A simile uses the words "like" or "as" to compare two things, while a metaphor directly compares two things without using "like" or "as." For instance, "a failed metaphor is a cat." A failed attempt at a decent simile would be the joke above! Still super funny though and totally something im gonna use
@@tantanthespaceman1923 Does word "similar" fit to a "metaphor"? It`s translation of non-english phrase and i`m not sure that the best one, Does it fit good "An unsuccessful metaphor is similar to a kitten with a tiny door?"
1. Chekhov's Armory: When you show a bunch of stuff to set the reader up for later on but don't follow up 2. The Everything but the Kitchen Sink Syndrome: Trying to cram too many ideas into a book (This is okay for the first draft but should be fixed in revision) 3. Worldbuilding Vertigo: so much worldbuilding information it's overwhelming and confusing 4. Inspiration Indigestion: Being too similar to a specific book or too heavily influenced to the point of being a copycat 5. The Aesthetics over Ethics Trap: Creating situations for shock values without contributing to the actual story 6. Dialogue Ventriloquism: Every character sounding the same 7. Metaphor overdose: Too many metaphors/similes that you lose sight of the story 8. Lack of Character Motivation: No justifications/motivations for character actions 9. Temporally Shortsighted: So fixated on the present moment that it's hard to picture the character with a life before or after the book takes place 10. The "Gotcha" Spiral: Relies so much on plot twists, that the reader feels manipulated. The plot twists aren't properly earned/built up. 11. Checklist Character Development: Feels like created by an algorithm/AI making them feel fake. To avoid this, try finding contradicting/surprising traits for your characters. 12. "Subtext is Everything" Syndrome: Your story is too subtle that it's impenetrable to the reader. When they're so subtle, the reader can't tell what they're alluding to or the reader begins to feels confused.
Harry Potter is great with unique dialogue. Almost every character has their own way of speaking. My favorite example comes from book 7 where Harry is retrieving the sword of Gryffindor from the icy lake, but the cursed locket strangles him. A mysterious figure saves him and pulls him and the sword from the icy depths. We don't yet know who it is, but we get one line of dialogue from them. "Are you MENTAL?" We immediately know it was Ron. Fabulous moment. Of course, the main reason it is a great moment is because Ron abandoned them a couple chapters ago, so him showing up to save the day was exactly what the reader was hoping for.
@@Iron-Bridge my wife and I particularly appreciate that his advice is less about establishing RuLeS for writing and more about reframing how you think about your own fiction and that of others. It grants a refreshing sense of freedom to experiment without surrendering what makes you unique.
Your writing advice is always so helpful. As a person with autism, I get overwhelmed easily by "writing advice," but you always explain things in a very calm and easy to understand way. Thank you for taking the time to teaching writing.
Pacing and clarity (subtext) are two things best learned from reader feedback. The two main questions I ask from readers are, "where was it boring" and "where was it confusing?"
I loved the video. What I'd like to add is to always remember what readers don't know. That's why my first draft turned out to be a disaster. I immerse myself in characters, trying to understand their fears, motivations, and insecurities, often staying in their heads for hours or days. At this point, there are so many "obvious" things that I don't mention in the narration that it turns into chaos. I mean, it makes sense for me, who knows everything, but it's utter gibberish for everyone else. It doesn't matter how great your story is if nobody can understand it.
If you recognise yourself in any of these points, don't despair. Notice that with each point, he's giving examples of published work, some of them worldwide phenomenons. Nobody's work is perfect. Just learn and do your best.
The showrunners of Lost wanted to end it after three seasons while the network wanted it to run indefinitely. It sucks when conflicts between creatives and executives negatively affect projects.
This same problem affected comedy hit "How I Met Your Mother". Originally it was intended to be about 2-3 seasons, but it turned into a big hit and they kept adding more and more - and this makes the ending, which was planned from the beginning, something of a mess. All the characters have changed over the interim. They've become far more complex and their relationships have become a lot more complicated. We can buy Ted falling in love with Robin, then rekindling that later, if they haven't spent about seven seasons in the middle almost hooking up. The stuff with Robin and Barney just makes it weirder.
This is why I consume film rather than television. With film, the final product is reviewed on day one. With these series, all the glowing initial reviews are provisional. Your emotional investment is ultimately exposed to Hollywood dysfunction. I guess if you get your thrills from having your own emotional skin in the game, as a totally passive bystander, fill your boots. Not for me. I like film, and hardly any sequels or prequels, either, to mitigate this entire channel of BS. There isn't much left in the film bucket these days. I've watched close to 1000 great films in my life. It was fabulous while it lasted. Mission accomplished.
Look, I'm not saying people shouldn't have wanted satisfying answers to Lost's mysteries, but the show's biggest thematic throughline was faith vs. reason. Faith is not about having answers, it's about believing despite not having the answers. Everybody, including The Joker is like "Why'd it end in a church?" And I'm like "Do you need to watch it again?"
Not entirely true. The showrunners wanted the show to last three seasons, which isn't the same as "ended in season 3". The network forced them to pad the initial seasons with filler so, if anything, the first three seasons were the ones affected by the network, regardless of what half of the show people like more.
One of my favorite metaphors in a recent book is in Everybody Knows, by Jordan Harper. He describes a character who’s been “the muscle” for bad people as “a fist on someone else’s arm”
This was super helpful for me. I have been racking my brain trying to figure out why my plot wasn't jiving the way I wanted it to. Now I realize I had too many subplots, too many twists, and too much going on in general. Side note: I love all my ideas so I'm now realizing I'll just have to write more books to use them all 😂
Jackie Chan: Now I realize I have too many stances, too many twists, and too much going on in general. Side note: I love all my jabs so I'm now realizing I'll just have to film more movies to use them all. What actually makes martial arts appealing is the iconic economy of motion. Less is better, when perfectly orchestrated.
My mom’s ex did screenwriting as a hobby and my mom tagged along to his club sometimes. My mom, despite not being a writer herself, has given me some useful advice over the years. One of the main things is to not let your character have more than one superpower. Or more broadly, don’t overload your audience with a laundry list of traits. I’ve heard it called the “limp or an eyepatch” method. Choose one or two traits and make those the most important.
God watching this made me feel, immeasurably more confident in my novel. I always watch videos like this with tips and worry so much I’m falling into bad writing holes or patterns, and then I watch the video and am assured that I’m doing just fine. I could do with some more subtext for sure though, thank you for the great video.
Excellent, glad you were encouraged by this! Overall, that's my goal to encourage. Hopefully authors, even when they realize they have some revision to do, don't get depressed about it.
I watched a helpful video on subtext recently-from 'the eternal english major' on YT-she said to take a character's arc, their struggles and mistakes, and make a comparison, then take that metphore and figure out ways you can allude to it without saying it directly. (for example if your character is feeling like a weak link in Team Save The World: have their necklace break, have them walk by a ship where the anchor chain broke. Expand it to them noticing how fragile things are in general-their pie crust crumbles to bits at the slightest touch.) The events of the story aren't just the Happening of The Plot, reactive scenes should include theme relevant feelings. Especially if your character is clammed up, the things they take notice of become subtextually a measure of their inner world. Also notable when what they think and say are in opposition.
You could argue that the first Saw had a point to its ultraviolence and that there's artistic value behind it, though I'd agree with you for every other entry in the series.
As someone who couldn't possibly make it through a single scene of that franchise, but married somebody who loves it, I'd say the only point is "violence begets violence", or something similar, like "misery loves company" 😅
@@anamazing2297 It's a little more like a rollercoaster ride, the entire point of watching it is the "point" the killer is trying to make. You compare the situations the characters find themselves in, and their sins, to your problems. And you experience, vicariously the thrill of trying to survive against impossible odds, but in a safe environment, while being reminded to try not to take your life for granted.
This is a very strong guide, but I have to take issue with one (very minor, almost unimportant) point: The Saw franchise very much has a message - to the point that it feels completely unsubtle about it. The story is about a dying man trying to force people who are throwing their lives away to actually treasure it (hence "Live or die, make your choice"). As the story goes on, the various chapters also focus on more specific issues such as calling out a health care industry that is more interested in profit and policy than it is in actually saving lives. I know that doesn't change your point, but I wanted to defend a franchise that delivers a message of saving yourself from negative spirals without coming off as too preachy.
Had to chuckle at the metaphors, because I love using them a little too much. But I know this and so I have a certain character using most of them, making for a nice, individual voice. 😊
Well, I just started making videos in March ... and I kind of took the summer off and went on a two month vacation. Ha ha. So I'll get there. Thanks for the kind words!
Excellent video, thank you so much! You've really reassured me of being on the right path with third draft of the novel I just spent the last several years on. George R.R. Martin's "gardener" style falls deep into Everything-But-the-Kitchen-Sink-Syndrome and Worldbuilding Vertigo by ASOIAF books 4 and 5. While he was a big inspiration as far as even my major characters having thin plot armor, I consciously avoided his trap of name dropping "So-and-So from This-or-There" on every other page. The only people I mention who are already long dead have some point to the current narrative.
Hey man I love your channel I am here just to ask you to make more videos like the Hemingway video because I really loved that one. Giving tips and talking about famous authors I thought it was really cool . Plus I am a Hemingway fan so I was really glad you posted a Hemingway video. Keep doing what you are doing because it’s really cool and I if you read this please consider more videos about authors thank you!
I just now discovered you and, after watching, subscribed. Excellent insights! When you introduced the section on metaphors, my mind went straight to Raymond Chandler.
Supposedly, author said he didn't like the Kubrick movie because Alex isn't reformed by the end, so it doesn't _sound_ like it's much more complicated than that. tbh
@@futurestoryteller it's been a long time since I've read the book but if I remember correctly, he doesn't give up his violent ways due to the punishment. I think the punishment/brainwashing doesn't work as intended, but he ends up basically just maturing and being better on his own later basically just by growing up and reflecting on how crappy he was as a teenager
I just love your videos. I can always pick out at least one gem, usually more, and you don't deal with political agendas within the writing community, which I appreciate. Thank you.
12:25 Not that it detracts from the point, but the angel did it to gather the additional souls of the passengers descendants that could be born, since they survived for the war in Heaven. He made that Celine Dion excuse to hide the truth and to mess with the Winchesters. This works, because he is introduced as a petty and selfish character and the Winchesters only know him as such.
@@Cocc0nuttt0 took me about 5 episodes then spent the rest of the run and indeed the rest of jj's career raging that we hadn't grabbed up our pitchforks and chased them into the sea. And what sticks in my craw is that it didn't cause lost or JJ to fail.
I bet you're one of these people who think the characters were dead all along, died on the plane crash and the island is purgatory. I know it must come as a shock, but that's not what happened in the final episode. And every question can be answered by analysing the plot, the show never spoon-feeds you information.
Only if you completely misunderstood it, lol. Let me guess - you think they were dead the whole time or that none of the questions were answered. Neither of these tired complaints are true, they're just exhausting.
Great video. I might go further on the example of Moby Dick where you say “… there is a section that goes on and on about …” My experience was that there was one section that didn’t drone on and on: the last 25 of 481 pages that was the actual chase and final battle. I felt the Hero’s Journey was finishing the book; I was exhausted
Actually in Supernatural he didn't save the Titanic because he hated the movie/song. I like to think it played into it though. But it later turned out that there was a more important reason.
Okay, so I honestly believe they were supposed to be throwing that football in an alley, but because Wiseau had every set built in a studio (like Hollywood films of old) it looked like it was inside. That's also why the rooftop scene looks so obviously green screened, because it was.
Thank you! I'm pretty broke right now, but I might be able to ask for your course for Christmas. I'm going to write the bulk of my novel in November, but I think your course would help with the revision process :)
@@kuhpunkt he thinks they were dead the whole time, even when most of the characters aren’t from the original plane crash and lived on the island for more than thirty years. And he calls himself a screenwriter, he doesn’t pay the minimum of attention
i think i have the opposite to the subtext problem i want to be understood so i have no idea what or how to hide and when i try to leave the obvious stuff out, i have nothing on the page!!
I think that one of the few writers that nail a big twist in the end is Joe Abercrombie- especially in the Age of Madness trilogy. That twist enhances the second read-through for me. The man teases the truth throughout the three books. Hidden in plain sight. Genius
I agree with that particular twist you mentioned, but one complaint I normally have for Abercrombie is that he relies too much on subverting readers' expressions that he ends up being predictable in that all you have to do is expect the opposite.
I felt the same way when he brought up Snowcrash's Summerrian language stuff. It's been nearly twenty years since I read it, but i remember it running along at good clip without getting bogged down.
a great example of subtext done right are Umberto Ecos novels 'name of the rose' and 'Foucault's pendulum'. They read like a detective story / mystery story on the surface and you can totally enjoy them without knowing more. But there exist books that explain in detail what Eco was hinting at in a certain line in the book.
I think you might not have been paying close enough attention to Lost because all of those questions were answered. I also think you’re judging the original Saw too much by its sequels. The original had very little shock-value gore and absolutely had something deeper to say about the human condition. The sequels, unfortunately, spiralled fast into torture porn.
Well, Lost attempted to answer those questions. I felt their attempts were half-assed. Agreed on Saw -- I was referred more to sequels, not the original.
@@GarotoCoelho he’s arguing that because he didn’t like the explanations it’s bad story writing. That’s like saying that he didn’t like the ending of Breaking bad and thus it’s bad story writing. Don’t pay attention to this video
Getting retroactively rid of celine dion's horrifying screams definitely *is* an excellent reason for saving that ship, although *I* would rather have traveled back in time to prevent *both* the dion, _and_ the winslet family-lines from ever forming LOL
You mentioning Twilight's dialogue issues reminded me of how the author Stephanie Meyer straight up forgot that the character Renesmee's name was unorthodox, and had all the other characters act like it was some beautiful, perfect name and not acknowledge how weird it is.
I'm not going to lie! The last novel, the Secret of the Old Factory (2017), that I published when I was 12 has 7 or 8 out of the 12 issues you talk about in the video!
The thing with Chekhov’s betrayal point is that the point might not be the weapons themself more a demonstration that this is the kind of person a character is, secondly red herrings.
Re: #2 A japanese comic called Lone Wolf and Cub, written by Kazuo Koike does this beautifully and regularly through all the stories. Small breaks of educational detail set the reader up with an understanding of the time, culture, economy and customs of the setting, then returns to the plot. It's not clunky and always in service of the story. At no point is the writer in love with the research he's done, his humility makes these interludes into still moments in a river that may have rapids elsewhere, turning a comic into an orchestral arrangement where action breaks up stillness rather than the other way around.
The irony that that show has some of the worst writing I've ever seen. I've had long conversations with my brother about it. He just nods and agrees with everything I say about it - yet he loves the show. He's the one who convinced me to watch it. It's not an ironic appreciation either. To him it's great anyway. It's kinda wild.
@@futurestoryteller the show for sure has som of the lowest lows. But in the first five seasons its instead got som of the highest highs. They shouldnt have done away with the horror element. Either way, i love supernatural!
If I remember right, wasn't it Burgess himself who said that the 21 chapter version is a parable while the 20 chapter version is just a rude fable? Or something like that...
For a while I had a theory that Game of Thrones ended extremely similar to what he had in mind and that the negative reaction had startled him into quietly shelving it. But another video I watched last month persuaded me otherwise- he's just struggling to get the writing both complete and up to his own standards.
M. Night Shamagain has yet to fool me. I have figured out every twist in every movie before the halfway point. I feel his writing insults the viewers intelligence. To be fair though, I stopped watching his movies after about 3 of them.
The "Chekhov's Gun" rule is better stated as: don't put stuff in your story early on, unless you intend to revisit them in a meaningful way later on. Everything in your story must have a point to it. It must contribute to either character development, atmosphere, plot progression, etc., OR it must have a payoff in the back half of the story. The best stories have their elements pull double duty. They serve immediate purposes early on in the story (character development, atmosphere, etc.) and are then reused in the back half of the story in a different context after a revelation, or reversal. Revisiting a thing in your story can be the best way to establish change in the protagonist's internal values without resorting to stating them in exposition.
15:40 There are so many cop shows when you know that hey, this is the 15min suspect, so it's not him and nope, not the 25min suspect either... Once you recognize the recipe, those first suspect reveals become less fulfilling.
1) Best (or worst) example of dialogue ventriloquism I've ever come across: Robert Jordan's "Wheel of Time" series. I got the free "first half of the first novel" and was amazed how, male or female, young or old, every single character sounded the same. Never paid money for more. 2) The real injury M. Night Shyamalan did to himself by putting twists in his first two movies is that when some of his later movies (e.g., "Signs", "Old") *didn't* have twists (just wild premises), viewers felt cheated (even if the movies themselves were good, like "Signs" definitely was and "Old" barely was). Moreover, the twists that some of his later movies contained failed to satisfy (e.g., "The Village", "Glass").
I loved Wheel of Time for all its fault. Like some other fantasy authors, he tried to start the story in a Tolkienesque way so I'm not sure that making the first half of the first book available for free was necessary a great idea. I still did like that part though. I never really thought much along the lines of them sounding the same, they do get more themselves as the story goes on I think BUT there are some commonalities that are annoying, thinking mainly of the lack communication between characters but also of the resistance to change, the archetypes and other things.
"Worldbuilding vertigo" is pretty subjective. There are quite a few of us out here who enjoy exploring the depths of worldbuilding. And if they have to occasionally interrupt it with characters doing something, I guess that's okay... (That second bit was a joke. Mostly...) I thought the detail on the Sumerian language thing was the key that made something as bonkers as Snow Crash hold together and work as a story and those were among my favourite pages in the book. I realise mileage is gonna vary.
Thank you for this! I was dreading the idea of having an editor. Not knowing what to expect. But now that I've seen this video, I'm convinced I should never have one.
1. Lost didn't end on a dream. I can get the initial missconception, but it has been 14 years since it ended. Come on. 2. All of those "unsolved misteries" were explained, multiple times even. The polar bear, for example, was explained three freaking times. In Season 3, In Season 5 and again in the DVD's epilogue in case you missed it the first two times. There's no excuse for missing this one. 3. Imagine giving writing advice when you clearly lack basic comprehension of a story that amounts to good vs evil on a island.
1. I never said it ended on a dream. Watch again. 2. I didn't say they weren't explained, I said the writers attempted to solve them, and they were solved unsatisfactorily. 3. Imagine complaining about things I didn't say.
@@BookfoxYou understand that "solved unsatisfactory" is completely relative right, and it doesn't actually makes good or bad storytelling, right? Just because you didn't like the answers it doesn't mean the show is bad or is "chevoks armory."
1:36 - My first book is like this. But the reason is that it involves a mystery that *does* get resolved in Book 2 (I do have all the answers for every 'gun' introduced). Would it be better to just 'merge' Books 1 and 2 together? Or can the 1st Book (in a series) act as a primer to a wider fantasy as each 'gun' is fired for every book after the starting one?
I think the first book in the series should resolve most of the storylines that you open, but then you can always have one or two that isn't resolved until the next book. I wouldn't say the answer should be to merge book 1 and 2 together (at least not most of the time).
@@Bookfox Ty so much for the reply! So far, Book 1 is just shy of 90k words. Which I've been told is quite short for epic fantasy. I've started a few scenes for Book 2, but not sure if I'll hit the same length. So I'm not certain if having two shorter books is a better idea than just one large one that might be below ~200k words, possibly.
We all have our strengths, weaknesses, and challenges. For example, my betas have said that all my characters have unique voices, though do say that my MCs have always seemed a little older than their ages. That said, it does not dissuade my worry that, to me, they seem too similar (in my novels that is - in my plays, I can totally feel the difference between characters). Granted, most of the characters are kids as my novels are MG, but still. Also, my first novel is supposed to be a slice of life in our own world, in which Magic is used as an allegory for the MC to coming to terms with and accepting her own grief... however, as there is "technically" a kid learning magic and eventually fighting a villain (which note, technically she loses, the battle itself an allegory of a losing the struggle against grief, if you catch my drift), some betas have then come back and said that it was too slow for a "hero's journey". I took the rare path and broke the book up into Acts named after the stages of grief to try to at least suggest the actual arc, but... OH! A few authors will likely feel me here, but I wrote my first novel with an entirely different background concept. What set my MC on her journey was the death of her grandmother and the disappearance of her older brother. But then Amari and the Night Brothers by B.B. Alston, and I'd never even heard about it. I read the book (fantastic book and series, highly recommend), and it had a very similar concept to where it would seem like I'd been heavily inspired by it. So, I had to change that background concept from the brother disappearing (grandmother still died however), to the brother struggling with his own grief, having shut down and rejecting everything and everyone. Which, surprisingly, made, in my opinion, the whole exploration of grief much stronger. Checklist Character Development - 16:49 Dude just described Bruce Wayne. LOL!
This stuff worked for the classics because it was a different time, and even in today's standards, it still works....somehow. I seen the Everything but the Kitchen Sink syndrome in a lot of things that worked well. It depends n how it is done I guess.
I think that the compressed space of a short story means you have less time to reference things in the past/future, but the principle still holds. You should still have a sense of their past/future and allude, even if briefly, to it.
@@Starburst514 every single one. There was some weird general consensus that - because the finale sucked - they didn’t answer anything. In reality, I think they sometimes went a bit out of their way to explain stuff.
