writerly nattering

[schmerica]

katallison had an entry today about the difference between the ideal stories in our heads and what we actually end up writing. Which is a topic I think is pretty interesting, actually, so I've been looking over my website this evening.

The thing is, for me, I think the major issue between the idea of the stories and the stories I wrote in most cases -- well, it's pretty predictable. I write tiny, tiny stories. And sometimes that's a good thing -- there are times when the smallness and spareness makes stronger writing -- but that's really not always the case. I think of at least four of my due South stories off the top of my head that when I sat down to write I expected to end up at least two or three times the length they actually did (Fucking Girls, Post, A is for Apple, and Discovery are the ones I thought of right away). I think with any other writer, those stories *would* be several times longer, and i don't think they would necessarily be worse off for it.

(...Looking at my website, I have discovered I have written exactly 4 stories over 30k in the past three plus years. Two of those were co-written. That's vaguely depressing.)

Hmm. That's definitely my main bone of contention with myself, I think. I know Arctic Cottages and Sandy Beaches was originally supposed to have something at least vaguely plotlike before it ended up just being all implications. Same with Contents... I think A Box of Pictures actually works better for me than it does for readers, because for that one, instead of seeing the differences from what I wanted I just fill in all the blanks as I read. Heh.

I suspect I would have a whole lot more if I could bring myself to reread my Smallville stories, but I really really can't make myself do that.

Comments

[estrella30.livejournal.com]

Oh god. You know of my love for A Box of Pictures. I think it's one of your very best stories, so yay! You like it too!

*pets*

[pearl-o.livejournal.com]

*giggles* DEATHFIC WOO!