In this video, Kate was telling a roomful of students that they weren't using their imaginations enough. She said that in all of our stories, we should be creating every part of it: the characters, the setting, the time...even down to the force of gravity.
I'm into pain. I like to challenge myself, and this seemingly impossible idea of creating my own gravity in my stories was something that has fascinated me for a long time. I often ask myself if I'm using my imagination enough. And, often my answer is no. And, more often, my answer is "What does that even mean?"
So, I'm throwing the question out for your thoughts on this idea. Do you use your imaginations enough? Do you create your own gravity? What does that even mean???
You pose an interesting question here. I think we use our imaginations 'enough' when we hit on the right amount for the tale. I've read authorial notes in which the author admits to toying with the laws of physics to pull the book together. Well, if that's what it takes, I'm all for it.
ReplyDeleteMy current WIP is set in a fictional country in a time different from out own. But, time is linear, days are 24 hours long, and the acceleration of gravity is 9.8 meters per second squared. I created characters, setting, and two systems of law. I think that counts as using my imagination enough.
Good question, Davin! Whenever I think about using my creativity enough, it always come back to "uncomfortability." When I enter into a realm I'm uncomfortable, where I'm unfamiliar with the surroundings and the rules, etc., I know I'm entering into new territory where my imagination and creativity need to stretch. A lot. Cinders is doing that for me, and it's a fantastic experience so far. Monarch was like that for me, too, writing about a 50 year old male protagonist who does stuff I have no clue about - nor do a lot of people, actually. (the CIA keeps a lot of stuff under wraps). I had to use my imagination and creativity a lot.
ReplyDeleteI think Kate might mean, literarally create your own gravity, but I think it can also be figurative, as well. For me, it would almost always have to be figuratively, meaning, to me, that I need to be creating the reality in the story, not letting my own reality govern the story. I don't know if that makes sense or not.
Dominique: Cool, me too!
ReplyDeleteIn my WIP, I have chosen to use a.) psychosocial realism and b.) magical/supernatural rules harvested from medieval and ancient European belief systems and folklore.
My challenge is picking and choosing the magical rules that others have already invented, but combining them in new ways.
For example, my medieval villagers believe in witches, vampires, and werewolves, but none of those things "really" exist in my fantasy world. However, unicorns and dragons do. The unicorns have magical manure. The dragons take "you are what you eat" in a unique direction: They absorb the temperament of any animal or person they consume. Magical curses and prophecies are real, but they are 100% self-fulfilled. Their efficacy depends upon how many people believe in them and how strongly they feel. If people forget about a prophecy, it doesn't come true.
Is that imaginative enough? I'm not sure. I'm trying to strike a balance between familiarity and originality. So far, my writing group readers seem to like the world I've created and feel drawn in. Time will show whether I can hold their interest!
I also think it's hilarious that ancient Romans and Christians believed in unicorns, but unicorns do not appear in their mythology. They appear only in zoology books, because they thought that unicorns were plain and simple, real animals, not mythological creatures. They thought they lived in Asia and that's why nobody ever saw them. Also, some early Christians believed that unicorns were somehow linked to Jesus and preferred the company of virginal girls. I have a hard time flexing my imagination when there's so much rich old folklore, sociology, and psychology to mine! But I guess critical thinking and using old concepts in new ways ARE forms of using imagination.
ReplyDeleteGreat question. Creating your gravity...what comes to my mind is digging deep, mining my brain while at the same time trying to step outside my own view of the world. Thanks for the question--I think it will help me to focus on my revision today!
ReplyDeleteI won't presume to speak for Braverman, but to me, using my imagination "enough" means that I am constantly surprising myself; the ideas in my stories are not the ideas I have read in other people's stories. I'm going to possibly insult some folks here and say that world-building isn't necessarily what Braverman means, because inventing fantastic languages and cultures is not the same thing as having an imaginative story. Reimagine your characters, reimagine your plots, reimagine your outcomes.
ReplyDeleteI also don't know what she means by a writer creating his own gravity, but I interpret it as meaning that a writer should create the forces in his own fiction that propel all the characters and events forward through the story. A writer should not lean on anyone else, or borrow too directly from another writer. A writer's work should not feel just like something we've already read.
Mostly, I don't think in these terms. I just want to be surprised and amused and sometimes bemused by my writing.
Well, Scott, you usually are surprised by your writing, it seems, which is a good thing!
ReplyDeleteMichelle: I'm still going to say that I don't use my imagination enough. You know who used her imagination enough? Flannery O'Connor. Her stories all work the same way, but that way of working is different from the way any other writer's stories work. Last night I re-read "A Good Man is Hard to Find" and "A Late Encounter With the Enemy" and by gosh, that woman was a genius. And an absolutely solid writer of prose. Not a single syllable is out of place. Tonight I'm going to re-read "Greenleaf."
ReplyDeleteDominique, Another part of the inspiration for this post was also me recently watching Tim Burton's Alice In Wonderland and Quentin Tarantino's Inglourious Bastards. I really impresses me when artists like you and them create so much of their world. I mostly write realistically these days, but I'm thinking I might want to take more control over my version of "real."
ReplyDeleteMichelle, that does make sense, I also agree that Kate was talking in a figurative level as well. I like what you had to say about discomfort. I think that's a sign that you are pushing yourself in your writing.
Genie, That's a fascinating world you have created! I often thinking about that balance between new and familiar. As a reader, I do like to experience new things, but if they are TOO new, it becomes an uncomfortable experience. It's sort of an interesting conflict, because in a way it punishes the most original writers, or at least challenges them to somehow create new comfort that must take place relatively quickly.
Scott, you are a man after my heart, I swear. It's rare that I find male readers, or many readers at all, who appreciate O'Connor. The Violent Bear it Away is my absolute favorite. I wrote a paper on it. I should send it to you if you're interested, although it's pretty dry and boring and just about the hero journey of Marion Tarwater. My favorite part of Greenleaf is the recurring light theme. Yes, she's a genius. I have her collected works, and it's been gathering too much dust lately. Must read.
ReplyDeletepaulgreci, I do think this is just a more specific way to ask if we are challenging ourselves enough. I'm glad this was inspirational to you. It has been for me as well.
ReplyDeleteScott, I think I know what you mean when you say you don't think in these terms. More often than not, I write to amuse myself. But lately, as part of my writer's funk, I do find myself craving something new. For the first time I want to write something that I can't get anywhere else, and it's not enough for it to be new, but it must somehow be specific to my needs. I'm finding it more demanding than ever but also easier in a way because I only have myself to answer to. I think when Braverman mentioned gravity, she did mean both literally and figuratively. It was in a list of other components if you decide to seek out the clip. And, I do agree that the figurative part deals with whether or not your story can be self-propelled. I love it when I happen to hit on a "machine" like that in my stories. It doesn't always happen, and I don't seem to be able to control when it will happen.
Scott, I'll read more of her work. I've only read very little and somehow her work stays untouched on my shelf, probably because I don't know it well enough to give it a chance. I will!
ReplyDeleteGreat advice, which authors of all stripes should attend to. A handful of speculative writers have really taken it to heart and produced some intricately detailed settings. William Gibson's Neuromancer is a wonderful example.
ReplyDeleteDavin: I did watch the videos, and I agree that Braverman probably meant it both literally and figuratively about gravity. But I think even she'd be hard pressed to say how she meant it literally or to give examples. Though impossible tasks are good for us as writers, I think.
ReplyDeleteThe machine, the motor of stories, is what I always look for. I think that when we were doing the Genre Wars contest and you commented that some of the stories "didn't have enough movement" for you, this is what you meant. I don't know either how to give stories that machine every time, but I'm better now at recognizing it and keeping it going once I've managed to find the "on" switch.
Hmm. I thrive survive and survive off pain and I think it fuels my writing well. I think it is the single most potent ingredient to my imagination. I've never thought about this before, thanks Davin.
ReplyDeleteAfter dreaming of telling my kids off for being late to school this week, I realised I am definitely not being imaginative enough!
ReplyDeleteThere's some great audiobooks and classes out there that use tools like meditation and focus on writing from the imagination. Plus riff-writing can be fun once you get going. I need to go play... I mean work.