![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
correspondence on "Close"
29 Dec 2023 05:32 pmThis has ended up being long. My brain is in verbose mode today so I'm going with it while it lasts. I often think best with my fingers and in response so this is a way for me to think with greater depth and also save the thoughts to return to.
"Concept: works and is engaging and emotionally credible, if not entirely surprising (it crosses genre conventions, but the idea that two characters who care for each other care for each other isn’t too much of a twist - despite the style acting as misdirection…)."
Engaging, emotionally credible and "works" are very reassuring. This is only the 2nd story I've written (plus another 10 years ago), so thank you.
I wasn't going for a twist or a surprise. This started as a writing exercise to show relationship without relying on the usual conventions.
You're the 1st reader (out of 4) to centre the relationship. 2 got caught up in trying to work out scenarios and the 3rd made a tangle out of seeing the love as unrequited. In fairness, I made a point of strengthening the depiction of the relationship in response to their feedback. So maybe that aspect is good enough now as you got it.
The misdirection wasn't intentional either. It just happened and provides the engagement. Which helps as I'm not skilled at writing plot.
" Style: V factual without interiority and short sentences. Pushes towards an ‘action’ reading, but without the intensification you’d expect if so. It has clear sentences and a ‘transparent’ style (a big plus!): but they may be a bit *too* consistently short. It almost reads like it’s describing a film, rather than the events themselves. There’s also some repetition (‘whispers’ and ‘says quietly’) and repeated epithets (‘the healthy man’ etc) which can make them feel like flat characters."
What do you mean by 'transparent'? It's helpful to understand its strengths as well as its weaknesses.
It is describing a film. It's part of how I can write fiction at all because "watching" it lets me shift into visual and spatial thinking - it's a disability accommodation. It's more like collage-ing from familiar things than painting on a blank canvas. So what comes next details are possible but any attempt at a big plot or structure will just be cliches.
I'm not looking to write more conventionally either; there's so much already and I'll be mediocre. I'm struggling to read fiction again but can engage well with the immediacy of visual story-telling. Aspects of this will necessarily be my style. Plus if it's a useful niche for me, it's likely to be useful for others who also struggle to read conventional fiction.
What would you define as events in this story? This might help me figure out how to focus more on them. The "facts" I guess? Or something broader?
I like that it's an 'action' setting with pretty much no action. There are too many 'whispers' and 'says quietly's. Will work on adjusting that whilst still looking to convey their worries about being heard/found.
Sentences being too consistently short is also something I can work on.
The epithets do present difficulties. It's been really valuable to work that way as a writing exercise though and how to make it understandable which 'him' is being referred to at any moment. This doesn't mean it needs to stay that way though. One person who found multiple readings speculated on it being a single man (self and shadow-self) and I just love that the epithets allow for this possibility, where it becomes a story of how a man manages to get himself through this ordeal.
If they had names, it would be easier for readers to relate to them as people. But names will imply ethnicity and in my mind there are a minimum of 5 equal possibilities (4 distinct Asian countries plus UK/US/Anglophone. Sweden, France and Denmark would also be included if I still watched European crime drama).
Maybe because they exist visually for me (thought not always in specific detail), the lack of names matters less and I'm missing something important for readers. Will ask the others who've read it how they feel about this.
Their flatness and lack of interiority *in this moment* are necessary. They're too caught up in shock, trauma, exhaustion, hunger and the need to survive for much else.
Last night I imagined a sort of walk through with two specific actors in the roles to help me find and understand the emotions better. I'd been trying to decide if clearer physical affection was appropriate (moving away from the writing exercise). What I found when 'they' reached a point where it seemed necessary (a goodbye gesture like a kiss on the forehead when the healthy man leaves to get supplies) was that the vulnerability of it was overwhelming for them.
I'd known that they were secure enough in their relationship that they were expressing it and understanding it indirectly through actions and concerns (like the injured man's need to see his partner's face) but this is more important. There are limits to what they can let themselves feel and I have to respect that.
I'm trying to figure out how to write the new information in. It's not something they can let themselves be aware of which really limits my options without adding an external narratorial voice.
"Overall: What does come across strongly - and affectingly - is the tenderness and relationship between them (which feels more realised than each of them individually)."
This makes me very happy. It would be good if they could also be better realised as individuals, even at a time when their selves are repressed by trauma, but the core is how the strength of their relationship is what's helping them get through this, literally (physically) and emotionally.
"It feels like you’re trying to do something extremely hard (deliberate lack of context, genre pushing in a different direction, external and terse viewpoint, focus on actions/words to build the relationship rather than interiority or description) and within those constraints being really rather successful. But if any of the constraints aren’t important to you, it might give leeway to deepen/centre the emotional effect, or our understanding of who the characters are."
Hmm. The first draft felt like it wrote itself, one What next? at a time. Most of the constraints you mentioned come from my cognitive limitations. I couldn't imagine context for it well so I didn't worry about it and then realised the mystery of it made the piece more engaging and unique, and therefore interesting.
Very little in this was deliberate. It was more acceptance and then embracing what was there. I use the phrase "intentionally ambiguous" because it's too cumbersome to say this is just how it happened and I liked it so I'm going along with it and now I'm trying to do what I can to make it work better for more readers :)
The story is also necessarily constrained. It's called "Close" because of the number of meanings of the word, including closed off, close air - hot, stuffy, difficult to breath, invoking the discomfort of their situation - as well as a close relationship, close call, holding someone close.
So some of the constraints are disability accommodation (that someone else deems it "successful" is a significant achievement for me, thank you for that) and some are necessary to represent the situation the characters are in. But I should be able to chip away at them a bit to bring in more of the things you suggest.
"Hope that’s of some use: and thanks again."
It's very helpful. There's a lot to think about and work with. Thank you so much for your friendship and for giving it this much of your time and attention. It really does mean a lot.
"Concept: works and is engaging and emotionally credible, if not entirely surprising (it crosses genre conventions, but the idea that two characters who care for each other care for each other isn’t too much of a twist - despite the style acting as misdirection…)."
Engaging, emotionally credible and "works" are very reassuring. This is only the 2nd story I've written (plus another 10 years ago), so thank you.
I wasn't going for a twist or a surprise. This started as a writing exercise to show relationship without relying on the usual conventions.
You're the 1st reader (out of 4) to centre the relationship. 2 got caught up in trying to work out scenarios and the 3rd made a tangle out of seeing the love as unrequited. In fairness, I made a point of strengthening the depiction of the relationship in response to their feedback. So maybe that aspect is good enough now as you got it.
The misdirection wasn't intentional either. It just happened and provides the engagement. Which helps as I'm not skilled at writing plot.
" Style: V factual without interiority and short sentences. Pushes towards an ‘action’ reading, but without the intensification you’d expect if so. It has clear sentences and a ‘transparent’ style (a big plus!): but they may be a bit *too* consistently short. It almost reads like it’s describing a film, rather than the events themselves. There’s also some repetition (‘whispers’ and ‘says quietly’) and repeated epithets (‘the healthy man’ etc) which can make them feel like flat characters."
What do you mean by 'transparent'? It's helpful to understand its strengths as well as its weaknesses.
It is describing a film. It's part of how I can write fiction at all because "watching" it lets me shift into visual and spatial thinking - it's a disability accommodation. It's more like collage-ing from familiar things than painting on a blank canvas. So what comes next details are possible but any attempt at a big plot or structure will just be cliches.
I'm not looking to write more conventionally either; there's so much already and I'll be mediocre. I'm struggling to read fiction again but can engage well with the immediacy of visual story-telling. Aspects of this will necessarily be my style. Plus if it's a useful niche for me, it's likely to be useful for others who also struggle to read conventional fiction.
What would you define as events in this story? This might help me figure out how to focus more on them. The "facts" I guess? Or something broader?
I like that it's an 'action' setting with pretty much no action. There are too many 'whispers' and 'says quietly's. Will work on adjusting that whilst still looking to convey their worries about being heard/found.
Sentences being too consistently short is also something I can work on.
The epithets do present difficulties. It's been really valuable to work that way as a writing exercise though and how to make it understandable which 'him' is being referred to at any moment. This doesn't mean it needs to stay that way though. One person who found multiple readings speculated on it being a single man (self and shadow-self) and I just love that the epithets allow for this possibility, where it becomes a story of how a man manages to get himself through this ordeal.
If they had names, it would be easier for readers to relate to them as people. But names will imply ethnicity and in my mind there are a minimum of 5 equal possibilities (4 distinct Asian countries plus UK/US/Anglophone. Sweden, France and Denmark would also be included if I still watched European crime drama).
Maybe because they exist visually for me (thought not always in specific detail), the lack of names matters less and I'm missing something important for readers. Will ask the others who've read it how they feel about this.
Their flatness and lack of interiority *in this moment* are necessary. They're too caught up in shock, trauma, exhaustion, hunger and the need to survive for much else.
Last night I imagined a sort of walk through with two specific actors in the roles to help me find and understand the emotions better. I'd been trying to decide if clearer physical affection was appropriate (moving away from the writing exercise). What I found when 'they' reached a point where it seemed necessary (a goodbye gesture like a kiss on the forehead when the healthy man leaves to get supplies) was that the vulnerability of it was overwhelming for them.
I'd known that they were secure enough in their relationship that they were expressing it and understanding it indirectly through actions and concerns (like the injured man's need to see his partner's face) but this is more important. There are limits to what they can let themselves feel and I have to respect that.
I'm trying to figure out how to write the new information in. It's not something they can let themselves be aware of which really limits my options without adding an external narratorial voice.
"Overall: What does come across strongly - and affectingly - is the tenderness and relationship between them (which feels more realised than each of them individually)."
This makes me very happy. It would be good if they could also be better realised as individuals, even at a time when their selves are repressed by trauma, but the core is how the strength of their relationship is what's helping them get through this, literally (physically) and emotionally.
"It feels like you’re trying to do something extremely hard (deliberate lack of context, genre pushing in a different direction, external and terse viewpoint, focus on actions/words to build the relationship rather than interiority or description) and within those constraints being really rather successful. But if any of the constraints aren’t important to you, it might give leeway to deepen/centre the emotional effect, or our understanding of who the characters are."
Hmm. The first draft felt like it wrote itself, one What next? at a time. Most of the constraints you mentioned come from my cognitive limitations. I couldn't imagine context for it well so I didn't worry about it and then realised the mystery of it made the piece more engaging and unique, and therefore interesting.
Very little in this was deliberate. It was more acceptance and then embracing what was there. I use the phrase "intentionally ambiguous" because it's too cumbersome to say this is just how it happened and I liked it so I'm going along with it and now I'm trying to do what I can to make it work better for more readers :)
The story is also necessarily constrained. It's called "Close" because of the number of meanings of the word, including closed off, close air - hot, stuffy, difficult to breath, invoking the discomfort of their situation - as well as a close relationship, close call, holding someone close.
So some of the constraints are disability accommodation (that someone else deems it "successful" is a significant achievement for me, thank you for that) and some are necessary to represent the situation the characters are in. But I should be able to chip away at them a bit to bring in more of the things you suggest.
"Hope that’s of some use: and thanks again."
It's very helpful. There's a lot to think about and work with. Thank you so much for your friendship and for giving it this much of your time and attention. It really does mean a lot.
