. So I'm forced to interview my antagonist until what is about to occur is plausible. The trouble is this scene might conflict with what happens in the following chapter if I am not careful. I haven't written anything meaningful in two days and it is driving me nuts! I've done pruning, and received a fantastic response on the previous chapter I wrote, so that tells me I'm on the right track, but this is such a crucial moment, despite the protagonist being absent from the scene...

Madness.

It isn't even the main antagonist, just a momentary environmental one, a proverbial bear in the woods... except it has a brain, and is quite intelligent and cunning, and needs humans as a source of food because they're rich in certain elements that other life on the planet is not. Elements that mean the difference between a strong body and a weak one.

But it is intelligent. And simply killing to eat seems too obvious. Because an intelligent marooned creature would have prior motives before discovering this unknown tasty source of food.

[Mister Blastman]

Writing action well is hard. I'm tired.

[Mister Blastman]

This novel is shaping up to be longer than my first... and it's a standalone distant tie-in. I might hit 190k words before I'm done, but I'm not sure. A lot more needs to happen in the end to tie it all together--what, with the premise of the novel and how it situates within the universe in relation to the timeline. I've got outlines and tapes, and it's really neat seeing stuff fall into place I dreamt of happening in the story when I started this journey five months ago. So long, though...

But a story is as long as it needs to be.

Remind me to shoot for a short but simple tale with my next one. Okay, my next standalone. My sequel to the first is going to be even longer, I bet...

It'll all be worth it, if folks enjoy the tale. Or so I tell myself.

[Mister Blastman]

Hah fantastic. Go for it, man.

I'm still not done with this second novel. I have a feeling it is going to be over 200k words as I'm at 186k and 34 chapters with four to six more to go. Taking time off to work on just your novel will be an awesome thing. I envy you, actually, having your story in such a way that you can split it up. Neither of mine can be, as far as I know--maybe an editor knows better. Err, no, not maybe, I'm sure they do.

We write. They fix. After we fix many times beforehand.

I'm actually stuck right now on a scene I've been re-writing for over a week now. It is pivotal to the entire novel, high emotion, total cry scene (if I do my job). The hardest part, however, is what I'm doing with it--I'm merging three points of view into a single scene, with two sets of characters worlds apart and slowly interlacing their dialogue together in a single frame. It is hard to describe, and even harder to pull off. If it were a movie, this is how I'd imagine it being done, and can come up with no better way to write it. Two separate scenes just won't work. But as with all things sentimental and romantic, less is more but not enough is meaningless, if that makes sense.

[Mister Blastman]

Write.

Re-write.

Then write again.

Those cliched scenes of writers hunched over typewriters, tearing sheets from the ribbon, and tossing them into the bin aren't so cliched, after all...

Edited by Mister Blastman, 16 December 2016 - 09:01 PM.

[Mister Blastman]

I think it is impossible to write action perfect the first time. Always yanking my scissors out and leaving words and punctuation strewn across the floor...

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Mister Blastman, on 17 December 2016 - 06:47 PM, said:

I think it is impossible to write action perfect the first time. Always yanking my scissors out and leaving words and punctuation strewn across the floor...

At least you're being somewhat productive.

I've tried to do nanowrimo for the past 5 or so years.

In those 5 years, I only managed to write 5 words.

Think about that for a second the next time you feel like you aren't getting anywhere.

[Mister Blastman]

I Zeratul I, on 17 December 2016 - 07:05 PM, said:

At least you're being somewhat productive.

I've tried to do nanowrimo for the past 5 or so years.

In those 5 years, I only managed to write 5 words.

Think about that for a second the next time you feel like you aren't getting anywhere.

Oh, I'm getting somewhere. I've written over 190k words of this novel since June, and that's not counting all the times I've re-written scenes or a chapter (sometimes six or seven times), plus discarded stuff, and my outlines.

The secret is you must write every day. I do it six days a week.

Marack Drock the Unicorn Wizard, on 17 December 2016 - 08:37 PM, said:

My action scenes are usually really jumpy and characterless the first time around. Takes a lot of work for me to get them where I am happy.

Mine tend to be full of extra words, sometimes with jumbled description and often sentences three or four times longer than they need to be.

Then I chop them apart. The end result is clearer, simpler, and more elegant--with speed, tempo and rhythm my goal. But even after all that, I still hate my prose. I know people who say they like it. But I hate it.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Mister Blastman, on 17 December 2016 - 09:37 PM, said:

I still hate my prose. I know people who say they like it. But I hate it.

Marack Drock the Unicorn Wizard, on 17 December 2016 - 09:56 PM, said:

Yeah I don't do that... not at all.I literally hate everything i write

Ditto.