Literary Troubles...

[Spoonius]

Hi everyone.

I've been brainstorming a novel/story/whatever for quite some time now [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.184128-Sci-Fi-Re-Imagining-of-the-WWII-Pacific-Campaign?page=1] (although a lot has changed), and a few days ago I finally decided to kick myself into gear and start getting serious about it. I'm a fairly good writer, and I don't think that the actual writing process would be problematic for me on any technical level, except... well, there's one thing I'm having trouble with.

The overarching plot I've come up with isn't very interesting apparently (well, not to the people I've talked to anyway).

It's relatively hard sci-fi based around futuristic warfare... but I'm not quite sure if I can salvage the idea and make it interesting enough for others to read. The changes I've thought up since conceiving the plot have only made it more realistic/plausible (at the expense of innovation), and even though I've spent countless hours developing characters, technology and scenarios, I'm not sure if I can bring everything together to make something interesting/enjoyable. I'm beginning to think that the entire concept is flawed because nobody will ever find human-vs-human combat interesting (people are only ever interested in real-life wars because they have real-world participants and consequences).

Nobody will care about a fictional human war; I mean, every popular sci-fi universe today (40k, Star Wars, Star Trek, Dr. Who, etc) contains unrealistic elements that allow it to explore something new, something totally unique. I won't have that to work with... only a little extrapolation of the world as we know it (requiring much more research and fact-farming, probably for a much smaller pay-off). And it doesn't involve the U.S. either.

.
.

So yeah, my question is: should I rethink the narrative and introduce unrealistic elements (aliens, ancient artifacts, etc) in order to make it more interesting? Or do you think that people will actually care about a fictional human war if it includes futuristic elements to shake things up a little?

If so, does anyone have any other advice?

Thanks

.
.

EDIT

Ok, just to clarify, here's a summary of the setting:

Spoiler

- 250-350 years into the future.

- Overpopulation and environmental damages have taken their toll on both Earth and its less fortunate populations.

- Many non-renewable resources have been almost or entirely depleted, and different nations/coalitions are becoming more reckless in their attempts to obtain what they need.

- There is no functioning NATO-level multinational peacekeeping presence, as more and more developed nations are forced to conserve their own resources and manpower, and humanitarian agreements such as the Geneva Convention and St. Petersburg Declaration are held in lesser regard than they are now (although MAD generally prevents deployment of WMDs).

- Technological development has plateaued slightly rather than increased exponentially, due to the aforementioned resource depletion (although more efficient and environmentally-friendly solutions to energy requirements have been developed, such as fusion reactors and laser relays). Military development has become a social and cultural priority.

- Several developed nations have installed orbital military space stations that allow them to rapidly deploy their forces to remote planetary locations via aerial insertion (one of which serves as the location of a "space siege" during the narrative).

- The conflict in the narrative takes place in the Pacific, and involves several Oceanic and South East Asian nations (formed into two separate coalitions).

 

[Fbuh]

Pesonally, I like the sound of it. It would had something new to teh legions of cloned sci fi novels out there. However, considering that it is sci fi, I would definitely add something to the mix that yopu don't see everyday. Maybe not aliens, but perhaps a new way to wage war?

 

[Shoggoth2588]

I think it could be interesting if it was just human V human if the humans on the other side were...I dunno, fighting for their freedom on a recently colonized/ terraformed planet or, maybe take a Deus Ex spin having humans fighting against humans who have integrated themselves with technology and, instead of becoming cyber-punk supermen, they become cyberpunk zombies or something.

The later suggestion would be more of a fantastic but it's better than nothing. Also it keeps things nice and Human V Human.

I guess that would count as 'other advice'...I don't think you'd need to completely rethink your idea though.

 

[ScipioAmericanus]

The general idea of basing a fictional continuation around the Pacific War is perfectly viable, but I'm wondering if it is entirely necessary to set in a future time of 'our' solar system.

Replace our existence with that of a human analogous (of whose biology, you don't even need to be explicit) and create a series of political factions in a central planet with colonies on various moons/outer & inner planets that can serve as plot points that drive the motivations of the war. I'm not sure if you were looking for something along these lines.

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

So yeah, my question is: should I rethink the narrative and introduce unrealistic elements (aliens, ancient artifacts, etc) in order to make it more interesting? Or do you think that people will actually care about a fictional human war if it includes futuristic elements to shake things up a little?

Nah. Well, it depends on your objective, really. If you're going for mass market appeal, you'll only really get a useful answer from a publishing agent, who can shatter all those delusions about what people really want with cold hard facts and figures. He/she will probably just tell you "younger characters, more vampires, ditch sci-fi, shoe-horn a romance, sold."

If you want my opinion: you can make anything interesting with engaging, unique characters. You could have a story about paint drying, and if the characters are good, people will like it.

Now, making characters good is an art in itself.

The changes I've thought up since conceiving the plot have only made it more realistic/plausible (at the expense of innovation), and even though I've spent countless hours developing characters, technology and scenarios, I'm not sure if I can bring everything together to make something interesting/enjoyable.

Like I said, well-developed characters can bring anything together. But something to stress is that the characters need to be natural and psychologically deep. If by "developing characters" you mean figuring out all the battles they've fought in, commendations they've earned, people they've served with, etc. that's not enough.

Sometimes, a writer has an interest in something in particular (e.g. weapons technology or military tactics) and they'll focus on that to the detriment of everything else (e.g. Tom Clancy). It's important to pay an appropriate amount of attention to the various aspects of your story, even if it means constantly reining yourself in. In my opinion, a story should be 40% character, 30% plot, 30% details/everything else.

Which means an issue like narrative realism only really accounts for roughly 5-10% of whether or not a story is good, in my opinion.

 

[genericusername64]

If your going to make a sci fi military novel there are two rules you must follow
1. No laser guns, if you have to have LAZERZ in your novel use them very sparingly
2. Use real military tactics, a series that did this well was gundam 0079, 8th MS team

 

[Draconalis]

If I were the consumer, with the idea being the way it is now, I'd probably put the book back down after reading the back. I really like my sci fi to be full of intergalactic strife. Good space operas are hard to find.

That being said. I, too, and writing a sci fi story. Mine is a full of aliens and war, all seen from the perspective of one human being.

 

[SckizoBoy]

Above all else, when the laser cannons are fired, 'FREEM!!' is the sound they make.

*hrk*

Anyway, be sure to mirror tactical and strategic aspects from your source material and actually differentiate between them and operational factors, just for us military nerds.

 

[Da Orky Man]

Hi everyone.

I've been brainstorming a novel/story/whatever for quite some time now [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.184128-Sci-Fi-Re-Imagining-of-the-WWII-Pacific-Campaign?page=1] (although a lot has changed), and a few days ago I finally decided to kick myself into gear and start getting serious about it. I'm a fairly good writer, and I don't think that the actual writing process would be problematic for me on any technical level, except... well, there's one thing I'm having trouble with.

The overarching plot I've come up with isn't very interesting apparently (well, not to the people I've talked to anyway).

It's relatively hard sci-fi based around futuristic warfare... but I'm not quite sure if I can salvage the idea and make it interesting enough for others to read. The changes I've thought up since conceiving the plot have only made it more realistic/plausible (at the expense of innovation), and even though I've spent countless hours developing characters, technology and scenarios, I'm not sure if I can bring everything together to make something interesting/enjoyable. I'm beginning to think that the entire concept is flawed because nobody will ever find human-vs-human combat interesting (people are only ever interested in real-life wars because they have real-world participants and consequences).

Nobody will care about a fictional human war; I mean, every popular sci-fi universe today (40k, Star Wars, Star Trek, Dr. Who, etc) contains unrealistic elements that allow it to explore something new, something totally unique. I won't have that to work with... only a little extrapolation of the world as we know it (requiring much more research and fact-farming, probably for a much smaller pay-off). And it doesn't involve the U.S. either.

.
.
.

So yeah, my question is: should I rethink the narrative and introduce unrealistic elements (aliens, ancient artifacts, etc) in order to make it more interesting? Or do you think that people will actually care about a fictional human war if it includes futuristic elements to shake things up a little?

If so, does anyone have any other advice?

Thanks

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/

Check that website. It's a resource for writers who want at least some realism in their stories. It's excellent, but it does limit a lot of things, so take it with a pinch of salt.

Anyway, it's a good idea to have something that's unexpected into the mix. You cold have the nations of Earth poised for another Cold War when the aliens show up, forcing the rivalled nations to co-operate to allow mankind to survive.
Or you could just imagine, then write. If you do do that, you can garner some truly awesome ideas. But, if you do, prepare for unforeseen consequences. It can get fairly mad at times.

 

[Esotera]

If it makes a better story, then you should definitely let your plot divert from the realities of our universe a bit. Would you be willing to reveal a little more about your plot? One way to spice it up would be to make the human factions have two politically opposed views which has taken them down drastically different routes of development.

I think you should primarily trust your instinct as a writer, but listen to as much criticism as possible. If you really want to write exclusively about humans, then do it. There are plenty of great works based exclusively on humanity out there.

 

[Knife]

I remember reading the last thread (yes I was here before this profile...) and thinking "Oh great, a futuristic Pearl Harbor" and then closing the thread (We have enough world war 2 and world war 2 look alikes in fiction, we really don't need any more of those). I guess I'm not the intended audience for this particular story. This said, what makes me uninterested
is not the fact that it is about humans versus humans (I'm certain there's plenty of interesting humans versus humans sci fi, hell there's plenty of popular/interesting humans versus humans stories that aren't sci fi), but rather that it is (from what I can gather) a recoloured retelling of a story we've all heard a million times before. What you need is either flashy "colours" - sci fi tech (but not to the point of absurdity) or a new fresh perspective on the story (like maybe its a third side pushing the two to destroy each other).
I would advise against adding "unrealistic elements" just for the sake of adding them, they should either be integral to the story or not be there at all. If they are added just because you feel you must then chances are they'll just detract from the story and make it into an incoherent mess. What you should focus on is not wether or not people like your story but rather on why they do or don't. I doubt its because of aliens and artifacts. The thing is a story is more than just a series of events, its supposed to have some sort of overarching point/moral/insight (either that or a tonne of spectacle). Its not so much about "Person A shot person B" but about why person A shot person B, how do person A and B feel about it and what do they get as a consequence (beside the obvious answers of "because he wanted him dead/good/bad/a corpse"). The important part is establishing meaningful context to the events described in the story, on the level of armies/countries as well as the level of individual soldiers and citizens.
The way I see it, Sci fi isn't about aliens and tech its about bringing you into a new and unfamiliar world, letting you go free of your biases, learning a lesson about that world and then bringing that lesson back to ours. Aliens and tech are just tools, and only you are familiar enough with your story to decide wether they are beneficial or harmful to your story. If you can make a coherent story that involves those elements - good for you, if you can't then don't bother - it isn't going to make a good story out of a bad one (the more new elements you introduce to a story, that you didn't intend to, the more plotholes you are likely to get as a result).

 

[Spoonius]

Thanks for all the replies!

.
.
.

I would definitely add something to the mix that yopu don't see everyday. Maybe not aliens, but perhaps a new way to wage war?

I thought that too, which is why I wanted to add in space as an additional arena. I wasn't thinking of anything majorly different in terms of planetary fighting (other than technological advancements)... any ideas?...

I think it could be interesting if it was just human V human if the humans on the other side were...I dunno, fighting for their freedom on a recently colonized/ terraformed planet or, maybe take a Deus Ex spin having humans fighting against humans who have integrated themselves with technology and, instead of becoming cyber-punk supermen, they become cyberpunk zombies or something.

Technology is already a major theme... it's advanced to a point where the protagonists, with all their equipment, could almost be considered superhuman. Their enhanced capabilities are actually really important to the story/plot. Was that anything like what you meant? I haven't played DE.

The general idea of basing a fictional continuation around the Pacific War is perfectly viable, but I'm wondering if it is entirely necessary to set in a future time of 'our' solar system.

I did think about that for a long time (I even made a topic here, I think). In the end, I figured that a real-world basis would help to immerse readers, and would skip all the exposition I'd need to write up otherwise. IMO 250-300 years is long enough to shake things up a bit, without losing historical implications.

Like I said, well-developed characters can bring anything together. But something to stress is that the characters need to be natural and psychologically deep. If by "developing characters" you mean figuring out all the battles they've fought in, commendations they've earned, people they've served with, etc. that's not enough.

I won't deny that I haven't done more than a paragraph on each character, but I have tried to do better than clichés and shallow personalities, and have been trying to get as much feedback as possible.

Sometimes, a writer has an interest in something in particular (e.g. weapons technology or military tactics) and they'll focus on that to the detriment of everything else (e.g. Tom Clancy). It's important to pay an appropriate amount of attention to the various aspects of your story, even if it means constantly reining yourself in. In my opinion, a story should be 40% character, 30% plot, 30% details/everything else.

The main problem I'm having concerns the plot. I'm not sure what I can do to keep it interesting and engaging.

If your going to make a sci fi military novel there are two rules you must follow
1. No laser guns, if you have to have LAZERZ in your novel use them very sparingly
2. Use real military tactics, a series that did this well was gundam 0079, 8th MS team

Haha, well, there won't be any Lasguns if that's what you mean. But I have been thinking a fair bit about military authenticity...I just figured that I'd eventually get someone with military knowledge/experience to proofread it.

Anyway, be sure to mirror tactical and strategic aspects from your source material and actually differentiate between them and operational factors, just for us military nerds.

You mean environmental variables?...

Or you could just imagine, then write. If you do do that, you can garner some truly awesome ideas. But, if you do, prepare for unforeseen consequences. It can get fairly mad at times.

Mmmm. I have a seven-page list of ideas... no paragraphs, just bulletpoints...



I've also found that listening to awesome music while thinking really speeds up the process.

If it makes a better story, then you should definitely let your plot divert from the realities of our universe a bit. Would you be willing to reveal a little more about your plot?

I added a summary to the OP. And yeah, I'm trying to rake up as much feedback on my ideas as possible.

I remember reading the last thread (yes I was here before this profile...) and thinking "Oh great, a futuristic Pearl Harbor" and then closing the thread (We have enough world war 2 and world war 2 look alikes in fiction, we really don't need any more of those). I guess I'm not the intended audience for this particular story. This said, what makes me uninterested is not the fact that it is about humans versus humans (I'm certain there's plenty of interesting humans versus humans sci fi, hell there's plenty of popular/interesting humans versus humans stories that aren't sci fi), but rather that it is (from what I can gather) a recoloured retelling of a story we've all heard a million times before. What you need is either flashy "colours" - sci fi tech (but not to the point of absurdity) or a new fresh perspective on the story (like maybe its a third side pushing the two to destroy each other).

Well, it's kind of based upon the WWII Pacific campaign, but it doesn't necessarily adhere to the events of WWII. Inspired by them for sure, but not dictated by them.

What you should focus on is not wether or not people like your story but rather on why they do or don't. I doubt its because of aliens and artifacts.

I was only thinking of those examples because adding something completely new would allow me more freedom to develop something truly unique. However, I would rather stick to realism/ plausibility wherever possible.

The thing is a story is more than just a series of events, its supposed to have some sort of overarching point/moral/insight (either that or a tonne of spectacle). Its not so much about "Person A shot person B" but about why person A shot person B, how do person A and B feel about it and what do they get as a consequence (beside the obvious answers of "because he wanted him dead/good/bad/a corpse"). The important part is establishing meaningful context to the events described in the story, on the level of armies/countries as well as the level of individual soldiers and citizens.
The way I see it, Sci fi isn't about aliens and tech its about bringing you into a new and unfamiliar world, letting you go free of your biases, learning a lesson about that world and then bringing that lesson back to ours. Aliens and tech are just tools, and only you are familiar enough with your story to decide wether they are beneficial or harmful to your story. If you can make a coherent story that involves those elements - good for you, if you can't then don't bother - it isn't going to make a good story out of a bad one (the more new elements you introduce to a story, that you didn't intend to, the more plotholes you are likely to get as a result).

I agree with everything you said... it's not a matter of whether I want to write something with depth and insight, but whether I can.

 

[Knife]

Well, it's kind of based upon the WWII Pacific campaign, but it doesn't necessarily adhere to the events of WWII. Inspired by them for sure, but not dictated by them.

So long as you don't copy battle for battle and the exact timeline of events it should be different enough (well, that and the motivations behind the fighting). If those are different it could in practice be any war, but I wouldn't market/present it as WW2 in the future. In fact I'd try to never mention WW2 concerning your story - people are so very tired of it, it would probably do more harm than good.

I was only thinking of those examples because adding something completely new would allow me more freedom to develop something truly unique. However, I would rather stick to realism/ plausibility wherever possible.

What you have to ask yourself (first and foremost yourself and noone else) here - is your story as is any good? Or is it lacking something? If you think its good and noone else does then you're probably missing something very basic and you should focus your efforts on that before adding a bunch of new stuff. If you on the other hand think its lacking then perhaps it is indeed a time to spice things up a bit. Whether its aliens and artifacts or something else is heavily dependant on what you're trying to communicate with your story (for instance aliens might be a good call if you're preaching equal rights and mutual respect - accepting the different or on the other side of it all if you're preaching patriotism and protecting your own then uniting to fight the big evil aliens might work as well). Try to flesh out the idea of what you're trying to say (if you haven't already) and then evaluate what can be used best to transfer that idea to the readers, what works for one message might not work for another (if you're trying to teach self dependance then winning the war by using alien artifacts might not be the best idea, if you're trying to teach that survival is key and everything's fair then it might be a good idea). Start from the bottom and use what fits.

I agree with everything you said... it's not a matter of whether I want to write something with depth and insight, but whether I can.

This part here takes some work and a certain amount of talent. And well you'll never know if you can or can't untill you try. If you can then awesome, if not ... well sometimes we have to learn to work with or around our limitations.

After reading the summary here are some ideas that popped into my head:
What if there are corporations that have developed the technology/have the potential to develop the technology to stop the wars by introducing new renewable sources of energy but don't anyway because its more convenient for them to keep the status quo financially/politically/otherwise.
If there are some countries/societies/organizations that keep on pushing their science instead of their military then you could draw a comparison between those who focus on science and those who focus on military, show the advantages and disadvantages of both positions.
Describe day to day life in a world that is environmentally damaged and has hit a technological dead end, what are the challenges for a person living in such a world.
How do the civilians treat military? Do they think it is the only right way? A necessary evil? Or perhaps that it completely misses the point and wastes resources?
Show the underlying politics of the conflict - what has pushed the sides to fight one another and how diplomacy is being used (if at all) to try and solve the situation.

 

[BakedAlaskan]

You've probably heard of movie/novel formulae and may or may not agree, but here's one path, not from me, but a man called Rob Parnell at easywaytowrite:

The Formula

1. Come up with a scenario whereby two or three central characters are engaged in a life or death struggle to overcome a huge problem, the bigger the better.

2. Think through the scenario and its setting, the characters and their dilemma, and ask yourself, has this been done before? If so, discard the idea and go back to 1.

3. Write down 5 to 10 bullet points that will comprise the 'meat' of the story.

4. Expand on the bullet points until you have a 25 to 40 page outline of your story told in the present tense, introducing all of your characters and all of the story in the right sequence. Each paragraph should represent a significant plot point.

5. Show this outline to anyone and everyone who will read it and make comments. This might be friends, agents, publishers, the man who collects the trash, anyone. Make note of their comments and adjust the story accordingly. Ken Follett suggests this process of creating the ultimate novel outline might take anything up to a year to complete.

6. Write the first draft. Make sure you have a significant 'story turn' every four to six pages. (I told you it was a formula!) Adhere to this rule - too many story turns too often will confuse the reader, too few and they will get bored.

7. Repeat the process mentioned in 5. with the first draft. Make adjustments accordingly. This should take between 6 months and a year to get right. The first draft may take a month or two but the rest of the time is spent re-writing to make the novel perfect.

Something to think about- too much or too little of one thing can ruin a novel- it may be yours but its got to appeal to a mass audience. Good luck chuck.

 

[mythlover20]

Glad to know I'm not the only one. I've been having the same problem with mine, to the point where only one of my reader's has seen even the first chapter, and that was only because I'd started it five bloody times and was beginning to feel unsure of myself, my talent, my creation, and even my knowledge of the english language.

I'm still having trouble with the plot lines, cause I saw a particular movie and realised that someone else had come up with a fiarly similar concept, and I've been struggling trying to find a new concept that salvages as much as the original as possible, but that is different enough that no one can call it a ripoff. I swear I though of the concept before I saw that movie (I'm not saying which one), and I absolutely hate that I have to change it. It was a great concept, but now... AAARRRRGH!!!!!

 

[Esotera]

Thanks for the summary. This was the only bit that I felt could use a bit of work...

- Several developed nations have installed orbital military space stations that allow them to rapidly deploy their forces to remote planetary locations via aerial insertion (one of which serves as the location of a "space siege" during the narrative).

...mainly because it'd be incredibly expensive in terms of resources getting troops up to space. I suppose that could be a part of the story though, highlighting how much resources are wasted protecting the few that are left. Or if you're looking for an alternative solution then they could have brought really big rocks up that will destroy entire cities when released from orbit.

 

[SckizoBoy]

Anyway, be sure to mirror tactical and strategic aspects from your source material and actually differentiate between them and operational factors, just for us military nerds.

You mean environmental variables?...

No, but that would be something to consider as well.

Rather, it's disposition, supply lines, maneuvers and strategic goals, all of which can be weaved into the drama of a wide range of characters from the politicians at the top to the grunts at the bottom. Sure, it's been done before in any number of franchises, but generally without the practical motivations or hard militaristics associated with the role. Now, logistics is what most authors/screenwriters miss out. Work in something along the lines of:

An army without supplies is never brave.

Just my two cents (I'm writing a military novel... or at least trying to, though perhaps I've gone a bit too far in how 'realistic' it's becoming).

 

[Shymer]

The warfare isn't the primary interesting bit. If your conflict is only revolving around the external forces at war with each other, it's missing the complexity of interpersonal drama and internal dilemma that people look for in narrative. It won't be a surprise if that's not interesting to many people. Adding alien bits won't solve that problem.

Find a protagonist with complexity, a goal, and obstacles. Relegate the war to setting, and to create the external drive to the narrative.

A leader given orders he cannot, in good conscience, follow
A family split between the two warring factions
Someone intent on murder, volunteering for the military to get close to his target - and then the target saving his life
A parent driven to extremes to stop the war by the loss of a son and a threat to a remaining offspring

If you can find human drama that people can relate to, then interest is likely to follow.

 

[Shymer]

...mainly because it'd be incredibly expensive in terms of resources getting troops up to space.

Not necessarily for countries with an operational space elevator.

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

So yeah, my question is: should I rethink the narrative and introduce unrealistic elements (aliens, ancient artifacts, etc) in order to make it more interesting? Or do you think that people will actually care about a fictional human war if it includes futuristic elements to shake things up a little?

I think the reason a lot of people are (at least initially) unreceptive to the idea of human v human conflicts in the far future is the underlying hope/belief that in the future we'll have sorted out our differences and won't be at each others' necks all the time, especially when an alien race is introduced for humanity to unite against and overcome (thank you Hollywood for your never ending streams of cliches). People are so used to this story in it's various forms that in a sad way it's the only one they want to hear anymore. So believe me when I say this: stick with what you have fella. You'll more than likely need to put a few Logan's Run/1984/Soylent Green style elements in there to keep everyone happy, but personally I applaud any work (literary or otherwise) that is willing to look at a scenario from a new or rarely looked at angle.