Writing skills 1: generating ideas

When a writer begins a story, scene, or poem, there is always some kind of starting point: an idea, or perhaps several ideas. So, where do these ideas come from, and what can you do in order to have more successful ones? There are a number of techniques which can help:

Relaxation

As creativity researcher Csíkszentmihályi (1996) says, a writer needs to achieve the flow of engagement with their task, and it is important not to think how the end product will be received by critics.  Avoiding the 'fear of the blank page' can mean avoiding worrying (or even thinking) about the end product and how it will be received. Instead, the aim is to become immersed in the task.

Flow is the state of being relaxed but focused.
Image by premasagar

However, a bit of balance is required - getting too relaxed is not helpful!  Focus on a clear short-term goal can help to achieve this 'flow'.

Mind mapping

A mind map (see main article) is a method of note taking which links words and ideas in a cluster or spider-shaped diagram. Its non-linear form can be helpful in triggering non-obvious connections in your mind, and developing possibilities that might have been quickly discarded if they weren't down on paper.

Brainstorming

Probably an overused term, especially in the workplace, but it still has its uses. The basic concept is to come up with a lot of ideas, however stupid they might seem at first. A later review stage is used to discard the less promising ones, but - hopefully - find one or two rough diamonds among the coal dust.

The key to brainstorming is to be non-critical.  Author Fay Weldon says that a writer needs two personalities: the creator of first drafts who is sloppy, emotional and impetuous, and the later editor who is argumentative, cautious and rational (Singleton and Luckhurst, 2000).

Freewriting

Freewriting is the author's equivalent of Sigmund Freud's technique, free association. Essentially it means letting one idea lead to another, without trying to consciously guide the process.  Freud believed that the process could uncover the id or unconscious mind.  Modern psychologists would probably see it as a way of switching off the conscious processes which direct and oversee human thought - your metacognition.

It can be useful to try freewriting first thing in the morning, as a sleepy state makes it easier to switch off this metacognition.  The subjects of your dreams can also feed in to the freewrite. But freewrites can also be directed, as in the following task...

Writing task

Gather a list of writing prompts - words, phrases or pictures will do, or compile some more detailed prompts from websites (e.g. here). Using a timer, set 5 minutes to brainstorm, mind map or freewrite on each one.  Give it a try! Better still, make it a regular starting point to your daily writing time.

Kitchen timer by pasukaru76

References
Csíkszentmihályi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York: Harper Perennia.
Singleton, J. and Luckhurst, M. (2000).  The Creative Writing Handbook.  Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave.

Caffeine - fueling or harming creative writers?

Many of you probably find it hard to get doing without a morning cup of coffee or tea (or three!)  This is normal enough, an even less surprising when you consider that creative types are usually night owls.

What is caffeine?

Caffeine is the world's most popular psychoactive drug.  It is a stimulant which can affect alertness - and therefore performance on a range of tasks.  It is found in coffee, tea, soft drinks, in pill form, and in medicines such as cold remedies.

Coffee and books - a classic combination?
Image by christian.senger

Positive effects

Caffeine can make us think faster and focus for longer.  Research has shown that even a small dose of caffeine, such as that in a glass of coke, can increase alertness with no measurable adverse effects (Lieberman et al., 1987). In a study on university students, Smith et al. (1994) found that caffeine improved performance on semantic memory, logical reasoning, and memory tasks.

Negative effects

Caffeine is a drug, and can have side effects. It increases heart rate and therefore blood pressure, and can be addictive.  There are anecdotal reports of overdose following excessive use, and at extreme levels it can be fatal.  Like other drugs, regular use tends to lead to users becoming resistant to its effects.

Although the research is largely positive, cognitive tasks in the laboratory tend to be fairly simplistic tasks, and don't present a full picture of heavy caffeine use on the real world.  There are probably large individual differences - for example, St Claire et al. (2010) found that  coffee helps women cope with stressful meetings, whereas men got worse!

Context

Many of us turn to caffeine when we are especially busy and stressed. In research with soldiers, Lieberman et al. (2002) studied the effect of caffeine on individuals who were stressed and sleep deprived. The researchers found that caffeine mitigated the effects of the stressors and sleep loss.  In contrast, caffeine may have a detrimental effect if you already highly alert and stimulated, due to the Yerkes-Dodson law.

How important is caffeine in your writing or creative context?  Do you see it as just a habit or part of your routine, or would you be unable to perform at your best without it?  Is there a point where it starts to have an adverse effect?

References

Lieberman, H.R., Tharion, W.J., Shukitt-Hale, B., Speckman, K.L. and Tulley, R. (2002). Effects of caffeine, sleep loss, and stress on cognitive performance and mood during U.S. Navy SEAL training. Psychopharmacology, 164(3), 250-261.
Lieberman, H.R., Wurtman, R.J., , G. G. Emde, C. Roberts and I. L. G. Coviella (1987). The effects of low doses of caffeine on human performance and mood. Psychopharmacology, 92(3), 308-312
Smith, A.P., Kendrick, A., Maben, A. and Salmon, J. (1994). Effects of breakfast and caffeine on cognitive performance, mood and cardiovascular functioning. Appetite, 22(1), 39-55.
St. Claire, L., Hayward, R., and Rogers, P. (2010). Interactive Effects of Caffeine Consumption and Stressful Circumstances on Components of Stress: Caffeine Makes Men Less, But Women More Effective as Partners Under Stress. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(12), 3106-3129

Creative Writing: why bother?

Creative writing is a curious game.  So many people seem to want to do it, yet the odds of success seem stacked against the budding writer, and even those who do establish a viable career usually have to work hard for relatively little in the way of fame and fortune.  So why do it?

The value of literature

One way of looking at the question is to focus on the writing itself, the end-product. Literature is of course a worthwhile thing in itself: it has been described as a 'life support system', and applications in crime reduction and therapy have been tried with some success.

If worthwhile literature is to exist, then someone has to 'do' writing, and do it well.  In any artistic field, the more people there are to do it, the better the chance of finding one who does it really well.  But this doesn't explain the motivation on individuals who do it.

Life as a writer

If writing is anything more than a hobby or passtime, then you have to assume that the writer him/herself has an aim.  I think that for most new writers I've met, these goals fall into two main categories, with a bit of overlap:

- Become a commercially successful writer/earn money

- Write something good/that other people enjoy reading

For many people, writing is a career like any other - a way to earn a crust, perhaps in combination with some offshoot activities like reviewing or tutoring.  I'd say the majority of new writers have taken this approach, with varying levels of clarity about what they're aiming for!

Enjoyment of the product

It seems logical to say that if the aim is not to make money, then it must be to write 'well', or at least for others to think that it is done well.  I guess this is my category, as I already have a career as a teacher.  I began because it was fun, but as with any task, it quickly occurred to me that I'd enjoy it more if I was better at it.

Bookshelf by jurvetson

The second category is a happy place - and also a comfortable waiting room until you declare yourself ready for the other camp!

What is your motivation...?

So, why did you take an interest in creative writing?  Do you see yourself 'being a writer', or is there a subject matter that is important to you?  Do you just love literature, and want to add to it?  Have you diversified from another field?

The best age for creativity

A good blog post on Write it Sideways about 'late blooming novelists' made me wonder if there is a peak age for creativity.  The young writers I teach have a lot of interesting ideas and creative energy, but good writing seems to be associated with a bit of wisdom and a lot of graft.  So what is the best age?

Galenson (2006) suggests that the stereotype of an artistic genius - a young, energetic and audacious visionary - only covers half of the story.  While some great creative types may fit into that mould - Mozart, Picasso and T.S. Elliot, for example - others follow a very different pattern.  Some creatives - Paul Cézanne for example - only achieve their greatest work after many years of struggling.

Boy with Skull by Cezanne,
photo by freeparking.

Gladwell (2009) describes the cases of two contemporary American writers - one who succeeds early and another who needs many years of graft.  Not only do they differ in how long they took to achieve success or fame, but they also work in different ways.  Gladwell suggests that the brilliant young things tend to do less research and start with a clearer idea of what they achieve.  The older creative type tend to repeatedly doubt and reject their own work, and see each thing they do as being more about progress than product.  They also tend to do much more research into their subject matter.  Do either of these types sound familiar?

A related issue comes up in the study of scientific breakthroughs.  Csikszentmihalyi (1996) states the scientists, rather than having a flash of inspiration as is popularly perceived, typically have an insight of true greatness after many decades of work.  Great scientists and inventors tend to have amassed a lot fo skills and knowledge before the have their bigger insights.  In the arts, children can be intensively schooled (Picasso was the son of an art teacher), but in science, it may be almost impossible to acquire the tools without many years of work.  It would explain the shortage of child prodigies in particle physics!

It is an interesting question whether the likes of Mozart and Picasso are geniuses in their fields, and if so, does the term 'genius' apply to someone who has had to work harder/take longer in order to achieve?

References
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996).  Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention.  New York: HarperCollins.
Galenson, D.W. (2006).  Old Masters and Young Geniuses: The Two Life Cycles of Artistic Geniuses.  Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Gladwell, M. (2009).  What the Dog Saw and Other Adventures.  London: Penguin.

The importance of character names

Names - so important!  A poor choice can jar with a reader, and make characters less memorable and engaging. A name can also be a poor fit with the story or genre.

Kelvingrove Faces by Spikeyhelen

Putting a reader off

A bad choice of name can put a reader off.  And while it is possible to avoid names completely (and there are good examples in literature), it is a tricky one to pull off, especially for a longer piece.

As a reader, I am put off - perhaps unfairly, but there we go - by stories which have wall-to-wall anglo-saxon names.  I feel that as a poor reflection of modern society, it can detract from the believability of a story.  For the fantasy genre, I am put off as a reader if writers seem to have gone down the route of 'anything bizarre sounding'.  Tolkein's work had a system, and I'd like to see some rationale behind a name - perhaps a fantasy version of the sort of surname-endings that most real languages have.

Tips

A name should resonate with a reader, and link well with the character described.  It should be memorable, if not deliberately unconventional, and definitely not an overused choice (unless you specifically want your character to sound bland).

There is no reason that the right name should come to you straight away, any more than any other aspect of writing.  It may be easier to use an initial or description until the right name occurs.

Names such as J.D. Salinger's 'Holden Caulfield' are highly memorable
and can come to represent a type of individual. 

As in real life, it can be hard for a reader to remember a name.  Repetition when a character is first introduced can help a name to stick.  Avoid bringing in too many names at once, and avoid having very similar names (e.g. Jon and Joe) - when reading a text quickly, these are easily confused.

For realism, names should be a likely choice at the time your character was born - and not necessarily a popular name now or at the time of the narrative.

Useful tools

There are several useful tools internet tools.  This article provides an excellent list of automatic character name generation tools, including historical genres.

I sometimes make use of websites which list the meaning of names, such as this one. Some sites list them by nationality, which can also be useful.  I don't necessarily have a specific meaning in mind - but there may be meanings I'd like to avoid!

Sometimes just browsing these sites can be worthwhile.  When you find right name, it can really help with the development of a strong character.

Fresh eyes - why?

Writers are often told to put their work away (in a drawer, or similar) after writing the first draft, and return to it with 'fresh eyes'.  In 'On Writing', Steven King suggests that it should be months rather than weeks (King, 2001).

Pile of Papers 

by Biblioteekje

Does anyone know why this works? (assuming it does - surely all those millions of writers can't be wrong!)

I expect it is partly due to reading becoming more automatic with exposure, causing mistakes to be missed.  As mentioned in a previous post, the mind likes to take shortcuts.  An obvious shortcut is to read what you remember, rather than going to the trouble of looking at the words and letters on the page!

Another aspect is that when reading, the eyes do not actually take a text in one word at a time, letter by letter.  The saccades - quick eye movements - that a reader makes leads to some words being perceived in more detail than other.  This tends to be the 'content' words which contain the meaning of the sentence - verbs, nouns etc - rather than 'function' words such as pronouns (e.g. 'of' in the example below).

Eye movements across 2 lines of text

It can be clearly see why typos are going to be easy to miss, especially in function words such as one of my common mistakes - 'the' instead of 'they'.

But more important that proof reading, a writer needs to look at the ideas of a text, the meaning, the pace and the emotion.  All of these can be looked at anew.  I don't know of any research in this area, but I'd like to hear about it.  My own experience is that a lot of the raw, personal nature of a piece of writing goes with the passage of time, and it is much more like looking at someone else's work - something that you can look at and respond to objectively.

King, S. (2001).  On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft.  New English Library.

Creative Writing - value to society (part 1)

On a day that the Arts Council England slashed funding for many small literature organisations, I thought I should post about how valuable creative writing can be.

The creative arts, when done well, are of course pleasurable and beneficial to both the artist and audience.  Many writers and artists, even amateur ones, benefit psychologically in terms of mood, feelings of accomplishment and self-esteem.

For this reason, the creative arts can be of great benefit to people with mental health problems. Art therapy is where people use a visual art form primarily for psychological treatment, and Chapman et al (2001) reported it to be helpful for child patients who had suffered traumatic injuries.

Writing therapy can be effective in reducing stress, improving health, increasing mood, and helping people to cope (Harber & Pennebaker, 1992).  What makes writing arguably unique among arts-based therapies is the potential of the written word to help people both communicate and re-examine aspects of their life.  Pizarro (2004) found that while art therapy led to more enjoyment, it didn't match writing therapy in terms of improvements to social functioning.

Creative writing has been used to help rehabilitation of prisoners by organisations such as the Writers in Prison Network, helping hundreds of people to transform their lives (and benefitting society as a whole).  Sadly, Writers in Prisons is one of 16 literature-related organisations to lose their core funding.

What can help to treat the mentally ill or rehabilitate offenders can no doubt have smaller-scale benefits for writers in more ordinary circumstances.  All in all, creative writing...  Fun?  Yes.  Valuable?  Very.

References
Chapman, L., Morabito, D., Ladakakos, C., Schreier, H., & Knudson, M. M. (2001). The effectiveness of art therapy interventions in reducing post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
symptoms in pediatric trauma patients. Art Therapy: Journal of
the American Art Therapy Association, 18, 100-104.
Harber, K. D., & Pennebaker, J. W. (1992). Overcoming traumatic memories. In S. A. Christianson (Ed.), The Handbook of Emotion and Memory: Research and Theory (pp. 359-387). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Pizarro, J. (2004) The Efficacy of Art and Writing Therapy: Increasing Positive Mental Health Outcomes and Participant Retention After Exposure to Traumatic Experience. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 21(1), 5-12.

V.S. Naipaul - "I had an aptitude, but not a talent".

Often the best way of finding out about creative writing is through the ideas of successful writers - if we can understand them.  In a longish (40 min) BBC interview with the writer V.S. Naipaul, talks about the influences on his writing, and his own 'aptitude':

"I have an aptitude and I developed it….I didn't have a talent, because I required a lot of thought to arrive at the forms which I managed most naturally, the forms most suited to the material I was dealing with.  Even my understanding of my material.  All of that required a lot of time.  So, I had to learn stage by stage... It's a very slow process."

In the early section he explains He states that he has been unhappy with 2-3 of his books, and has gone back to put things right.  This is because he was 'mislead by the form,' trying to write a particular sort of novel rather than being true to himself. He states that new writers need to find their own form and originality rather than recreate someone else's work.  In striving for this , he controversially advises writers to read 'very little contemporary fiction'!

BBC (1994).  Face to Face with V.S. Naipaul [online].  BBC archive.  Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/writers/12219.shtml

So you want to write a novel?

People who are writing/'finishing' a novel' are not really like this, are they...?!  So funny:

What is it about the 'being' of being a novelist that attracts people?  And with e-publishing taking off, will the appeal be the same without the hope of producing a physical, printed book? 

Malcolm Gladwell on Creativity, Writing and Embracing Chaos

From smartercreativity.com, the amazing Malcolm Gladwell speaks:

Life writing

In my OU creative writing course, I am moving on to a section on 'life writing'.  It's the one area I haven't attempted before - unless my sporadic attempts at keeping a diary (at secondary school) are counted.

In fact, I didn't even know what life writing was.  On further investigation, it appears to be what is better known as biography and autobiography, but also includes travel writing, diaries and some personal essays.

My wife enjoys reading biographies of writers and I have generally left that to be 'her thing'.  My tutor asked me to think over the biographies I have read - embarrassingly few!  I can probably count on the fingers of one hand, and even then I am being fairly liberal about what is counted as an autobiography - 'Boy' by Roald Dahl?  'Trying to save Piggy Sneed' by John Irving?  Some essays on writing by Gunter Grass?  David Copperfield?

At least with poetry I could make up for lost time by reading a lot of poems in a short time.  With this section, I'm going to have to get speed-reading.