Hearing voices

[gmw]

Originally Posted by cromag

For me, the process is longer. After the "Polish" step I have a "Put it Aside" step. I walk away and do other things for a substantial period of time -- sometimes for a month, sometimes for several months, sometimes longer. I let it get cold, so I can read it with "fresh eyes."

Then I go back to the "Review" and "Revise" steps.

It takes a while.

Similar for me, cromag. After having gotten so involved in it all as to have heard the voices, the only way to gain the distance needed to really assess the result is to put it aside. ... Though, in my case, putting it aside generally comes after (about) the second draft. I only bother with the full revision process on work that survives reassessment after having put it aside.

[kennyc]

Since we've strayed (perhaps inevitable ) into creativity and process....I ran across this just this morning.

The Creative Brain really does work differently:

http://qz.com/584850/creative-people...k-differently/

[gmw]

Thanks for the link, Kenny. So, in summary, a creative brain is either crazily sane, or lucidly mad. What a comfort that is!

[crich70]

I think the ability to hear the 'voices' is at least in part a function of having flexed your imagination muscle enough. Not the only thing probably but no doubt it helps to have read a lot of other writers work, and spending time daydreaming about a storyline probably doesn't hurt either. I mean you think of a character and what genre of story you want to write and then let him/her run about in your mind a bit and watch what they do. Also work up at least a brief bio on them. The more you can visualize them in your mind the easier it may be to come up with the right words to describe what they are doing.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by crich70

I think the ability to hear the 'voices' is at least in part a function of having flexed your imagination muscle enough. Not the only thing probably but no doubt it helps to have read a lot of other writers work, and spending time daydreaming about a storyline probably doesn't hurt either. I mean you think of a character and what genre of story you want to write and then let him/her run about in your mind a bit and watch what they do. Also work up at least a brief bio on them. The more you can visualize them in your mind the easier it may be to come up with the right words to describe what they are doing.

So you actually hear voices and have characters speak and act completely autonomously in your mind?

[ekbell]

Originally Posted by arjaybe

You have synesthesia. Is sight-touch the only one, or do you have other minglings?

Good thing you know the imaginary cat's not real, eh?

I don't think it's synesthesia as I can, if desired, assign a different 'texture' to what I'm seeing but rather my version of an overactive imagination. Also the 'feeling' always matches my preconceptions which I don't think is true of synesthesia.

And, yes, it's a good thing I know the imaginary, invisible cat's not real.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by ekbell

I don't think it's synesthesia as I can, if desired, assign a different 'texture' to what I'm seeing but rather my version of an overactive imagination. Also the 'feeling' always matches my preconceptions which I don't think is true of synesthesia.

And, yes, it's a good thing I know the imaginary, invisible cat's not real.

to play off that a bit.....those who literally hear voices (the mentally ill category) also often know that the voices are not 'real' but they still hear them as if they were real. I can only imagine how disconcerting that might be.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by kennyc

to play off that a bit.....those who literally hear voices (the mentally ill category) also often know that the voices are not 'real' but they still hear them as if they were real. I can only imagine how disconcerting that might be.

Curious. This touches on some research I did a few years ago for a story. The subject was persisting hallucinations after drug use, the following quote from the related Wikipedia article: HPPD

It also should be noted that the visuals do not constitute true hallucinations in the clinical sense of the word; people with HPPD recognize the visuals to be illusory, or pseudohallucinations, and thus maintain the ability to determine what is real (in contrast to some mental illnesses such as schizophrenia).

[crich70]

Originally Posted by kennyc

So you actually hear voices and have characters speak and act completely autonomously in your mind?

I'm just saying that being able to visualize characters, scenes, etc can help make fiction seem more real to a reader. And as far as characters acting autonomously in your mind I think dreams a person has about a character or characters falls into that category. Certainly such aren't under conscious control.

[Meredith Miller]

I'm very very new to writing but don't remember ever having anything that intuitive in my writing. It's all techniques and alternatives, creating characters and events for a reason. A friend of mine does, though, and he describes himself as being a ghost in the book's setting. He writes, gets surprised, and stubbornly refuses to change anything that actually happened in his first draft, saying "that's not how it happened".

I think each way has its pros and cons. A person who carefully crafts things can appeal to specific readers, do clever things, and can culminate things into one rational end. He can even tie in things better, usually. A more instinctive writers can have some crazy strokes of imagination that turn out great, and often things seem fleshed out because he notices things in the book that are very detailed and would never be woven on purpose.

There's a manga called Bakuman that explains this very well. It's actually about two manga artists, one instinctive and the other (actually a duo) that's much more careful, and how they compete in writing.

So sorry for the wrong post!

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Meredith Miller

I'm very very new to writing but don't remember ever having anything that intuitive in my writing. It's all techniques and alternatives, creating characters and events for a reason. A friend of mine does, though, and he describes himself as being a ghost in the book's setting. He writes, gets surprised, and stubbornly refuses to change anything that actually happened in his first draft, saying "that's not how it happened".

I think each way has its pros and cons. A person who carefully crafts things can appeal to specific readers, do clever things, and can culminate things into one rational end. He can even tie in things better, usually. A more instinctive writers can have some crazy strokes of imagination that turn out great, and often things seem fleshed out because he notices things in the book that are very detailed and would never be woven on purpose.

There's a manga called Bakuman that explains this very well. It's actually about two manga artists, one instinctive and the other (actually a duo) that's much more careful, and how they compete in writing.

So sorry for the wrong post!