Timeline for How to make a story not just constant action?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 8 at 20:38 | comment | added | Robbie Goodwin | Further… I read a novel starting with a dramatic description not of a meteor smash, but of the noise a big motorbike made, roaring off the ferry onto a small, quiet island. The dramatic effect is different in scale, not quality. 'My' writer's motorbike had a vague association with his characters, though it had no further relevance to the tale. I see a meteor smash as a cheap way to avoid explaining the start a story. From what would your main character want to get the family to safety? If another meteor, how was the first random? Could you be more consistent, at least? | |
| Feb 8 at 20:26 | comment | added | Robbie Goodwin | I disagree. In real life, incidents need no explanation; they merely are. In fiction every incident that isn't a waste of both the writer's efforts and the readers' time does need an explanation, even if it's there only as some kind of distraction. Any 'inciting' incident needs as much more justification as it is 'inciting' rather than 'every-day. How is that not obvious? Who recently told us 'Stories where things just happen get very tedious very fast… Stories where things happen for a reason are more interesting.' More… | |
| S Feb 7 at 23:08 | history | suggested | CommunityBot | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
minor grammar fixes
|
| Feb 7 at 23:05 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 7 at 23:08 | |||||
| Feb 6 at 23:16 | history | edited | EDL | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 19 characters in body
|
| Feb 6 at 18:06 | history | answered | EDL | CC BY-SA 4.0 |