When a Gardener and Architect work together they can build a... Green House!

The plot weeds have overtaken what was once GRRM's tidy garden.

@DVSPress

6 жыл бұрын

That's the danger of "gardening" - you can lack direction and not "progress" in the story.

@TheJollyMisanthrope

6 жыл бұрын

I think GRRM really likes creating and exploring characters first and foremost. Unfortunately he piled in too many in the same story, instead of letting them have their own adventures in side novels. That's one lesson I've taken from his series. Don't feel like you have to introduce every person of interest that ever lived within a certain time period.

@DVSPress

6 жыл бұрын

That's actually part of the problem with Stephen King as well with the Dark Tower. He didn't have the end in mind when he began the series, and everything just kind of slips apart in the last book.

@TheRedneckAtheist

6 жыл бұрын

That's just typical SK though, he does everything right until he hits the climax of the story, after that the stories just sort of stumble forward. The Stand is the perfect example of this.

@DVSPress

6 жыл бұрын

TheRedneckAtheist Yeah I see your point. I thought the first half of the stand was some of the most compelling fiction I had read; the conclusion however was dreadfully anticlimactic and also made a huge portion of the story moot.

I work in television animation. When I write a script, I always start out as an architect, and end up a gardener. The first thing I do is decide what is the point of the story, something that can be summed up in one sentence, could be the moral of the story, or the plot of the story, or the theme. Then I plot it out, scene for scene, beginning, middle, and end. The most important part is the end. I have to know where the story is going, so I can get there as I write. At this point I have to make a one page outline for approval by the producer, director, and broadcaster, different studios use different terminology, some call it a treatment, some a one sheet, some a synopsis, some an outline. This outline plots out the story and may include dialog to get across what the scene is about. I find one page is sufficient for my purpose (an 11 minute animated show)... obviously if you are writing something longer, a movie or a novel, then the outline would be longer. Then I start the actual script writing... and this is where I go from architect to gardener. I follow my outline, fully fleshing out each scene, but I often stray from what the outline had, the basic idea of the scene remains, but the mechanics may change. For example (just making this up), lets say I had a scene in the outline where the main character get embarrassed in front of his love interest while playing a sport. The whole point of the scene is to make the main character embarrassed in front of the love interest. It doesn't matter how you get there. So I may change the scenario from a sport to something else, a school field trip, or in a shopping mall. Maybe by the time I get to that scene I may strayed from the outline earlier and now having the main character playing a sport no longer fits, so it has to change. As long as he embarrasses himself in front of the love interest, the plot/story can continue as planned/not planned in the outline. And of course, once the script is complete, there is the revision process, where the director or broadcaster asks for changes... and VOILA! eventually you have a final script.

@scarlet8078

5 жыл бұрын

We call it a treatment where I work but yes that is similar to what I do. I always have to be an architect. I make a 10-scene plan for every project (i'm not saying the final project will be only 10 scenes - it can be more or less, just depends). I have to get the treatment approved. And then others also add sometimes or comment on the dialogue

I'm firmly an architect. For me, a story isn't a story until I know how it ends. Then I work my way backwards from there, how it started.

Be aware of your audience...that's very good advice for any writer.

Building a house does not involve planning EVERYTHING. There is actually a good amount of improv involved, especially as problems with the plan arise

I'm a farmer, I plan what I plant

@AdmoreMethod

5 жыл бұрын

Sir Suspicious I’m totally confused by the whole gardener idea, because anyone who’s planted a garden KNOWS how much planning it takes successfully yield a harvest (the goal of every gardener - and, should be the goal of every writer).

@AdmoreMethod

5 жыл бұрын

LagiNaLangAko23 I totally agree. I think what we fail to realize is, an architect does the same thing as a gardener. An architect plans the structure, then they watch to see how the customer designs and decorates it. There’s no more “creative freedom” to planning out a garden as there is to planning out a house. I still think “pantsers” is a more appropriate term. Cuz, people who try to garden by the seat of their pants don’t usually have success at that, either.

The commentary section is really valuable. Lots of people who are writers and share their knowledge and experience.

I'd never heard of these terms, but I have felt their affects. As soon as I began to trend towards architect, I stopped being able to produce. It sucks. I do so much prep, but when I sit down at the keyboard, the juices refuse to flow, the spark is gone. This is my own personal experience, of course. I envy those who can make it work.

@AdmoreMethod

5 жыл бұрын

McHaven07 Maybe you’re doing too much prep. After all, you’re not writing a University essay. Novels don’t require the same kind of outline that essays require. In fact, the former can be quite detrimental to the novel-writing process. Quick question: Have you finished a novel using the gardener method? And, if so, how much work did it require to “fix” afterward?

@McHaven07

5 жыл бұрын

@@AdmoreMethod I've never been published, so in the eyes of a few family members, I've never succeeded in writing a novel, but in truth I wrote about nine of them between the ages of 17 to 20 (maybe eleven if fanfiction counts, lol). Most of them were of the gardener variety, and I was self taught, so "editing" didn't really come into the equation until I got curious and re-read them for fun, and it was mostly spelling mistakes. I'm sure they would have been atrocious to anyone else, but I was very proud of them and the stories still excited me. Then the 10 year old Windows 98 PC I was wrote them all on died and I lost everything, with no way to recover the data. It was devastating. I'm 30 now. I haven't finished a novel since. But a whole slew of things could have been have been responsible. I developed extreme depression, I lost my family home to the mortgage crisis, my mother got extremely sick before developing cancer and ultimately passing away, I was constantly unemployed and having to depend on the generosity of family who would have preferred otherwise, and I developed my own host of medical issues. And through it all I had the expectations of family to get published and be able to support myself, while I tried to re-write everything I had lost. It was during that time I became more of an architect. I became more aware of technique and craft, and how it could be woven throughout a story, and I tried to apply it to my own re-writing, but always found myself stymied. I wrote as a gardener, and then attempted to re-write as an architect and ultimately failed. At times, it feels as if I said all I could about the things that interested me and now had nothing left to say--I don't like repeating myself. For me, writing was such a revelatory discovery. I used it to form the opinions I still hold to this day about things like war, peace, love, honor, psychology, sociology and most of the rest of the pillars my beliefs are now based. It made me smarter as I researched the subjects associated with my stories, made me love learning for its own sake. I easily learned more researching for stories than I ever did in school, for the mere fact that I was invested in what I was learning. Writing was a revelation. It's difficult to put into words exactly how life-altering it was. These days, I wonder if I'm simply a worldbuilder. I craft worlds I barely use, for stories I would love to tell, but doubt my ability to actually tell them. Sorry for the word dump. Your comment evoked some stuff I'd been holding in for a while.

I'm not firmly an architect or a gardener. Rather, I have a sort of two-pronged style. To start, I firmly out every character's full personalities, their initial friendships/relationships, the world, the magic/scifi system, the conflict, why the characters care about the conflict, the themes/message of the work, the secrets of the universe/world I'm creating and where someone may discover them (AKA what eventually becomes plot twists), the factions in the world, the conflicts/alliances/wars between the factions, the generalized partial histories of most characters, and most importantly, the end goal of the story and why the characters would and will be led to this end goal. So if you look at my pre-writing exercises it's purely architectural in nature. But. I do NOT plan "this is a bad guy/good guy", I don't even point to the ultimate antagonist (AKA the emperor to my Vader), I simply plan whom is the protagonist we follow throughout the journey and rationale why he is the protagonist (and I only define the protagonist out of necessity, and half the time I'll rewrite an entire story retroactively simply because I chose the wrong protagonist and it'd simply be better for the story I've written to follow another). Once that's set in stone, AKA once I've built my world and the people in it very architect-like, I'll let the story write itself very gardener-like. (I mean, I technically always write full outlines of my stories, but it's mostly a formality as I'll never actually follow them.) When I get to writing the stories themselves, I just let the characters go about their own business as time goes on. It just so happens that (a small part of) "their own business" is in of itself the conflict/themes/lore of the story. Therefore, it becomes instantly very gardener like. Sometimes a character will avoid conflict for a time, and prefer to assist those around her, sometimes a character is desparate or just otherwise focused on their goal, sometimes a character dives right into the conflict, sometimes a character's first instinct is to flee entirely. Truthfully it's all the same to me, they can take their time if they so choose, it's not about their role in some obnoxious grander purpose but rather about their lives and this rather important slice of it. They simply are ***themselves,*** and while this gardener writing style has some tangible flaws (namely, I can easily get lost in meaningless nonsense if I'm not careful) it has strong benefits as well... namely, a gardener finds it easier to make relatable (and better, believable) worlds, characters and plots than an overly controlling architect might. I don't know why I originally came to this odd, two-pronged writing style, just that it provides some tangible benefits. The architect style pre-structuring helps my garden look neat and beautiful, and my garden gives the architecture purpose and meaning; to speak less metaphorically, I gain basically all of the benefits of both styles of writing while avoiding ***most*** of the flaws of both approaches. I haven't written in well over a year (college keeps me too busy) and I have lost most of my old manuscripts to the years, but I always got complimented on how relatable my characters could be and how deep and intriguing my world was. Truly the only issue that held me back as a kid, I mean besides the obvious youth and lack of experience, was how disjointed my storytelling became - casually bouncing back and forth between two extremes. The rich world building and expansive/unique worlds simply had trouble meshing with the nuanced, intricate character relationships my storytelling always focuses upon building, and by God, were the parts/chapters where I worked in both trades were confusing to follow. It's something that, if I ever wanted to become a writer for a living, I'd have to fix before even starting.

I'm firmly a Gardner. I really can't plan a book like an architect because as soon as I start writing, the story just 'knows' which way to go and I kinda just help it along.

@QazwerDave

6 жыл бұрын

I'm completely opposite !!

@Metalhammer1993

6 жыл бұрын

Saika me too. Once I start writing I have very little control what happens. I set up my main plot and my characters and after that it's like watching real people. Only advantage I have is, I know what the people are thinking. (people means characters) so I pretty much just make it look as good as I can.

@AdmoreMethod

5 жыл бұрын

Saika Do you write novels this way? And, if so, have you finished one using this method?

I like to toy a lot with poetry and I like the idea of creating a poem that works as a seed for a novel. At the poem level, you can say that it's pure gardening, because I don't have a story in mind I'm just playing with emotions, and since it's short it doesn't make much difference if it's good or not. Once I find a poem that has a good emotional charge I take it line by line and expand it into a story outline and plan plot points from there. At that point you can call it more of an architect style. I can refer back to the original poem for setting the tone of the story and inspiration when I get stuck, plus its kind of cool to have a poem as a table of contents and chapter titles.

@LordBaktor

5 жыл бұрын

It's the opposite approach to what most people I know who write use, but it sounds lovely.

I honestly can't imagine writing screenplays and novels without an outline + scene cards (for nonfiction, I use chapter cards). That's how I've always written. I don't understand how people could write without knowing the story. How do you know what to write?

David is bang on as always! This one was a big help!

I'm a kindergartener. I plot out a story and let my characters mess around with it.

I only have experience writing RPG campaigns for my friends but I started out with total architect mentality (the execution is another matter) and became more of a gardener over time. I guess it makes sense that once the world was properly built I felt more free to just create an interesting conflict and let the players have their characters attempt to solve it however they see fit.

I find myself to be both, leaning slightly towards architect. Generally I will have most of my cast planned out, what the general plot will be, what my first, second, and third act will be, how it begins, how it will end, how specific scenes will be, therefore I have a structure that I would follow. They kind of serve as markers. That said, there is alot of room for me to move, alot of improvisation, alot of 'by-the-seat' writing involved till I reach these certain markers, and there are moments I may adjust those markers depending on the mood. Having to micro-manage everything is a big chore, and alot of my more 'fun' moments won't happen if I don't get that wide degree of freedom. So, yeah, I don't fit neatly in any category. More like, maybe, 51-49.

@AdmoreMethod

5 жыл бұрын

AegisKHAOS In reality, creating a Blueprint requires an ENORMOUS amount of creativity. Building the Outline, however, like building the house, requires focused intention. But, once the structure is complete, the real fun begins with Designing: picking out the colors, the textures, the flourishes and finishes. This also requires an ENORMOUS amount of creativity to complete... ...and, it makes up the vast majority of the work. So, it’s more like 15/5/70. 15% to create the Blueprint. 5% to Build the Frame. 70% to Design the home.

I'm a gardener. I always was and always be. What is interesting is that now I work on a comics which is not mine, I pretty much have to adopt the architect method. While I'm not at my ease with this creation process, It yet seems impossible to work as a gardener, when there are so many people involved. The author, the assistant, and the drawer. Thank you very much for this video because I always thought "garderner" was not a real method of work (something use by people who write fanfiction). Now I understand the ins and out of both methods, and why they are both legit.

I definitely think I fall into both of these paradigms depending on what aspect of my story I happen to be writing. I have a definite end point, a set beginning, and a very loose middle point. I have a general idea but it definitely needs some work.

I see writing sort of like constructing a 3D figure. I always start by creating a skeleton. This ensures that there is a head and a tail, and that all parts of the story are correctly articulated, with major plot points being analogous to the joints and large tendons. Once I have that, I work my way down from the head, fleshing the thing out and choosing the aesthetic details like the skin and fur as the creature takes a more defined shape. This provides a lot of flexibility, the creature can be a cow or a T-Rex and yet ultimately everything flows smoothly and logically from one end to the other.

@DVSPress

6 жыл бұрын

Great analogy.

A *Gardener* works if the writer is full of ressources. Being an automatic writing, much like Freudian work, it empty up everything that the writer know: knowledge, skill, experience, past, philosophy and their view on the world. They are also conscious on what they are writing, which previous written lines, much like memory, will have consenquence on the future, which follow the plot without an hole. George Martin is a gardener, his ressourcefulness and his intelligence make him write a great book, thank to his research. In the other hand, *Architecte* is like "scene-to-do", they plan out important element, at the cost of writing style's liberty. They know the cause and effect but try to make the character getting on this path that the event will reach what the author wanted to do. Much like forcing them and thoses event has to be done. Also, they are asking themself detail to bridge the gap, without letting question like that. The goal is to awnser on everything. Dan Brown is an architecte. Notice that "Inferno" and "Da Vinci Code" follow the same formula. (Which dissapointed my mom)

I'm an "architect", and I just started writing. I've already read through Seymour Chatman's "Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film", and I'm writing the script for my first comic book. I am a tad OCD when it comes to structure, and so I can't even throw stuff on a page unless it's just to get a quick rough draft of the ideas I am trying to do, which usually gets completely rewritten later because it needs to be tied into characters I haven't invented yet, to help tie the story I'm unraveling altogether. That said, I am able to adjust things and rewrite whole sections if need be to get the story to do what I need it to do to meet the expectations I am establishing within the narrative, but it sure does take me longer lol. The fact that I find I need to invent more fleshed out characters to fully motivate the story conflicts and events, causes me to double down on world building and adjusting the Chatman Graph to make sure things are perfect before I waste time trying to write an event when I know I don't have all the characters involved figured out yet. My background is in film and animation, visual story telling, strong character design and acting, and world building. That said, the world building and plot building is the bulk of my work so far, and is taking me a while because I need to invent a certain number of characters to fill all the rolls, and I'm adjusting the world building to make these characters extremely believable yet super interesting. I do wish I had some assistance on the writing, but at least I have an editor or two. Any recommendations on how I can accelerate my work flow?

Thank you very much! :-)

I noticed this in Jurassic Park 2 and in many other books/movies since then: Shortly before the finale or a major plot pointthere are a lot of characters killed of in a short and bland way. I think this is connected to the author being a Gardener. He noticed that there are still to many people left to get rid before the major plot point can start.

@alberttaco3668

6 жыл бұрын

While your assumption makes sense, it is not the only explanation, even though it is a good one. I have one or two shonen in my mind, which totally fit your explanation. I think this phenomenon occurs in movies when the characters have fulfilled their functions. They were useful before that point, and can't have being merged with other characters that will be useful in the final part. The reason they are killed in a short and bland way might be to save screen time, and not detracting the audience from characters that are actually useful from this point. It's lazy writing, but we speak about blockbuster, so it makes sense. If it was a Shonen in which screen time is not that precious, yes, I would wholy agreeing you. But you speak about blockbusters movies, so it can totally be fully planned, just "lazy but efficient" writing.

@randompanda3415

6 жыл бұрын

The same can be said about Game of Thrones

I'm kinda a gross fusion of both. I think about my characters. Make them as detailed as I can. I know each character of each story I've written or trashed better than my best friend. And I have vague plot points but the really big scenes are written way in advance and they are written out the moment I say "this is a key scene" I immediately want to have that scene on paper. And that's another habit these scenes will always be written by hand on paper. Because I want these scenes that are important to be perfect. And all other minor scenes are there to connect these scenes and in these scenes I pretty much let my characters do what they want and gently push them where I want them to be. I know it sounds weird but for me my characters are like real people if you get what I mean. Interfering too heavily would give it a dunno how to call it "fake" feeling. And given I'm pretty much only doing high-school drama this is possible to do. If I tried high fantasy that wouldn't work. Like I have a character that hates snow and my crew gathers somewhere cold completely by chance? That doesn't work. But maybe the cold is important to the plot like there is a place where the sky is covered in ash and this could spread further and this one guy who hates cold areas is extremely well versed in the world's lore. Than I'm bummed. I'd have to give this characters role and knowledge to someone else to keep the story as I want it to be. But my characters are now entirely different. And that's where my 3/4 gardener 1/4 architect style would kick its own butt

Unrelated but it reminds me of Rush “philosophers and plowmen, each most know his part” though I wonder if Neil pert had something similar when he wrote those lyrics. He is a novelist as well as songwriter

Speaking for myself, the gardening approach just doesn't work for me. My first attempt at a novel years ago, I was doing the gardening approach, though I don't know what that means at the time. All I have were how the story ends, some scenes I wanted to write, and that's it. I never finished. I got almost 90,000 words and I was about halfway done before I got the dreaded "writer's block". Re-reading it, there's a lot cringe and subplots that don't really advance the plot. I wouldn't let my worst enemy read it. Now I'm taking another crack at writing a novel. This time, I actually had a structure and where I wanted to go with the story. I'm about three chapters away from finishing the first draft. That didn't mean I don't get a new feel for the story and change things around as I write it. But if I hadn't commit myself to some basics, I wouldn't get anywhere. Also, though I started writing it just two months ago, I actually had the story in my head for years now. I've managed to scribble a lot of notes on it, even some isolated scenes, though the original story was much different than the one that I'm writing now. In other words, it's the architect approach. I even wrote with the 'three act structure' in mind. Of course, I'm a different person when I made the first attempt compared to my second. But my point still stands regardless. Tldr, you should commit yourself to a structure before you write. That doesn't mean that you won't discover something new about your world and your characters. I know I did.

@DVSPress

Жыл бұрын

If it's any consolation your first million words are usually spent learning - in other words, being bad - so look at it as a learning experience.

Great video, and some really good advice... This is also where I'd love to point out that GURPS solves a lot of this... (lolz). Okay, I know you were a casual D&D player, so you can understand where I'm coming from. BUT I would highly advise, especially aspiring writers to get into a game system, ANY game system, and GM a few games. It helps to start as a Player, just to learn the system, of course, but there are still a few of us "old schoolers" who remember the days of "rotating GM" duties for sake of the table (or circle, depending on personal nomenclature)... The point is, when you get used to setting up the world, and building great plans for Players to "shit all over that and do something completely different"... You start to move on toward the concepts of character driven story, setting up conflicts, and taking advantages of loosely nudging the plot along instead of hooking deep and dragging the damn thing... or trying. (lolz) It's also an ABSOLUTELY WONDERFUL practice ground for building truly nefarious, despicable sons of bitches. Players kill villains outright so quickly and happily, you just never seem to have enough despicable sons of bitches to go around. AND you can always just stuff the "best of the worst" into notebooks or binders and "recycle" your most popular sons of bitches into the novel, comic book, or otherwise written work. It can save some time sculpting and engineering a remarkably vile son of a bitch, because frankly, as fascinating and fun as the work it, it's still kind of rare to really get it just right. AND we can tour YT for the plethora of videos about villains, and see a remarkable feedback statistic from their comments (collectively) from people who seem to be struggling with building truly fiendish sons of bitches. :o)

I'm an architect, defenitely. I'm just not very good at it.

Do you know of any big fantasy/sci-fi writers who are firmly architects? Martin is towards the gardener. Tolkien was almost entirely a gardener. Rowling likes to say she's an architect, but I think she puffs that up as an aspiration, at least on the series scale. But as you said, she's a mystery writer using a fantasy setting, not a fantasy writer like Tolkien or Martin.

@DVSPress

6 жыл бұрын

Brandon Sanderson, Michael Moorcock are two great examples. Robert Jordan can craft a story ahead of time (see his Conan books), but as wheel of time demonstrates, he can get lost in his own world. Brandon Sanderson finished the series based on Jordan's plans. The Way of Kings is an excellent piece of craft if you are looking at how a series starter can be well-planned, and I happen to think its a pretty damn good book.

@TheJollyMisanthrope

6 жыл бұрын

Sanderson definitely. He's like a machine when it comes to completing novels.

@NelsonStJames

6 жыл бұрын

I think Frank Herbert was the consummate architect, which is why all the Dune books written by others don't really feel like his books.

@matts9487

6 жыл бұрын

what would you consider Issac Asimov's writing style is? or does he change it up between series?

@wahlex841

6 жыл бұрын

Anyone who writes hard sci-fi would be a safe bet, I suppose.

I would consider myself more of a plotter as I enjoy to plan things out in terms of the world. World building is something that I love to do, and so my desire for my characters are to be the lens through which the world is viewed. I currently have a space fantasy in mind (originally came to mind as something that can compete with Star Wars), and I'm working on creating the world where most of the events of the first adventure to take place, and I'm working on creating the culture, design, general societal structure of the inhabitants of the planet along with at least a barebones language for them. My ultimate is goal is for a universe that makes sense and that to me requires planning, at least for the pieces not the adventures they have.

@SirZelean

6 жыл бұрын

I'm curious now. Have you heard of World Anvil?

@DHtheGamer

6 жыл бұрын

Ser Zeke Lionhart I have not. What is that?

@SirZelean

6 жыл бұрын

DHtheGamer hah, you'll love it xD it's a new website, almost like a DeviantArt, in a wiki-like format, made specially for worldbuilding. It's on beta yet, but that only means there are a bunch of features to add yet, because you can already make an account and use nearly every fuction they have to offer (only a few things are subscription-only, such as having people help you as co-authors, setting your work as private, participating in votings for new features, full CSS control over the pages layout, etc). It's got all sorts of things you can use. Templates for characters, places, races, laws (as in physics), organizations, and more. You can create multiple timelines to organize events, separate your website in different sections (what they call "Books") and so much more. And better yet, the developer is REALLY active and gets stuff done on a daily basis, and the Discord community is pretty great too, you can stay up to date with the news, suggest features, search for inspiration, ask for advice, etc. Well, I've been having a blast with WA, and it has helped me a lot to keep me motivated. So yeah, free but well deserved advertisement XD

@DHtheGamer

6 жыл бұрын

Ser Zeke Lionhart Thanks for the information. I'll definitely need to check it out

@josh032687

5 жыл бұрын

As a fellow world-builder who is also writing out a space fantasy movie series I can say that it takes a TREMENDOUS amount of planning and designing to make the universe feel surprising, yet realistic. Like you, I really enjoy this process. I outline all the major events in the story along with all the character arcs and planets before I start writing. Depending on the scene I may do a very detailed breakdown for war and other action scenes, or go for the gardener approach for less intense or emotional interactions. I usually leave some room to improvise in at least the small details. Some of these improvisations can lead to huge ideas that impact the series as a whole.

The flaw of the Gardener is creating too many devils and trying too many details; Architects can be stuffy and uptight at their worst reigning in everything so that the devil can't move from his pre-conceived position. Devils can't really be contained or allowed to let loose for too long.

I use to be an architect, and i never got any real writing done, ever. So now i try to stay ahead of the story about a few chapters at a time with some crude plot points further down the line... I take the train and try to visit a couple of stations down the line, but i'm mostly focussed on staying on the tracks.

@AdmoreMethod

5 жыл бұрын

mischa wolf Have you managed to finish a novel using this method? And, if so, how much work did it require to “fix” once it was finished?

Hey David I watched your analysis on The Force Awakens and I completely agree with you on everything that you said. I don't want to rehash anything from your analysis of TFA. Now that JJ has signed on to do the last film what are your thoughts on that and your impressions of The Last Jedi? If someone has already asked you this feel free to point me to your response. Also I would love to see you make a video that is more in depth on story and how to make something cohesive as you began to talk about in this video. Love your analysis videos and how level headed they are keep it up!

@DVSPress

6 жыл бұрын

I honestly don't follow Star Wars or keep up on it much at all. TFA really broke me of it. So I don't really have an opinion. I get putting JJ back in the chair from a finance perspective, because TFA did really well at the box office, but by the time the third one comes around the illusion might be dissipating, and people won't be as tolerant of something bad just because it was new star wars.

@tomphotog022

6 жыл бұрын

I am definitely with you there. I just get bombarded with stuff so its hard to ignore sometimes. I totally agree with you. Thanks for your thoughts!

@tomphotog022

6 жыл бұрын

I am just learning about story structure and how a "good" should be constructed. Like you I have found most movies these to be pretty mediocre if that and find myself digging to find decent films. I would love to pick your brain about how people like Paul Thomas Anderson (specifically Their Will Be Blood), or Stanley Kubrick have so many hidden themes and layers inside their films that I can keep coming back to their films and find something new. I know you can't say for sure and I know most of Stanley's movies were based off of books and he would inject his big ideas into that books framework. Basically I would love to hear your thoughts on how they construct a story and how they achieve all these hidden layers and themes so affectively.

@AdmoreMethod

5 жыл бұрын

Tom Fowler The old school writers knew the mechanics of storytelling. And, modern movies have two things going against them: 1st) Hollywood sold out to China, because that’s where the money is; and, since China doesn’t care about layered stories, Hollywood doesn’t bother paying good writers to write good scripts anymore. 2nd) Since America’s seduction by Manga, the entire storytelling structure has collapsed on itself, because kids today don’t even know what it is. As long as it’s “pretty” and has lots of punching, they’re happy.

i'm definitely a gardener. i have my main character and some side characters, the beginning of the story detailed, and know where it will end, but like about the 2. half of the story is open. (at the moment >^..^

+1 subscriber

I have just read Amok again by George Fox. Enjoy every time I read it. Check out the new book by Leo. It is a new fantasy realm called Kandor The Warrior. Magic and wizardry. Goblins and Elves and Dwarves and Orcs... I could not put it down. :-)

Stephen King is beyond gardener status. He just buys a bag with 300 different types of seeds , throws them onto the concrete in front of his house, let's rain do the watering, cuts nothing, and watches from the window as whatever comes out of there grows. And it works.

@DVSPress

5 жыл бұрын

Johnny Appleseed mode engaged.

I thought you would deal with the "Two Blueprints" in architecture. The first one is "as planned" and the second one is "as built". Every architect has to make changes to the design to introduce new things or correct mistakes.

@AdmoreMethod

5 жыл бұрын

formerevolutionist I think you might be talking about the Building Phase versus the Design Phase. In the Building Phase, there is very little room for alteration. The creative work has already been done in the Blueprint Phase. Building is just building. But, the Design Phase is where the fun and creativity comes in - where you get to pick your colors, textures, flourishes and finishes. The Design Phase is actually the longest and most detailed phase - and, it correlates to the actual writing of a novel. This is where 99.7% of the work is done.

Are you gonna do a review/analysis of the new 'It' film? Because I found it to be probably one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Would love to hear your thoughts on it.

@DVSPress

6 жыл бұрын

Maybe eventually. I have limited ability to go to the cinema and I know of nobody that would want to see it with me.

I find this interesting. I'm a gardener by this definition, but I DO Think a lot about scenes. Every time I start a new scene, I ask myself: What state is the POV character in right now (for example: character just lost their brother in a gang shootout)? What will the process be for the character in dealing with it (for example: They come across information about where both gangs hang out. This leads to an internal debate of whether they should go the legal route, or the personal revenge route)? What state is the character in at the end of the scene (For example: determined to get revenge regardless of what the law says)? By doing this, I find that it's easier to ensure that the plot actually moves forward, and make sure there are truly meaningful Changes going on in the character's Life. If I don't do this, there's a risk that I'll include too many scenes that are just pure exposition, which is just plain boring.

It is like raising children, they need discipline but too much control creates people that can’t fit in with society.

I think I'm an architectural gardener.

Am I a Gardener, or an Architect? I think the answer is, neither. Once an author starts talking about these sorts of terminologies and starts associating themselves with one or the other, things get pretty complicated. I prefer to do away with such bureaucratic nonsense and just write. Besides, if I must specify, then I put emphasis on both. Specifically, the entire plot of my entire fantasy series is already fleshed out, and once I get a certain idea on who a character is, then I flesh that character out and change the plot accordingly. Tweak the magic systems, and even add in subtle hints of a subconscious self awareness, and perhaps even do something Last Jedi repeatedly attempt and failed at, and that's subverting plot twists or surprises. Sort of easy because my main anti-hero protagonist doesn't bother too much with details, other than the most important (to him, anyways) sort of details. This is because descriptions, believe it or not, say a lot about the POV character, even if said POV is represented from a third person perspective. So too are the nature in which a character is asking questions. You can either make a person come across as an ignorant dumbass or you can make the person analytical. If you want a good example of a person who asks a lot of questions and comes away looking that much more intelligent, look up Gordon Ramsey. The man himself might as well be a fictional character, especially his Reality TV personas (which are not terribly too far off from reality, btw).

So JK put in a lot of planning but she didn't put in any indication Dumbledore was gay. Lol. I am sorry about this comment. It didnt need to be made. This was a very imformative video, thank you.

You are gardener. Stop pretending XD In my opinion it depends what kind of story you write. Gardening makes sense when story is simple. Then you dont need more than just general idea, couple of plot point and you go. Sometimes you dont even need an ending-because story idea is simple, it is going to write itself, and once you get to the ending it will come to you naturally. However more complex stories require more and more planning. Generally the more complex is the idea, and the more planning you will put into it-the more planning you will actually need. Confused? Its simple, really: you assume that since story has X complexity, therefore it requires Y amount of planning. In reality the higher is X, the more actual planing you need than you assumed-instead of Y, you need Y+something. At some point story can get so complex, that you should just give p trying to pin down any detail and just go with gardening instead. It is impossible to plan everything and acheive results you want. There are simply things outside your control.