![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
These are my panel notes. I don't transcribe the panel, I just write down the bits that caught my attention. Some of these notes are thoughts the panel inspired, not things the panel actually discussed. I don't attribute because I can never remember who said what! The full description of the panel topics is here.
Families, Festivals, and Fireworks
When you feel truly connected to a place, there is less need to ritualize things like eating traditional ethnic dishes that were eaten at the time you left (or things made by a person who has died or moved beyond reach). Rituals, especially ones centering around food, can be an excellent way to show loss.
Science, Technology, and Fantasy
Should you want to have technology or "laws" of nature prove to be incorrect or incomplete for story purposes later, you need to signal that to readers early on, or at least lay the groundwork for a fallible world view. How to be inconsistent in your worldbuilding, in other words.
The length of history implies certain levels of technological advancement or a powerful interior or exterior force suppressing it. Keep technological innovation timelines in mind when worldbuilding. Cycles of decay are another option, but even with decay, you must consider where it bottoms-out and how long it has had to build up again since. One cataclysm won't do it forever.
Not all technology rises in lockstep. It rises and falls in different areas.
In apocalypses, you need to consider the death of those relying on medications that are no longer manufactured, or aids that are no longer available.
Consider the idea of inherent versus skilled/learned ability and which is valued or reinforced.
Frequently, a writer wants to write in "the vague now-ish," but that is not best achieved by removing all technology. No cellphones, dear horror writer? Really?
This is also the panel where I figured out that yes, I could talk about writing an apocalypse or a post-apocalyptic setting quite a bit.
Blood, Love, and Rhetoric
When avoiding a violence- or conflict-related resolution, establish the heart's desire of the character early on, and show character's changing emotional reactions in a path leading to the conclusion, whether
1) to establish a pattern and then break it at the peak, or
2) to use incremental change as a trail of breadcrumbs leading to the conclusion.
Does having a fight as the climax ending obviate more interesting climax options? Consider before writing that final scene/while doing revisions.
Can you satisfy both sets of readers by having an emotional climax in a story that is structured with a series of fight scenes? See Clint Eastwood. What cues do you need to slide in to make it satisfactory despite them not expecting it (because they totally won't--we've all been thoroughly programmed for the violent story climax).
Consider the structure as nesting code when history or story plot wants violence but not for that to be the climax and yet for the reader to be satisfied. If you want to end not-violence, you need to begin not-violence. Consider nesting themes, character arcs, etc. You can go down multiple layers as long as you close your loops and particularly if you mirror the order of introduced changes (or use overlapping wave patters, I suppose, but as a former comp-sci person, nested loops makes a lot of sense).
In horror especially, the character transformation resulting from it may be the most interesting part.
Violence may lead to expectation of blood and pain, but satisfactory amounts of blood (possibly metaphorical blood) and pain (possibly emotional) can be in the ending without violence, or at least without a fight. Eastwood!
(All my 4th Street Fantasy 2012 posts.)
Families, Festivals, and Fireworks
When you feel truly connected to a place, there is less need to ritualize things like eating traditional ethnic dishes that were eaten at the time you left (or things made by a person who has died or moved beyond reach). Rituals, especially ones centering around food, can be an excellent way to show loss.
Science, Technology, and Fantasy
Should you want to have technology or "laws" of nature prove to be incorrect or incomplete for story purposes later, you need to signal that to readers early on, or at least lay the groundwork for a fallible world view. How to be inconsistent in your worldbuilding, in other words.
The length of history implies certain levels of technological advancement or a powerful interior or exterior force suppressing it. Keep technological innovation timelines in mind when worldbuilding. Cycles of decay are another option, but even with decay, you must consider where it bottoms-out and how long it has had to build up again since. One cataclysm won't do it forever.
Not all technology rises in lockstep. It rises and falls in different areas.
In apocalypses, you need to consider the death of those relying on medications that are no longer manufactured, or aids that are no longer available.
Consider the idea of inherent versus skilled/learned ability and which is valued or reinforced.
Frequently, a writer wants to write in "the vague now-ish," but that is not best achieved by removing all technology. No cellphones, dear horror writer? Really?
This is also the panel where I figured out that yes, I could talk about writing an apocalypse or a post-apocalyptic setting quite a bit.
Blood, Love, and Rhetoric
When avoiding a violence- or conflict-related resolution, establish the heart's desire of the character early on, and show character's changing emotional reactions in a path leading to the conclusion, whether
1) to establish a pattern and then break it at the peak, or
2) to use incremental change as a trail of breadcrumbs leading to the conclusion.
Does having a fight as the climax ending obviate more interesting climax options? Consider before writing that final scene/while doing revisions.
Can you satisfy both sets of readers by having an emotional climax in a story that is structured with a series of fight scenes? See Clint Eastwood. What cues do you need to slide in to make it satisfactory despite them not expecting it (because they totally won't--we've all been thoroughly programmed for the violent story climax).
Consider the structure as nesting code when history or story plot wants violence but not for that to be the climax and yet for the reader to be satisfied. If you want to end not-violence, you need to begin not-violence. Consider nesting themes, character arcs, etc. You can go down multiple layers as long as you close your loops and particularly if you mirror the order of introduced changes (or use overlapping wave patters, I suppose, but as a former comp-sci person, nested loops makes a lot of sense).
In horror especially, the character transformation resulting from it may be the most interesting part.
Violence may lead to expectation of blood and pain, but satisfactory amounts of blood (possibly metaphorical blood) and pain (possibly emotional) can be in the ending without violence, or at least without a fight. Eastwood!
(All my 4th Street Fantasy 2012 posts.)
