Posts Tagged ‘how to write’

Seven Types, Infinite Stories: Writing the “High Concept” Idea

Thursday, March 12th, 2009

Fingers poised with painful precision above the keyboard. Eyes squinting, lines furrowing between arched eyebrows. Mouth pursed. Head cocked. The occasional twitch, fingers buried in hair and the frustrated sigh.

Writer’s block.

It’s not that I don’t have ideas, because Lord knows I have ideas. A plethora of squirming ideas wriggling about, waiting to be plucked and put to the hook, bait for a story to swallow it whole. (Gruesome but truthful.) The problem is their lack of substance. I might have a few scribbles in my notebook after an hour of brainstorming and they all mostly come down to a story about a so-and-so, who faces so-and-so challenge to reach so-and-so goal. It’s formulaic, stale, overdone, and about as gripping as watching a dying earthworm crawl along the sidewalk. I want to cultivate my ideas because they’re precious to me, but in truth, so few of them move beyond that first, stagnant concept.

A professor of mine once said that when you are writing, you should jot down the first four ideas that come into your head for your story. And then you should immediately cross out the first three, because they’re clichéd, hackneyed crap. What you want to create is beyond the surface. You don’t want a “concept,” you want a high concept. Something universal but fresh, an interesting twist, a compelling new confection. Which some might argue is difficult, given that many scholars, critics etc. have decided there are only seven story ideas in the whole world.

Except that there are fourteen. Depending on whose side you’re on… continue reading

Common v. Correct

Wednesday, May 17th, 2006

Decided May 17, 2006

Cases before the court:

Bring v. Take
Like v. Such as
Over v. More than/Greater than

Big Bad Book Blog delivered the opinion. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary occasionally dissenting. Chicago Manual of Style occasionally dissenting.

Common usage has invaded the domain of correct usage. The two parties constantly battle for dominance in the written language. Over time, correct usage eventually accepts certain elements of common usage, blurring the lines for writers and editors. And of course, multiple parties take sides in the dispute—editors, linguists, publishers of dictionaries and style manuals. In the end, the true victim is the writer. How is the writer to determine when common usage is acceptable? continue reading