NationStates Jolt Archive

I've been writing a story (a fanfiction) since the end of my freshman year (for fun). It's currently about 68,000 words, and I've had writer's block for the past month or so. My story includes my English class from freshman year.

We go into different stories, including Phantom of the Opera, Star Wars, and Lost. My character marries the Phantom fairly early on (not exactly by choice, though).

I think the problem is that now instead of having the class explore a pre-existing story, I'm making up a world from which the machine they use to enter the stories came from. The basis of the world is that the meaning of a person's name in real life determines what they are in that world. Thus, Erik (the Phantom) is the emperor of the alternate world, since his name means something like "ruler of all."

Here's (http://www.fanfiction.net/s/2606771/1/) a link to the story at Fanfiction. I could use some advice regarding my story.

It's interesting and fun to read for me, although at times it seems somewhat forced (which is sorta unavoidable with the plot, i guess). I don't know about how to move on, but you'd better, cause I want to know what happens. Not very constructive advice, but keep writing please... :p

It's interesting and fun to read for me, although at times it seems somewhat forced (which is sorta unavoidable with the plot, i guess). I don't know about how to move on, but you'd better, cause I want to know what happens. Not very constructive advice, but keep writing please... :p

All right. I'll definitely keep trying, but I've had trouble writing any more than a sentence per day since a month or so ago. I guess I'll have more time to try, though, now that my winter break has begun.

All right. I'll definitely keep trying, but I've had trouble writing any more than a sentence per day since a month or so ago. I guess I'll have more time to try, though, now that my winter break has begun.

You could try something along the lines of "Suddenly, Laertes returns from France!" Not that, specifically, you know, but in that vein.

Finally a thread where I feel useful.

As a pro writer I'm constantly running into writers block. I find the quickest, easiest way to get around it is to start something else fresh - you'll get past that one golden rush of ideas and then you'll suddenly start thinking of all sorts of great stuff you could pile into the original one. In short, you always have ideas for the project you aren't doing.

I actually have a computer with project one and another computer across the room with project two, if I wasn't constantly switching I'd never get anything done.

You could try something along the lines of "Suddenly, Laertes returns from France!" Not that, specifically, you know, but in that vein.

I think another part of my problem is that I know exactly how I want the story to end, but I really don't know how to get to that point.

As a writer, I say open up a word document and just type. Type the same word over and over again if you want. Eventually, you'll start typing different words. Eventually, it might start making sense.

Hey presto, writer's block over!

I think another part of my problem is that I know exactly how I want the story to end, but I really don't know how to get to that point.

Have you written the ending yet? That's often a very good way to begin writing a story!

As a writer, I say open up a word document and just type. Type the same word over and over again if you want. Eventually, you'll start typing different words. Eventually, it might start making sense.

Hey presto, writer's block over!

Yeah, maybe I'll try that.

Finally a thread where I feel useful.

As a pro writer I'm constantly running into writers block. I find the quickest, easiest way to get around it is to start something else fresh - you'll get past that one golden rush of ideas and then you'll suddenly start thinking of all sorts of great stuff you could pile into the original one. In short, you always have ideas for the project you aren't doing.

I actually have a computer with project one and another computer across the room with project two, if I wasn't constantly switching I'd never get anything done.

Thanks for the advice. I'll see if it works for me.

I just typed two more sentences. That's progress, I guess.:)

Have you written the ending yet? That's often a very good way to begin writing a story!

I've planned the epilogue, and I know how I want it to end. I haven't written it yet; maybe I'll try that, too.

Yeah, maybe I'll try that.



Thanks for the advice. I'll see if it works for me.

I just typed two more sentences. That's progress, I guess.:)



I've planned the epilogue, and I know how I want it to end. I haven't written it yet; maybe I'll try that, too.

You could combine techniques and make the ending Project Two :cool:

You could combine techniques and make the ending Project Two :cool:

Yeah, maybe I'll try that. Thanks for the advice.

Finally a thread where I feel useful.

As a pro writer I'm constantly running into writers block. I find the quickest, easiest way to get around it is to start something else fresh - you'll get past that one golden rush of ideas and then you'll suddenly start thinking of all sorts of great stuff you could pile into the original one. In short, you always have ideas for the project you aren't doing.

I actually have a computer with project one and another computer across the room with project two, if I wasn't constantly switching I'd never get anything done.
This is a curious technique. Something I might have to try as an amateur writer who hasn't really begun to do more than think of the thing.

As a writer, I say open up a word document and just type. Type the same word over and over again if you want. Eventually, you'll start typing different words. Eventually, it might start making sense.

Hey presto, writer's block over!
That doesn't always work. In fact, it usually doesn't help me. Often I need but one good idea, and I'll follow it where my mind wanders with it.

Have you written the ending yet? That's often a very good way to begin writing a story!

That's how I usually begin. :p Know where you are and where you want to go, then follow the flow of events with one shaping the next, but always with the final product in mind. Sometimes the story leads in another direction from that desired, though. Let the story shape and revise itself.

when I get blocked I switch to a short. I don't really work at keeping my new subject to any particular thing, though if I have an itch to expand on the world I have been plucking at then I do. But instead of working to fit things in I try to just let something flow. Try taht. Maybe ten pages. You'll surprise yoruself.

well, i would give you link to some of the sailor moon cannibal slash that a guy i know writes, but that probably won't help and i can't find a link to it anyway

I haven't read what you linked to, but here's an idea:

kill the main character.


you know: send the main character in to finally face the villian and have him/her get absolutely vaporized by henchmen.

Just to make the audience shit their collective pants.

then make the last few chapters about secondary characters who pull through to Save The Day (tm).

and it's not a bad idea to throw in a little backstabbing on both sides.




I'm really sick of stories where the main character is invincible, defeats the villian through some stroke of luck, and rides into the sunset with the princess.

that's why I'm such a big Stephen King fan: his villians are actually intelligent and sometimes they actually do some real damage.

every story is actually interesting to read, because the main characters might actually die.

that's why I'm such a big Stephen King fan: his villians are actually intelligent and sometimes they actually do some real damage.

every story is actually interesting to read, because the main characters might actually die.

My rule for my scripts is that every character should make the most intelligent decision available to them. Which of course leads to another pleasing phenomenon - inevitablity ( "it couldn't happen any other way"!).

However, I'm not quite sure what you mean by invincible. Just because the hero doesn't die doesn't make him invincible. Although, I've got to say I've never had the commerical guts to kill off a hero.

My rule for my scripts is that every character should make the most intelligent decision available to them. Which of course leads to another pleasing phenomenon - inevitablity ( "it couldn't happen any other way"!).

However, I'm not quite sure what you mean by invincible. Just because the hero doesn't die doesn't make him invincible. Although, I've got to say I've never had the commerical guts to kill off a hero.

For a time, I was a member of the Star Trek forums, and a common reference was the website of a person who had a series of hilarious criticisms of one of the series.

he also had an interesting essay on the concept of 'threat level'

"threat level" is a measure of exactly how much danger the main characters are in at any given time.

In Star Trek, for example, there is almost no threat level: people whose names are in the opening credits are invincible, and everyone else has a snowball's chance in hell of surviving.

no matter how bad it got: no matter how dire the situation, all of the fans knew that all of our heroes would get out of it alive.

after watching them escape every single deadly situation imaginable, we just stopped caring.

I mean: what was the point of worrying about characters who were going to come out of it OK anyway?


Seriously: raise the threat level.

let your fans know that when you threaten a character, you really mean it.


it's not about whether the villains are able to kill the protagonist, it's about whether the writer is willing to kill the protagonist.

without it, there is no suspense, there is no excitement, there is no danger.

Ah, I see what you mean in terms of television series. 'Spooks' started off by horribly killing one of the characters who was presented as a main character in, I think, the second episode. The real main character got away though.

But I was thinking feature because that's what I've been doing lately. There you don't have that luxury - when you've got a clear protagonist he must make it well into the third act and unless you want your audience to hate you he probably has to be alive and well as the credits roll.

Ah, I see what you mean in terms of television series. 'Spooks' started off by horribly killing one of the characters who was presented as a main character in, I think, the second episode. The real main character got away though.

But I was thinking feature because that's what I've been doing lately. There you don't have that luxury - when you've got a clear protagonist he must make it well into the third act and unless you want your audience to hate you he probably has to be alive and well as the credits roll.

Eh, I hate the happy-go-lucky-fuzzy-bunny-hero-saves-the-day-yay!-joy-joy endings. When things turn out perfectly for everyone, it just doesn't seem that great. Far to predictable. I do believe 90% of all books/movies/tv shows would be far better if at least one main character was offed. But that's just me.

<snip>
i see your point and it reminds me of an anime called gantz, the main point of which seemed to be having the main characters (and all the other ones) die

Eh, I hate the happy-go-lucky-fuzzy-bunny-hero-saves-the-day-yay!-joy-joy endings. When things turn out perfectly for everyone, it just doesn't seem that great.

The ending usually has to be a mitigated positive, if everything works out too peachy it comes across as contrived and sickly but it still should be positive.

There are exceptions to this rule but you never end a story on a negative note without thinking it through very carefully indeed.

I haven't read what you linked to, but here's an idea:

kill the main character.


you know: send the main character in to finally face the villian and have him/her get absolutely vaporized by henchmen.

Just to make the audience shit their collective pants.

then make the last few chapters about secondary characters who pull through to Save The Day (tm).

and it's not a bad idea to throw in a little backstabbing on both sides.




I'm really sick of stories where the main character is invincible, defeats the villian through some stroke of luck, and rides into the sunset with the princess.

that's why I'm such a big Stephen King fan: his villians are actually intelligent and sometimes they actually do some real damage.

every story is actually interesting to read, because the main characters might actually die.
Something like that happened in a series I read. One of the most important characters died, and the others had to continue without him. Fate of the world and all. But he kinda came back as a different being. Ah, the wonders of magic.:p Consistency is a good thing, though. I do agree that no character should be beyond the threat of harm, and the villains should be completely committed to destroying the protagonist. Or at least achieving whatever aim they have, which may not include the destruction of the main character.
My rule for my scripts is that every character should make the most intelligent decision available to them. Which of course leads to another pleasing phenomenon - inevitablity ( "it couldn't happen any other way"!).

However, I'm not quite sure what you mean by invincible. Just because the hero doesn't die doesn't make him invincible. Although, I've got to say I've never had the commerical guts to kill off a hero.
"The most intelligent decision available" inplies that all characters are rational and think things through. They aren't always so cautious in their evaluations, either by stint of time or circumstance, villain and hero alike. Characters should be flawed and make mistakes. All characters. It's what beings do. All have strengths and weaknesses.
Ah, I see what you mean in terms of television series. 'Spooks' started off by horribly killing one of the characters who was presented as a main character in, I think, the second episode. The real main character got away though.

But I was thinking feature because that's what I've been doing lately. There you don't have that luxury - when you've got a clear protagonist he must make it well into the third act and unless you want your audience to hate you he probably has to be alive and well as the credits roll.
You are forgetting about a noble death or some such. Like the end to Gladiator in which the main character dies after his triumph over the Emperor. Nothing is absolute. All things are possible given proper context.
The ending usually has to be a mitigated positive, if everything works out too peachy it comes across as contrived and sickly but it still should be positive.

There are exceptions to this rule but you never end a story on a negative note without thinking it through very carefully indeed.
I generally favor the antagonist, so I doubt I would find it overly negative. :p

I haven't read what you linked to, but here's an idea:

kill the main character.


you know: send the main character in to finally face the villian and have him/her get absolutely vaporized by henchmen.

Just to make the audience shit their collective pants.

then make the last few chapters about secondary characters who pull through to Save The Day (tm).

and it's not a bad idea to throw in a little backstabbing on both sides.




I'm really sick of stories where the main character is invincible, defeats the villian through some stroke of luck, and rides into the sunset with the princess.

that's why I'm such a big Stephen King fan: his villians are actually intelligent and sometimes they actually do some real damage.

every story is actually interesting to read, because the main characters might actually die.

I killed the main character, but she came back to life because she wasn't in the real world. My main character is actually not very good at fighting villains, and mostly survives because Erik protects her.

The ending usually has to be a mitigated positive, if everything works out too peachy it comes across as contrived and sickly but it still should be positive.

There are exceptions to this rule but you never end a story on a negative note without thinking it through very carefully indeed.

I think I might make multiple epilogues with different possibilities, or maybe just one long one. I don't want Erik to be invincible in Jennifer's reality, just that he won't age. Is that a reasonable amount of threat for the character?

Something like that happened in a series I read. One of the most important characters died, and the others had to continue without him. Fate of the world and all. But he kinda came back as a different being. Ah, the wonders of magic.:p Consistency is a good thing, though. I do agree that no character should be beyond the threat of harm, and the villains should be completely committed to destroying the protagonist. Or at least achieving whatever aim they have, which may not include the destruction of the main character.

I think my villain's main goal is just to torment Erik as much as possible (although I don't really introduce her until later. Erik is sort of the villain at the beginning.)


"The most intelligent decision available" inplies that all characters are rational and think things through. They aren't always so cautious in their evaluations, either by stint of time or circumstance, villain and hero alike. Characters should be flawed and make mistakes. All characters. It's what beings do. All have strengths and weaknesses.


I think my characters have a good amount of strengths and weaknesses. Jennifer is smart and nice, but is physically weak and becomes increasingly emotionally damaged as the plot unfolds. Erik is good at a lot of things, (he'd have to be in order to be kept in character) but has a lot of weaknesses (like a morphine addiction to overcome, and insanity)


I generally favor the antagonist, so I doubt I would find it overly negative. :p

I do, too, which is probably why I found the ending to Phantom of the Opera really sad.

... It sounds very disconnected, the dialogue is a bit stilted, and the characters sometimes act a bit illogically. Not enough background, either. (All that from reading the first page.) Hell, I've written RP posts (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=498499) more coherent.

No offence or anything intended, just a major criticism: cohesion is lacking (maybe because you wrote the story at one sentence a day). Try visualising the scene beforehand, playing out the action in your head, writing an outline of what happens, and then expanding it to a full paragraph or chapter or whatever. It worked for me (all of my monster 2000-4000 word posts above were written within the span of a couple of hours, given due preparation and inspiration).

... It sounds very disconnected, the dialogue is a bit stilted, and the characters sometimes act a bit illogically. Not enough background, either. (All that from reading the first page.) Hell, I've written RP posts (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=498499) more coherent.

No offence or anything intended, just a major criticism: cohesion is lacking (maybe because you wrote the story at one sentence a day). Try visualising the scene beforehand, playing out the action in your head, writing an outline of what happens, and then expanding it to a full paragraph or chapter or whatever. It worked for me (all of my monster 2000-4000 word posts above were written within the span of a couple of hours, given due preparation and inspiration).

Ok, I'll try that. I'm going to go back and edit the previous chapters after the whole story is finished, because I've noticed plenty of problems. I think I improved while writing it, though, and that it starts to get better after the first 20 or so pages.

Thanks for the criticism. I'm working on improving it.:)

Ok, I'll try that. I'm going to go back and edit the previous chapters after the whole story is finished, because I've noticed plenty of problems. I think I improved while writing it, though, and that it starts to get better after the first 20 or so pages.

Thanks for the criticism. I'm working on improving it.:)

Yeah, I've read more and it does get a little better (everyone's writing does over time, if repeated). There is still a dearth of lurid description, and the vocabulary is not in prominence (translation: You don't use enough big words and your sentences are too short!), but it does look sort of ok. I'd appreciate an introduction though, one that explains who these people actually are. (The class, I mean.)

Yeah, I've read more and it does get a little better (everyone's writing does over time, if repeated). There is still a dearth of lurid description, and the vocabulary is not in prominence (translation: You don't use enough big words and your sentences are too short!), but it does look sort of ok. I'd appreciate an introduction though, one that explains who these people actually are. (The class, I mean.)

All right. Thank you for reading it.:)

I've noticed that, too. I need to work on that.

That's probably because when I furst started writing it, it was written for only the class to read. I didn't decide to post it anywhere until much later. When I go back to edit and revise later, I'll add in introductions.

[QUOTE=Fascist Dominion;12119413
"The most intelligent decision available" inplies that all characters are rational and think things through. They aren't always so cautious in their evaluations, either by stint of time or circumstance, villain and hero alike. Characters should be flawed and make mistakes. All characters. It's what beings do. All have strengths and weaknesses.[/QUOTE]

It depends on the genre but a mistake on the part of the antagonist leads to the impression that our protagonist is lucky which leads to the impression that the story is contrived. For instance, in DIE HARD, it would have sucked if in the elevator Alan Rickman hadn't hid his fear and Bruce Willis killed him or if he had and Willis just handed him the gun. However, Rickman picked the most intelligent option available to him (the hostage shtick) and Willis picked the most intelligent option available to him (he didn't have the required information to tell if Rickman was the antagonist or a hostage) and gave him an unloaded gun. A very cool scene followed. If I've remembered that scene wrong, it could be embaressing! :D

For dramatic tension you want a feeling of inevitability - not to say predictability! - it had to happen this way. That's why 'decide' is a dirty word for me, I don't like my characters to decide anything. This happens so this must happen and so on, the characters are compelled by their preset goals, external factors set in act 1 (e.g a gust of wind can't blow the bad guys gun out of the air in the climax) and the actions of other characters. The dominoes should be lined up in act 1 and the next two acts should be a visually pleasing observation of them all bumping into one another.

Of course all stories are contrived, the trick is making sure it doesn't seem that way. So, rather than altering the character's decisions to get to the situation or destination you desire you change the external influences or their goal in act 1.

If a character must mess up it needs to be the protagonist and it needs to be as early as possible.

Characters can let their emotions influence them into doing something hot-headed but that's a slightly different matter. I'll stop writing now though, this is beginning to feel a lot like work.

I think my villain's main goal is just to torment Erik as much as possible (although I don't really introduce her until later. Erik is sort of the villain at the beginning.)
Thinking is all well and good, but I fail to see how you could write it without at least assuming a certainty of purpose for the antagonist. It can change later, perhaps. Or perhaps shift as part of the story itself, but it seems to me you should have a specific notion as to the villain's ultimate goal. All villains have goals, just as all heroes' goals are to thwart their nemeses.

I think my characters have a good amount of strengths and weaknesses. Jennifer is smart and nice, but is physically weak and becomes increasingly emotionally damaged as the plot unfolds. Erik is good at a lot of things, (he'd have to be in order to be kept in character) but has a lot of weaknesses (like a morphine addiction to overcome, and insanity)
Perhaps I should actually read it before commenting on an appraisal of the character development. :p You should demand that I read it; otherwise, I'll keep forgetting to make time for it, despite my interest. I shan't begin now. My mind isn't functioning well enough for that. I'm just in a mood for spam. And arbitrary advice. :p

I do, too, which is probably why I found the ending to Phantom of the Opera really sad.
You know what they say: great minds think alike. Or was it fools seldom differ? I always get those two confused. :p

It depends on the genre but a mistake on the part of the antagonist leads to the impression that our protagonist is lucky which leads to the impression that the story is contrived. For instance, in DIE HARD, it would have sucked if in the elevator Alan Rickman hadn't hid his fear and Bruce Willis killed him or if he had and Willis just handed him the gun. However, Rickman picked the most intelligent option available to him (the hostage shtick) and Willis picked the most intelligent option available to him (he didn't have the required information to tell if Rickman was the antagonist or a hostage) and gave him an unloaded gun. A very cool scene followed. If I've remembered that scene wrong, it could be embaressing! :D

For dramatic tension you want a feeling of inevitability - not to say predictability! - it had to happen this way. That's why 'decide' is a dirty word for me, I don't like my characters to decide anything. This happens so this must happen and so on, the characters are compelled by their preset goals, external factors set in act 1 (e.g a gust of wind can't blow the bad guys gun out of the air in the climax) and the actions of other characters. The dominoes should be lined up in act 1 and the next two acts should be a visually pleasing observation of them all bumping into one another.

Of course all stories are contrived, the trick is making sure it doesn't seem that way. So, rather than altering the character's decisions to get to the situation or destination you desire you change the external influences or their goal in act 1.

If a character must mess up it needs to be the protagonist and it needs to be as early as possible.

Characters can let their emotions influence them into doing something hot-headed but that's a slightly different matter. I'll stop writing now though, this is beginning to feel a lot like work.

Work or no, I thank you for giving me much about which I must ponder. Oh, and the scene you mentioned sounds about right to me. :p

But...but people must have been killed!"
"Oh, yes. I daresay that's quite likely! It's really very difficult to be a murderer without killing people from time to time, you know."

that is my advice...some one needs to die

that is my advice...some one needs to die

Did you read all of it?

Did you read all of it?

to be completely honest, no i did not read any of it.
in my experience in all good stories someone/thing dies, so i passed that advice on. i could go read it i suppose...

to be completely honest, no i did not read any of it.
in my experience in all good stories someone/thing dies, so i passed that advice on. i could go read it i suppose...

Too much death could be a bad thing. And it really depends on the story as to whether or not someone need die or not. I haven't read it myself, so I don't know that it is required at this stage. But the idea should not be disregarded for some stage of the story. Deaths cause all sorts of plot complications sometimes.

Too much death could be a bad thing. And it really depends on the story as to whether or not someone need die or not. I haven't read it myself, so I don't know that it is required at this stage. But the idea should not be disregarded for some stage of the story. Deaths cause all sorts of plot complications sometimes.

Sometimes a good story needs at least one death.

Sometimes a good story needs at least one death.

Sometimes. But not always. I am uncertain that she is of a mind to revise her plot at the moment, but perhaps that would inspire fresh ideas for the continuation of the story.

I try to write too and often get writers block sometimes the best thing to do is to stop writing for a bit.

Very good, you have some formatting problems in it sorta looks a bit disorganised but very good:D !

I try to write too and often get writers block sometimes the best thing to do is to stop writing for a bit.

Very good, you have some formatting problems in it sorta looks a bit disorganised but very good:D !

She has all but stopped writing as it is. I think she should push forward, find a new well of inspiration. She needs a muse, a guide to fresh thoughts.

Thinking is all well and good, but I fail to see how you could write it without at least assuming a certainty of purpose for the antagonist. It can change later, perhaps. Or perhaps shift as part of the story itself, but it seems to me you should have a specific notion as to the villain's ultimate goal. All villains have goals, just as all heroes' goals are to thwart their nemeses.

Yes, I know her goal.


Perhaps I should actually read it before commenting on an appraisal of the character development. :p You should demand that I read it; otherwise, I'll keep forgetting to make time for it, despite my interest. I shan't begin now. My mind isn't functioning well enough for that. I'm just in a mood for spam. And arbitrary advice. :p

Fine, then. I demand that you read it.:p


You know what they say: great minds think alike. Or was it fools seldom differ? I always get those two confused. :p

:p

I try to write too and often get writers block sometimes the best thing to do is to stop writing for a bit.

Very good, you have some formatting problems in it sorta looks a bit disorganised but very good:D !

Thank you.:)

I've been trying to go back and fix the formatting problems. I'm aware of them, and they'll be fixed when I go back to edit it.

She has all but stopped writing as it is. I think she should push forward, find a new well of inspiration. She needs a muse, a guide to fresh thoughts.

I just finished reading Dracula. Maybe that will help. And I had a new idea! It's kind of creepy, but it should be interesting.:)

have you still got it,as i now have got it for a fight scene

Too much death could be a bad thing. And it really depends on the story as to whether or not someone need die or not. I haven't read it myself, so I don't know that it is required at this stage. But the idea should not be disregarded for some stage of the story. Deaths cause all sorts of plot complications sometimes.

Sometimes death can be necessary to make a plot more original. For instance, in one of my many interminable novels-in-progress almost all of the main characters end up dead by the end, some of whom have killed each other (admittedly that's supposed to be a depressing novel anyway).

Can I hijack this thread to join in asking for help? Hadisveja, my story isn't progressing at all atm. I don't have webspace, so I can only mail it to people.

Sometimes death can be necessary to make a plot more original. For instance, in one of my many interminable novels-in-progress almost all of the main characters end up dead by the end, some of whom have killed each other (admittedly that's supposed to be a depressing novel anyway).

I haven't read anything you've written but I will lazily dispense one of my soundbites: "originality is not a substitute for structure".

I haven't read anything you've written but I will lazily dispense one of my soundbites: "originality is not a substitute for structure".

Structure also is no substitute for originality.

Structure also is no substitute for originality.

It's more important. Originality is only of value within a structure but structure is critical regardless of originality.

And it is possible to create good but unoriginal work.

As a fellow writer, all I can tell you is to watch TV. If a certain topic comes up incorporate it into the story and try to work it into the ending you want. :)

I haven't read anything you've written but I will lazily dispense one of my soundbites: "originality is not a substitute for structure".

:p I know, I try to incorporate both into my writing. I learned structure first by writing essays (which I now do for fun occasionally), so now that I know that I've tried to be at least slightly original to make it more interesting. A good but unoriginal story is generally not as interesting to read, while a bad and original one simply ruins the originality of the idea in the first place. So yeah, both are needed.

snip
Practice makes perfect. Chandelier, what I do suggest is that you go onto 1, the NationStates forum (the one with the biggest vehicle charts) and the International Incidents forum. For good role-models, I say Doomingsland, Pacitalia, Azazia (AKA Oceania ICly), Jagada, Dread Lady Nathicana, GMC Military Arms, Hamptonshire, Aequatio and Automagfreek, are good examples to look up to. I urge you to get on there, role-play on the NS and II forums, and learn.

I do not have time to read your entire story. Suffice to say that I read the first 17 chapters and stopped there. It’s quite ironic that I watched “The Phantom of the Opera”, the 2004 movie for the first time last night. It wasn’t a bad film, I’d probably just prefer to see a live, on-stage production with professional singers. I may come across as overly critical of your story, so I apologise. I am aware that this is amateur fan fiction, but you can still get some very entertaining fan fictions none-the-less. I admire your dedication to writing this, and admit that I am too lazy and overly self-critical to write fiction myself, most of the time so in that sense you’re a far better writer than me. As a story it’s just too underdeveloped to work in novel form. As a television series that seeks to parody a famous work (as is often done) it might work, but as a novel it fails to grab my attention.

The first thing that you need to work on is character development. Perhaps there are too many characters. I lost track of how many names there were, and so I got confused. Besides, there were virtually no character descriptions, so all I had to remember a character by, was their name. There were twins in the class? Why wasn’t I aware until chapter 17? Also, many of the characters are too stupid. Why does Kevin want to take off the phantom’s mask, when he provides them food, and after all the threats to stop doing it? He’s listening to his I-Pod; why not to really annoy him, make his I-Pod unable to work in the story world (maybe no electronic objects can work because they weren’t invented yet?) or maybe make his batteries run out? It would be a little more interesting. On at least 3 occasions the class want to remove the phantom’s mask. Why? Why is it important at all? These characters verge on idiotic teens in slasher movies, even though I am aware that they are younger than that.

Other people mentioned threat. A character dies. Well he was a stupid, I admit. But how come, even though they know that he’s actually all right in real life, at least some of the characters aren’t freaking out? It would add a little realism. You have the guys who won’t admit their fears. The scared characters, the comforters. Just add a little diversity! The concept of the Story Seeker is a good one. But why not have something go wrong? Have loop-holes in the game? Or why not let there be a possibility that a character might not reappear all right in the real world. Later someone comes into the torture chamber where the class are stuck, and they’re content to hear stories instead of begging him to get them out? People are generally selfish beings. If they’re trapped then they want out. ASAP. I know it’s fantasy, but there’s little too much suspension of disbelief. Also, what happens to the people who die? Do they cease to think until the story is ended. Do they end up in a sort if limbo? What? Also “If anyone in the class kisses or marries a character in the stories, then that character will come back here with them when the class returns.” Does the kiss have to be voluntary, or can any character force a kiss to become real? It would be kind of funny if every character they meet tries to kiss another one like that, so that there is turmoil in the real world with all these characters coming to life.

Also you over rely a little on other sources. A musical is meant to be heard. That’s why there are writers and there are singers. Film and theatre can combine the two. Quoting lines from a musical cannot compete with hearing the actual thing. You make a reference to “Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life”. I’ve seen that film and I didn’t get that reference. Also, in referring to another source, it should be one that readers are familiar with. You shouldn’t be directly told where it comes from, so you should pick something well known. Like the balcony scene in “Romeo and Juliet”, or perhaps a line from a very famous film; "I'll be back." or "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn!"

You need to diversify your language. One passage (Ch16) begins; “When Matt woke up, he was lying on a divan.”, the next with “When the class woke up, they were in a library.” You know what you want to say, but try to say it in different ways. How about something like “Dizzy and groggy, Matt awoke to find himself, not in the dank torture chamber he had been trapped in earlier, but half falling off a rosy pink divan, a piece of furniture that appeared to have once been elegant, but whose lining now looked as if it had been clawed at.” Okay, so maybe not that long a sentence (the French background seems to lead me to writing overly long sentences) but do you see how you can make some of your sentences longer, without adding much extra information, but creating a more interesting effect?

The class are too united; there needs to be more conflict. You say that the phantom will give them food. Not having been given food for a day might make them panic so that they all greedily grab the food. There need to be more arguments, more disagreements. You can make the course of events much shorter, i.e. occurring over several hours as opposed to several days if you make the scope a lot bigger. Add in more conversations; less ‘borrowed’ conversation that will leave us waiting to get back to the main course of events a lot longer, but also interesting enough to add another dimension to your story. Split up the group more. Make people who don’t get along be stuck together. Make us aware that they don’t get along: give us more about characters than their names!

The flow between passages is a little stunted. They need more of a connective source. For example the class are given a rose. Well, have a character study the rose, make the rose the thing that links Jennifer to the group. Perhaps she is being given a rose at that very moment. The group find a sketch book. Perhaps the phantom will ask to draw Jennifer. Better still, Jennifer finds the sketch book. It’s more alarming to her, because it’ll appear that he’s been stalking her.

“After a few minutes, Erik noticed her and asked, “Did I wake you up?” Jennifer said, “No. I just heard you playing when I woke up and came here. What time is it?” He replied that it was 4 o’ clock in the morning, and asked if she would like to see his library. She nodded, and he led her there. Jennifer thought, “It’s beautiful! There must be a thousand books here!” She noticed that there were books in many different languages: French, English, Russian, Italian, German, Persian, Arabic, and many others as well. Noticing Jennifer’s contented smile, the phantom grinned and said, “Would you like to play chess?” Jennifer said that she would, and they played for a long while, Erik always winning.” Is this in any way borrowed from Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast”? It seems like the animation had far more build up. You’re just telling things, you’re not developing them. What kind of library is it? As far as I can remember the phantom lives in an area full of water tanks, so how does he store the books? What condition are the books in? Does your heroine not think of any of this, not ask him any questions, like where did he get all these books? Ask yourself questions when you describe. Everything might seem fine in your mind, but we can’t tap into it unless you tell us!
“Then he gave her instructions on how to remove the bullet and how to treat the wound.
She followed his directions to the letter, and in about a quarter of an hour the wound was treated.” Might Jennifer not be squeamish? Wouldn’t that liven things up a bit? She’s very obedient for someone who’s being kept prisoner. And very young. Sixth grade; she’s what, 14 (I’m not American, so it’s only a guess)? And the phantom doesn’t wear a mask for a long time, yet she only notices it after 20 minutes? Surely not? Even if the room is full of shadows, I’m sure you’d notice the absence of a glowing, white porcelain mask. Make the phantom wince and jerk suddenly, and the mask fall to the ground and smash. Just something to make your statements flow a little better.

I really hope that any of this is helpful to you. I hate to take apart your piece of work here, but you sort of left it open to it.

I really hope that any of this is helpful to you. I hate to take apart your piece of work here, but you sort of left it open to it.

Thank you. I think it will be helpful when I go back to edit it. She's in 9th grade (15 years old). I'll have to add in more descriptions. I think those were some good suggestions. She probably would be squeamish and she probably would have noticed that he didn't have his mask on.



Also, I have another story (http://www.fanfiction.net/s/2638276/1/) that I've been working on that I think is a little better. It's much shorter.

Yes, I know her goal.
Good.

Fine, then. I demand that you read it.:p
Awwww, do I haaaaaaaave to?:p

I just finished reading Dracula. Maybe that will help. And I had a new idea! It's kind of creepy, but it should be interesting.:)
Creepy can be good. At least it might recapture attention.
Sometimes death can be necessary to make a plot more original. For instance, in one of my many interminable novels-in-progress almost all of the main characters end up dead by the end, some of whom have killed each other (admittedly that's supposed to be a depressing novel anyway).
Depends on the progression of the story and whether or not a death really fits. Sometimes it's simply too contrived. But yes, it could potentially be useful. Certainly not something to discount.
I haven't read anything you've written but I will lazily dispense one of my soundbites: "originality is not a substitute for structure".
The best stories are growing things, not constructed things. Structure be damned if it interferes with the growth of the story.
It's more important. Originality is only of value within a structure but structure is critical regardless of originality.

And it is possible to create good but unoriginal work.

Good, perhaps, but the best work defies convention on all platforms and generally provides its own sense of "structure." Or rather a sort of "flow" that all thriving things tend to have.

The best stories are growing things, not constructed things. Structure be damned if it interferes with the growth of the story.

All stories are constructed.

And structure isn't a seperate beast from the story, structure is there to focus the conflict and the action in an elegant and effective manner.

Good, perhaps, but the best work defies convention on all platforms and generally provides its own sense of "structure." Or rather a sort of "flow" that all thriving things tend to have.

Forgive me if I'm working on the assumption that I won't be remembered for redefining cinema. I could reel off all sorts of cliches on the matter of appreciating codes and conventions but I'll stick to just the one: "You've got to know the rules before you break 'em".

The best stories are growing things, not constructed things. Structure be damned if it interferes with the growth of the story.

All stories are constructed.

And structure isn't a seperate beast from the story, structure is there to focus the conflict and the action in an elegant and effective manner.

Good, perhaps, but the best work defies convention on all platforms and generally provides its own sense of "structure." Or rather a sort of "flow" that all thriving things tend to have.

Forgive me if I'm working on the assumption that I won't be remembered for redefining cinema. I could reel off all sorts of cliches on the matter of appreciating codes and conventions but I'll stick to just the one: "You've got to know the rules before you break 'em".

Not all. And I believe A Clockwork Orange is a prime example of a lack of structure. Not all stories require elegance and efficacy. Sometimes that's the very point.

That still implies that the "rules" are mere suggestions as a crude guidline.

I haven't seen that film for an utterly insane amount of time so I can't comment fully but I believe it falls into the classic three act structure.

There will be exceptions to every rule and often truly iconic pieces are iconic because they break the rules and challenge the way we look at things. Now I'm not suggesting a Snyder-esque approach [Edit: a devotion to formula taken to such extremes that specific pages are designated to individual story beats] but I do know that the vast, vast majority of stories benefit from the application of a pre-devised structure.

And, as a side note, I should note that structure doesn't have to be pre-devised and rigid. There can be original structures that work well. The benefit of a structure is also in the ability to distance yourself from the story ("I can't see the wood for the trees!") and therefore allow yourself to better identify and manipulate elements of your story to create a more effective story.

We like to think that great stories are organic, beautiful beasts. They're not, they're effective manipulation of story elements.

Good.


Yes.:)


Awwww, do I haaaaaaaave to?:p


Yes.:)


Creepy can be good. At least it might recapture attention.

That would be good. It was inspired by some of my kind-of dreams as well as by Dracula, partially.



Depends on the progression of the story and whether or not a death really fits. Sometimes it's simply too contrived. But yes, it could potentially be useful. Certainly not something to discount.

I've put deaths in my story earlier.


I just remember, too, that I have another story that did have an unhappy ending, because I decided early on that I hated my main character. The link to it is in my signature.

I haven't seen that film for an utterly insane amount of time so I can't comment fully but I believe it falls into the classic three act structure.

There will be exceptions to every rule and often truly iconic pieces are iconic because they break the rules and challenge the way we look at things. Now I'm not suggesting a Snyder-esque approach [Edit: a devotion to formula taken to such extremes that specific pages are designated to individual story beats] but I do know that the vast, vast majority of stories benefit from the application of a pre-devised structure.

And, as a side note, I should note that structure doesn't have to be pre-devised and rigid. There can be original structures that work well. The benefit of a structure is also in the ability to distance yourself from the story ("I can't see the wood for the trees!") and therefore allow yourself to better identify and manipulate elements of your story to create a more effective story.

We like to think that great stories are organic, beautiful beasts. They're not, they're effective manipulation of story elements.
Oh noes! Typo!!!shiftONE1!!!!leventy@!1!! :eek: [/facetious]
Yes.:)



Yes.:)
Very well. :)


That would be good. It was inspired by some of my kind-of dreams as well as by Dracula, partially.
I'll have to read it to find out, though, won't I? :p

I've put deaths in my story earlier.


I just remember, too, that I have another story that did have an unhappy ending, because I decided early on that I hated my main character. The link to it is in my signature.

Another thing I have to read? :p Perhaps some tomorrow. But from Friday to Tuesday I'll be with my girlfriend, so I don't know that I'll have any time to read then. :)

Very well. :)



I'll have to read it to find out, though, won't I? :p



Another thing I have to read? :p Perhaps some tomorrow. But from Friday to Tuesday I'll be with my girlfriend, so I don't know that I'll have any time to read then. :)

Yes.:)

I suppose you will.:)

Well, I hope you will eventually. And the latest chapter is almost finished!:)