Breaking Up the Logjam of Mid-story Writer’s Block

In the old days, breaking up a logjam was incredibly tricky and dangerous. Loggers carefully removed one or more “key logs” (a little like reverse jenga, I guess) and if it was a really bad jam, they had to use dynamite. These days, they use a machine to haul out big chunks until the logs start moving.

I’ve been working on revisions for my YA novel, THE SPARROW’S SECRET HEART. It was my first novel, and it’s been through more rewrites than I can count, including a complete point of view shift from third person to first person, but I keep coming back to it because I still love the protagonist and he just won’t let me give up on him.

Recently I hit a logjam. I’m trying to rewrite a pivotal scene that introduces an important character, the protagonist’s Aunt Megan, a complete stranger to him until this moment. My critique group demanded a better description of Aunt Megan and her house, as well as a restructuring of the scene to raise the tension and conflict. I kept coming at the scene and stalling. Over and over and over. Finally, I realized I really didn’t know enough about this aunt of his. So I sat down and started working on the backstory.

Now, I’d worked out a backstory for Aunt Megan before, but it really was surface stuff, more about plot logistics as they affected my protagonist than about Aunt Megan herself. I realized I didn’t even have a clue how to get inside her head yet. So I started with the timeline, her age when certain key events took place. I pieced together the ways those events affected her and her life. Then I wrote my problem scene in first person from Aunt Megan’s point of view. Mind you, I have no plans to rewrite the novel in her point of view. This was an exercise to help me find my way into the scene.

I wish I could say the words flew from my finger tips, but they didn’t. With each key log I thought I’d removed, new ones took its place, new questions about who Aunt Megan was. I wrote scenes that had nothing to do with my protagonist. I followed lines of thought well beyond the necessary conclusion. I got out my sketchpad and drew a complete floor plan of her house. It was a little terrifying to make such a commitment to the interior world of a character who isn’t my protagonist. Why was I spending all this time on stuff that wouldn’t even make it into my final draft?

But it was worth it. Bit by bit, the logs began to break free. Aunt Megan came into focus. Critical motives and subtexts revealed themselves. It’s taken me a good week or so, and a lot of words that won’t end up in the novel itself, but the logs are floating downriver again.

Mine was definitely a case of removing key logs one at a time, gradual and painstaking. But I’ve also had those dynamite situations – just sit down and power through it with some insane, off-the-wall notion. I’ve even used the chunks at a time method – cut this chunk, move this chunk, and soon it makes sense again.

When you’ve faced writer’s block, how did you break up your logjam? Chunk-chomping machine? Key logs? Or dynamite?

This is a post from the Writer’s Wavelength blog which can be found at writerswavelength.blogspot.com.

Overworking the Clay

On my latest project, I found myself worrying away at the same spot over and over, bringing the same chapters to my critique group, rewritten, revised, renewed and tweaked, week after week. Every week I’d say to myself, “That’s good enough for this draft. Now it’s time to move forward.” My group would echo the sentiment, reminding me not to “overwork the clay.” But every week, when I sat down to write, I found myself rereading and rewriting that same section. My logic brain told me I was caught in a quagmire and rereading those same sections was a trap, but some other slippery spirit in me kept insisting on going back.

I didn’t really have this problem on the first two novels. Here I am on my third, thinking “I should be getting better at this. In fact, I should know better.” I began to think the genre was what made the difference. The first two novels were realistic fiction. This one is magical realism, and the rules and process feel completely different, more metaphorical, less linear. I’ve written a full draft and about two-thirds of it is useless. I’ve written multiple synopses that seem to make perfect sense only to have the story hijack me into some other direction. Every rewrite seems to change the metaphorical elements or the psychological landscape just enough that I have to go back and alter imagery, scenes, characters. And each tiny change in choice or motivation has a potentially seismic impact on the physical landscape, the symbolic magical objects and the otherworldly characters.

Okay. Let’s say this genre demands a spiraling approach to drafts and revision. Even so, at some point you overdo it. At some point you have to let go and move on or you risk “overworking the clay” – leaving your characters and story limp, exhausted and nearly lifeless from obsessive attention to one section. How much is too much? What signals tell you to move on? What if you go too far – can your story be rescued?

I am reminded of watching my third graders attempt watercolor painting using non-watercolor paper. They just don’t understand the idea of exhausting or overworking the paper. I’ll watch as they paint and paint and paint the same spot until the paper is coming up in little nubbins or falling apart in their hands or they’ve worn a hole right through their favorite section of the picture. Then they come to me in despair believing it’s ruined. I tell them to let the paper rest and dry and then we will try to repair it by transferring what’s usable onto a new, fresh, stronger piece of paper. Perhaps I need to heed my own advice.

Of course the best way to prevent the ruined watercolor situation is to use the right kind of paper to begin with. Proper watercolor paper can handle the kind of stress placed on it by diligent and overly enthusiastic third graders, or by techniques like watercolor wash that involve tons of moisture. It’s strong, thick, heavy and durable.

So what’s the metaphorical equivalent of “the right kind of paper” for a novel? Setting? Point of view? Pre-drafting strategies? Plot outline? General structure? It has to do with the foundation you lay before the intricate, in-depth work of drafting and revision begins.

What do you do to lay a good foundation before you dive into the serious drafting process?

This is a post from the Writer’s Wavelength blog which can be found at writerswavelength.blogspot.com.

Write Like a Third Grader

I’ve learned more about the craft of writing in the nine years since I became a teacher than I did at any time in college. Granted, I am thinking more like writer, and seeing myself as a writer, which helps. But in teaching my third graders the craft of writing, I have received an education myself. By teaching the process, I think about my own process. When I teach my students strategies for planning their writing, I discover my own strategies. When I talk with my students about revising by identifying whether they have a good balance of dialogue, action, internal story and sensory details, I must ask myself the same question. Have I oriented my reader to the setting? Introduced and described the characters? Am I writing in scenes, stringing together small moments, or just telling what happened? Have I chosen a story or topic that I care enough about to spend time with?

I have to give a great deal of the credit to the writing curriculum we use in our school, a curriculum developed by Lucy Culkins. Culkins’ curriculum is designed to help children think and work like real writers. As a teacher when I conference with students I must hone in on what they’re doing well and what they need to work on. In a conference, I ask them “What are you working on today as a writer?” “What are you trying to do with that story?” “Can you show me an example of where you did that?” I teach my students to be the boss of their own writing. When they sit down to write each day, they make a plan, asking themselves where they are in the writing process and deciding what they will work on that day. Are they generating ideas? Organizing their thoughts, perhaps with an outline or storyboard, a timeline or a story mountain? Maybe they’re writing a discovery draft or rehearsing their story. How can I not become a better writer when I ask these questions day after day and hear eight-year-olds telling me, “I noticed I didn’t have enough dialogue and I didn’t orient my reader to the setting?” If my third graders can hone their craft, so can I.

Every third grader in my class, and most of the younger students in our school, also know Lucy’s mantra “When you’re done, you’ve just begun.” I finished my novel and sent it out. Now what? “When you’re done, you’ve just begun.” Go back to your writer’s notebook and start thinking about ideas for the next piece.

If you are not a teacher but you are a writer, I encourage you to find some of Lucy Culkins’ work. THE ART OF TEACHING WRITING is a great place to start. You might even use it as a template for your critique group if you have one.

This is a post from the Writer’s Wavelength blog which can be found at writerswavelength.blogspot.com.

Fearless Revision

“What if I rewrite the whole thing in first person?”
“What if I cut this chapter entirely?”
“What if death is the narrator?”
“What if there are 4 different narrators?”
“What if I write it as a blog?”
“What if she turns into a hippo instead of a moose?”

There was a time when I revised like an ancient, nearsighted clockmaker, turning over every word and phrase, tinkering with the minutest mechanism, making miserly revisions as if each change cost me and each letter was crafted from grains of diamond dust. I love treating words with so much affection and care, but I’m thankful that I have finally developed the courage to make more fearless revisions, skydiving, bungee-jumping revisions, the kind of revisions that change the entire landscape of a manuscript.

My whole critique group seems to have entered this phase of development together, which makes it ten times more exhilarating. When one of us announces, “I think I’m going to cut that whole section and move the important parts here instead,” we cheer, we exult. It feels like we’ve all gone cliff-diving together.

Perhaps the support and safety of this long-term critique group has given me the foundation of confidence to take those plot-shattering leaps. Or maybe this liberation comes with writing novel-length pieces. Perhaps it’s a function of exposing myself, over a period of time, to multiple critiques. Or maybe being in the habit of writing has made the words less scarce and therefore less precious, the process less like mining gold and more like cultivating a garden.

What is the most fearless, radical change you’ve ever made in a piece of your own writing? How did it affect the story?

If you’ve found yourself saying, “What if I ….?” or “I wonder what would happen if ….” then I challenge you to grab the hands of some fellow writers and take that vigorous plunge! What have you got to lose?

This is a post from the Writer’s Wavelength blog which can be found at writerswavelength.blogspot.com.

Written In Stone

I’m taking another whack at the magical realism novel I started a while back and I’ve discovered that the process I’m following for it seems different than for the last project, which was straight-up realistic fiction. My office looks like a giant craft project. I find myself immersed in cut-and-paste, sticky note extravaganzas, drawing pictures, taping things together, and paper-clipping bits and pieces onto eachother. I can’t seem to stay in the realm of the computer. The world of the computer feels too small, as if its physical size and shape imprisons the story. It got me wondering, has writing changed as the tools of writing have changed? Do our tools affect not only our process but our product, too – that is, our stories themselves? Would the great writers of the past have produced different stories if they worked on computer?

A typewriter sends the words onto a page that flaps freely in the air. The words have a physical reality the moment you type them. Writing by hand has a messy, lively, organic flow to it. Writing by hand with a pencil, a pen, a quill – each tool seems to connect with different experiences in the brain and body, a different sense of artistry, permanency, open-ness.

On the computer, we can write and delete huge chunks of text with such ease. The words come and go like will-o-the-wisps. But their ethereal spirits are trapped inside this skinny little two-dimensional box.

How would my work change if I wrote on stone tablets? How would your work change?

This is a post from the Writer’s Wavelength blog which can be found at writerswavelength.blogspot.com.