Quote:
Originally Posted by saoir
I read this snowflake thing a while back and immediately saw it as far too prescriptive. The thing is there are many many ways to write a book and this is just one methodology. It doesn't work for lots of people.
I've heard from people who like to know the ending before they even start, such as Michael Connelly, author of the Harry Bosch books. Others need to make masses of rough notes. Others write rough drafts. Trying to force one's mind into a template that works for one writer is a mistake imho.
In my case I like to make some rough notes and then start writing. My first draft changes only a little before it's finished. I don't like to know too much before I start, only the immediately imminent plot because I like things to organically grow from the story as I write. Even half way through I may not know the ending.
Horses for courses.
I also use Scrivener and it is the program that really catapulted my writing urge forward to fruition. Templates are over rated. Just pick the Novel style and write the story in scenes.
My 2c.
|
Howard:
Well...I agree, that everyone has their own methodology, and nothing works for all, but don't confuse Snowflake with a template. That's not how it works. I've looked at it, in-depth, since this thread (with my friend who used it), and the driving theme behind it is simply nothing more than in-depth character development--not some type of "template."
I can see how it would be extremely useful for new writers. I see a lot of books--a LOT--and frankly, the one thing that seems to be missing by and large is any type of character development. I see a lot of one-dimensional, undeveloped characters, which of course, leads to one-dimensional and uninteresting plotlines (because you just can't stir your sticks to care about the characters).
I wish I could demonstrate this with one particular book--I can't, as that person was a client--but I remember well, when I first started my company, a book that actually had a really excellent plotline. It had a good reveal--everything that it should have. But the "author" was actually a businessman who had the idea, who hired a(n allegedly former) ghostwriter to co-author the book with him. The two decided to use astrological "types" for their characters, and promptly created a book that was as flat as a pancake, and now, some 5 years later, it's still not selling.
They went on to write 5 more books in the series, each one flatter and less interesting than the last. It was, all in, an exercise in ego; the author could afford to pay to have something like that done, and can now call himself an "author." But it's a shame...the first book could have had real legs. If he'd spent ANY time doing character development, instead of caricatures and stereotypes, it could have been a big book, self-pub-wise, in mystery.
Nor do I see why Snowflake would be "prescriptive," any more than if someone simply typed out 20 or 50 or ? pages of character sketches. {shrug}. That's really all it does; it forces someone to think about their characters, in-depth, and how they fit within the framework of the story. For actual story-writing, Snowflake isn't even used...so I don't see how it can be
limiting. It isn't--nor does it claim to be--a word-processor, like Scrivener. It helps people create synopses and outlines, which some folks really like. Pantsers, obviously, won't like it. (BTW; Snowflake doesn't care if you know the ending or not, actually. Not relevant to what it does or asks you to do.)
What I like about Snowflake, having played with it now, is that it doesn't waste a lot of time like some of those "writing programs" (LSBXE springs spectacularly to mind), which are obviously designed more to make someone "feel like a real writer" than providing
actual functionality.
That's why I recommended YWriter--another program that really delivers on functionality without wasting time/energy on things like "image galleries" and "pretty backgrounds" and, god help us all, "music for your scenes." That's the stuff that LSB provides that I find to be utter frippery. I mean, in this day and age, who doesn't have the ability to make a regular directory of images, or play iTunes (or whatever) on their computer ALREADY? And truthfully, even though there's a lot of MS-hate in the world, Word already does what most of Scrivener does; it's just that most folks can't be bothered to actually learn it.
{shrug}. As you said, horses-->courses. The only thing that matters is getting the text on the paper, so to speak. The rest? All choices and options.
Hitch