I reported a couple days ago that Asimov’s bought a story from me. If I count an early story in Analog that was reprinted in the Greek edition of Asimov’s (and I do), that’s my 20th appearance in the magazine since 1997.
I tried a different technique in composing the story. I knew my characters, and I knew what the conflict was, but I had no plot in mind. I focussed on writing fully fleshed out scenes in their lives. They’re childhood friends, so each scene is a key moment, but I didn’t have a plan where I was going.
However, I have an idea about constructing stories that I call the “ascending pearls theory.”
Because of how we read, the first scene starts the reader from scratch: all info is new. The next scene, even though it presents additional information, carries with it the info from the first scene. The knowledge accretes for the reader, just like a pearl that starts with a grain of sand and then coats it over and over until a pearl is built from the layers.
Knowing that as I write is a powerful tool. Each new scene pulls on that background to create increasing complexity and nuance. The weight of the story is carried in the accumulated mass of story material.
So I don’t have to have a plot in mind, necessarily. The information is making connections and building a path organically. Eventually a culmination of the combined dynamic of knowing what the characters want, the actions that they take or the world takes that impact their progress toward their goal, and the tension that creates, take me to a final moment.
After that, a story is like that old model of how the world balances on the back of a turtle. “Yeah, but what’s under that turtle?” a skeptical audience member asks. “It’s turtles all the way down,” is the answer.
The climax rests on the back of the second to last scene. What’s under that? It’s scenes all the way down. The advantage of writing this way for this story is I really worked on making each scene a whole and interesting moment. I didn’t have any skip-through-this-because-I-want-to-get-to-the-end writing.
The disadvantage was that I slowed down. I couldn’t write the story this way by sketching my way to an end. There were days in between scenes while I decided what would be most interesting to tackle next. Despite the slow progress, I’m very happy with the result.
I have a rough draft of a writing book I started for Fairwood Press from years ago that is tentatively titled, PLOT AS METAPHOR. You can see I’ve used some metaphors here. It’s the only way I have for talking about the inexplicable workings of creating a story for me. I suspect other teachers/writers face the same challenge when describing how story happens.
I’ve always liked this quote from Joseph Conrad. I think he was talking about writing. It’s from HEART OF DARKNESS:
“No, it is impossible; it is impossible to convey the life-sensation of any given epoch of one’s existence–that which makes its truth, its meaning–its subtle and penetrating essence. It is impossible. We live, as we dream–alone.”



One of the many fascinating aspects of English and writing is that anything that sounds like a rule has exceptions. The only real rule in writing is this: IT HAS TO WORK. If it works, it’s good. I’ve written stories in the past just to show that a “rule” can be broken. My latest story at Daily Science Fiction does exactly that. It’s called 
In May
Most everyone who has been responding to my posts seems well beyond beginner status as writers, but I’ve found that going back to the basics has always been good for me. For example, two of the best books I have on writing are ones that were written for rank beginners, but I keep revisiting them. Maybe it’s because I’m slow and simple, or maybe because reviewing the basics keeps me anchored. I figure if my basics are solid, my experimental flights of fancy may have a better chance of working.
Most of us have times when we don’t know what to write next. It could be in the middle of a project or in between them, but no matter what we do, we’re stalled. So what can we do to work on our writing when we can’t write? Reading, of course, is one answer, and you certainly should be doing that, but here’s a more active exercise: try copying some of the writing you admire.
How this works is that you will start to get a feel for how the writer you like goes about being who they are. Here’s a bit from The Stand by Stephen King:
Bradbury likes the long sentence here, and I notice his tendency to pair and to list, so the air is “ancient soft,” the fragments were “blue and white,” everything was “good and sweet,” while the air also blended the “dead and the living,” and “rains and the dusts.” His second sentence (did you notice he did this in only two sentences, while King’s passage that was only a tad longer took five sentences?) is mostly a list of connected noun phrases.
Writing the conclusion to a story can be hard! First off, the whole story has been leading to this last page, so the sense of responsibility to the story and to the reader is huge. I don’t want to end the story on a lame note, and I don’t want the readers to feel cheated, as if my story was a shaggy dog joke whose only point was in seeing how long I could keep them paying attention with the promise of a punch line that would never come.