Please don't stop making these "back to basics" videos. I always feel like at least something you've said has made me consider some aspect of my approach in a new way, always valuable perspective. I don't listen to this kind of stuff from any other youtubers. Thanks.

Love your tips! Years ago I made a video about the 7 deadly sins of screenwriting: 1. Stereotypical characters (like the Manic Pixie Dream Girl) 2. No dramatic throughline (the goal of the main character) 3. No clear conflict (characters going through the motions on the surface, but no actual meaning behind the scenes) 4. Repeating the same story beat over and over again (there should be a progression) 5. A Deus Ex Machina plot resolution 6. No self-revelation for the main characters in the end (the viewer will ask himself why he watched the movie in the first place) 7. The it was all just a dream plot resolution (the biggest betrayal of the audience)

Well this explains how disney star wars was made. :P

I was my D&D group's DM most of the time growing up so now when I write I constantly view it through the lens of "Would the players be interested and having fun at this moment if this were a role-playing game".

Editing while writing is a mistake I made early on. My continuity became pretty messy because of it. Overall, a tip that's been super useful for my workflow is to just write, even when you feel it in your stomach that what you're writing is bad. And keep writing until you have a finished draft. It's easier to edit bad work than to edit no work.

Recent grad of an MFA program in genre fiction here, and I would add to your list. First, reading your genre. Being an expert, or at least a specialist, in your genre of choice. I couldn't believe how many "writers" in my program wanted to write mystery because they loved crime shows, or fantasy writers wanted to write fantasy because they liked anime. When I would say, "Why don't you write a screen play," or what have you, I was always looked at as if I just didn't get their vision. I even had a girl who wanted to write "black space opera" because there were too many white space operas. When I asked what drew her to the genre if she didn't like space operas, she admitted she'd never read any and said that gave her an advantage in the market because she was going to be a new voice. Listen, any new writers out there: do not do this. If you want to write fantasy, read fantasy. Read the greats, read the hypes, read the fails, read it all and mine 'em all for what you want to do/not do with your stories. Every story is a learning tool. And while watching anime and crime shows might give you some insights in what you want in your story, it does not teach you how to write it as a novel. Sounds simple but some will make you wonder. Also, not as glaring an issue but definitely noticeable: live. Get some life experiences. As a fantasy writer, I would see this problem a lot in critique groups when we would look at someone's new fight scene, or when looking at someone's new, hot sex scene in their romance. Everything would be set up well, but then the execution of the fight or sex would be treated just as matter-of-fact as the set up. It would be as if the fight was being watched from ring side but the POV would be 3rd limited. I could tell the person had never been in a fight or else they wouldn't have written it so cleanly. Now, I'm not saying that person had to go get in a fight to write it convincingly, but I think this is a problem of a lot of aspiring writers. Since reading and writing is a solitary pursuit and often associated with kids who prefer indoor activities, aspiring writers can rely too heavily on what they've read or have seen in the movies and they try to translate that to the page even when dealing with something that requires a certain level of research or lived experience to accurately portray it. This is similar to your point on "head movies," but goes deeper because I think we as audiences have accepted a certain level of "Hollywooding" of experiences (ie, things are reduced to surface level), and it's a flaw. And, if corrected, can turn a mediocre novel into one with some substance. A so-so military drama can become recommended reading if just the little details of military life are added that just tell the reader I'm reading and learning about something worthwhile because I'm learning about a new, real place even if that military drama is set a thousand years in the future.

Soooo good. I'd love to see you breakdown a story that was "written by the seat of the author's pants" and analyze it.

I can never unseen the anime Mary and child.

As much as I love TV Tropes for giving me a vast encyclopedia of genres and writing techniques to flip through while doing research, it has probably single-handedly launched the epidemic of pseduo-intellectual critique channels on youtube and given rise to a generation of writers who think novelty and subversion are priority no. 1 in fiction. I would not be the least bit surprised to hear that Rian Johnson starts any project he gets by going to TV Tropes.

I'm a 'by the seat of my pants' writer. Mind you, for my epic fantasy/sci-fi novel I wrote out a three page synopsis first. I eventually got to a point where I'd surpased what I had written for the synopsis, but by then everything was so well established I had plenty to go on ... but in doing so I've done the exact opposite of write myself into a corner ... I've written myself into a wide open field with an endless horizon. And that I find quite daunting.

I am a pantser with ADD. I’ve tried to plot and I end up frustrated and bored to death. But what I found what worked for me was creating a character bible, a giant map , on poster board, of my fictional village and filling in the names of shops, restaurants etc and aligning them with characters and my character bible. It’s kind of a hybrid pants/plot idea.

#7 "no plan" -- It strikes me that if nothing else, having some sort of plan will help you write something where your (potential and inevitable) errors become more obvious. You can then lay out whatever your story is, get it done, and then reread and see what the totality of the story needs and whether you've done it (at all or well). It's another way into story, you might say. I think Stephen King can be rightly criticized for stories that are often overly long and repetitious. While they might still be decent, how much better would they be if he was able to cut the superfluous? Thanks for the video!

Thanks for the shout outs, David!

Great advice on emphasizing plot and character vs. theme/politics. I made the no-outline mistake, but OTOH I discovered a lot about my world by fumbling through. That said, I won’t be making the same mistake again. Another mistake I made was latching onto an idea that was always too big for one book. Start with a little idea, because it will grow in the telling.

Only been writing since November of 2019 and I've already seen improvement. Just keep writing. + Make notes as you learn new techniques, then when editing happens, go back and use your new skills to spruce up the draft into something even more fun. He's right, you have to learn by doing and then mold it into later versions of your series. Its ok to have clay in the beginning. That's what drafts are for. I use excel spreadsheet to keep the events and timeline coherent in my series. Along with quick character references. If you are stuck on a scene, I just put in what I want the character to do for that part, plus how it ties into the plot, then move on. When I have a firmer idea of what to write, Ill go back and flesh it out.

As chance would have it, I just watched this after reading Drink We Deep by Arthur Leo Zagut, which is a textbook example of great execution. He follows the pulp novel formula closely enough, but the execution is amazing. He plays with the formula, gives readers what they expect in interesting ways, introduces unexpected elements that fit and spur on the suspense. Worth checking out as an example.

Freestyle writer here. I've tried outlines, and they don't work for me. They actually cause writer's block. As soon as I try to force the story into following an outline, I avoid writing. Within a day, I say the heck with it, toss the outline and write the story as it comes to me. I've found the things that make this style not work for many gets solved after writing a lot. I visualize the story many times before I write a scene, so that may be what helps me avoid the problems others have with this method. I've been writing for decades both fiction and non-fiction. The non-fiction helped me be concise and edit to word count. In magazines and newspapers, you get only X-amount of words, so I needed to learn how to tell the full 'story' within those guidelines. I'm always looking for ways to improve my writing, and that keeps moving me closer to where I want to be as a writer. One mistake new writers sometimes make is they ask dozens of opinions for their first novel. Beta readers won't like or dislike the same things, and new writers either want to please them all or value their advice above their own instincts. Ask 2 or 3 people, then edit it the best to your ability, then work with an editor to polish it. But don't spend years editing. Get it done and move on to the next project. One can learn only so much from each project. Let them go. Looking back, it's easy to see the progress of experience with each project. My first fantasy novel, "Shadows in the Stone", lost some of its essence because it was edited to death with too many opinions of others being applied. I tried to inject the spark back in after I realised it, but it was difficult to reclaim what was lost.

Let this first comment be in appreciation of the wisdom and knowledge you impart unto us

I've been on both sides of number 7 -- jumping into the writing with no concrete plan and either I recognize a direction pretty quickly, or writer's block sets in when the initial creative dash wears off. The best part? Taking time to actually WRITE DOWN a plan (i.e. outline) before starting doesn't even help me in this regard.

I'd love to hear your point of view on linear and non-linear chronology when telling a story; like including flashbacks, prequels (before the story is finished chronologically) etc. How this can impact audience retention levels is something I've been curious about. For example, the character of Darth Vader and how we are given his story in non-chronological order with the introduction of the prequels after the original trilogy. If we started from his childhood we might have a better appreciation in regards to his sacrifices, but on the other hand the impact he has as we see him in the original trilogy would be far weaker, not to mention completely nullify Luke's shocking revelation about his father.

Re. point 7 I find myself still often getting stuck with writer's block when writing a chapter. Not because I don't have an outline of what is going to happen. I do have one; for both the story at large and for what is going to happen in each actual chapter. It's just that I often get stuck trying to execute those ideas. Like spending time trying to get the flow of a conversation right so that it naturally hits all the subjects I need it to cover. Do you have a suggestion or tip to overcome issues like this or is it simply a result of my inexperience? Love your videos as always and I hope you respond.

It's not about the ideas, it's about the execution - thank you, that's sobering to hear; in a good way. On the Seat-of-your-pants writing approach, however - one has to remember that Stephen King was getting *a ton* of rejections before Carrie got published. So it's very likely that this approach does work, but one has to practice a lot for it to work.

1) Being afraid to make a bold character, either by toning down a character that would generate backlash, or amping up a character in fear that SHE won't come off strong and independant enough for a reader not to complain. Don't let social politics and busybodies ruin a good character. 2) Drugs/alcohol won't make you a literary genius.

Always dig your videos. Another thing to remember about “flying by the seat of your pants”: pilots were able to do this with their planes because they learned their planes inside out and gained considerable experience in their air flying them. They wouldn’t allow them to take on such dangerous missions until they gained that king of experience. Not if they wanted to win the war.

I think that 1, 4, and 7 can use a little arguing and additional explanation. 1) I think early author attempts actually get deeply stuck here since they just learn how to worldbuild and don't want to mess up, then some actually start enjoying it so much they get stuck absolutely overplanning their world (and to a lesser extent the story, too). It could be good as some practice in creating worlds if you know where and when to stop. I net-know a person who only ever wrote 1 Naruto fanfic in their life now trying to create a book series. They planned it to be an 8 PARTER, but for a long while they were now stuck on what appears to be several scenes from crucial story points spread across their books along with a (badly in need of review and rewrite) initial part of what may not even be considered the first draft, below 10k words. They have this huge world they CONSTANTLY talk about and make small revisions to and at this point I basically warned them they will run out of enthusiasm before they finish their first book at this rate. And they wanna do 8 in that world. 4) I feel like this is a "if you know what you are doing" situation. Some quiet moments of respite are very helpful in characterization and letting the reader catch a breather too, but it is easy to accidentally write pointless scenes sometimes 7) I do think "Gardeners" have a more difficult time "getting" their creative process. If you completelt by-the-pants something, you will likely end up with something you can use more like an extensive outline or very bad first draft in need of multiple reviews and rewrites. Which is not very terrible if you have the time. But if we go with the idea that gardeners create the story in their head thanks to the characters and settings as they go, we do arrive at a good piece of advice. Those deeper into the architect zone generally do well by knowing and successfully establishing their plot first. Those deeper in the gardener side need not only a grasp of how their world works, but REALLY need to know their characters to an UNUSUAL (even 'voices in my head level) degree to be able to push them through the grinder while discovering the story on the go to come up with something decent. And then they need another crucial thing : Brakes on that thing, a.k.a knowing when to actually finish the story.

I’d say contradicting themes is a big one and that the language doesn’t feel consistent. Take Moby Dick for example, that book uses the sea for metaphors and language. ”Feelings came crashing like waves” and the like. It had been very odd if Melville started to use farming terminology in a large capacity later in the book to describe things if they were still at sea. You want to keep your language somewhat connected to your themes and characters. And if you abandon your theme halfway through then the reader will think ”then why do I need to read the rest?” Let’s say the theme of Moby Dick had been ”whale hunting is bad” and the author builds that up, with the main character regretfully on the ship, hating the crew and what they do only to result in the main character killing the whale mid way and he is making a lot of money from said kill, then living happily ever after without reflecting on what happend. Then you have failed to convey your theme and usually it turns into a mess.

This is a video I can see myself revisiting often. Seems pretty simple pitfalls that writers would naturally fall into.

Thanks for the tips. Much appreciated. Personally, I attempt to use tropes either to subvert them (yawn) or also as a shorthand. If I can convey a large amount of information in a very simple way, then trope it is.

Your #7 is completely personal style.

Think outside the box but keep it close so you can pull what you need from it

Ouch, #1 is me all the way. That hurts XD

I forgot to make a main character active. I had to gut a book and stitch it back together to fix that mistake.

I guess planning isn't for me. something about following a predetermined path kills the fun, so I end up losing interest and abandoning the project. even if I push through and finish it, the quality is never as good as when I improvise. when just let everything play out naturally, without trying to funnel the events into a specific sequence, the descriptions are richer, and everything just flows better.

Agreed pretty much entirely with this. Some points...ehh...I have various other opinions on, but... Still really enjoyed and learned from the video, David! Keep spouting your wisdom upon us simple authors and readers.

Big mistake: Not putting down the finished MS first draft before beginning editing. Walk away, work on a new MS or something else for at least a month, then come back.

I've had two main takeaways from my creative writing classes - write what a character feels and not just what is happening (character-driven stories), and plot is always about motion (internal or external). But this is creative writing and not literature. As far as literature class is concerned, they're supposed to teach critical thinking, aren't they? This basically means that you learn how to analyze literature but not how to write it. This is the same as how hearing, reading, speaking, and writing a language all use different skills. I'd expect a literature class to help with writing but definitely not to make your writing better.

Re: ideas vs execution: I think you hit on why the Star War prequels failed: Lucas had some great ideas, but couldn't execute them without a lot of help from others. The Disney sequels seem to have gone the other way: some quality execution, but no ideas to speak of.

Just have to say your profile picture makes you look kin of like Mable from Gravity falls from that episode where she wore a suit

I'd like to write a story (although I don't know if it'll be a serialized web comic or just a book) I'm not an experienced writer, how should I plan it out? How do I world/character built the right way or how to start?

David, could you do a video about how to write an engaging and fun quest for an rpg game (I'm thinking of Skyrim or Fallout 4)?

Do the same concepts apply to short stories? Those could be a good start for new writers, am i right?

good point on the political ideologies in books there are so many authors right now that love to preach at the reader and its so annoying

Have you read Shad M. Brooks' (channel Shadaversity) novel "Shadow of the Conqueror" yet? If so, I'd like to see a review from you, and I think he'd appreciate some feedback as well. I thought he did a pretty good job at world-building, establishing a magic system and making fleshed-out characters. :D

Can anyone give me examples of what he means by prepping before writing. Is it like a check list or specific steps to build up towards

What does he mean about execution, like a character taking action and connecting Event's

you keep saying these are mistakes new authors make but I've been seeing this stuff with Brandon Sanderson's latest works and Michael J. Sullivan.

The funny thing is that most of the authors I come across in forums etc. turn out to be Pantsers. More than that, many claim that their characters live in their head and they are the ones who write the book and that the author has no idea what's going on or where the story is going or how it will end. I've read so many posts where the author says they were totally amazed at what happened in the story because the characters did something totally unexpected.

I can relate to several of these, but am sort of struggling with #2 in a peculiar way. I'm in a wheelchair due to having essentially no legs and only 1.5 arms (congenital thing). I'm working on a sci-fi/space opera-ish story set in a different universe. I've been planning on having one of my main characters also be missing some appendages. The same ones, actually. On the one hand, given our anatomical similarities, as well as him being interested in philosophy like I am, this could feel like an author-insert character. On the other hand, he's not the only protagonist, he's not going to be a Mary-Sue type, and I think the whole no-legs angle could make for interesting storytelling (or at least "flavor" or "color," since his disability will not be essential to any particular plot point). So I'm torn.

I generally describe myself as a pants-er but anything over 20k words I need to start making notes character bios and so on or it all becomes impossible to remember.

The biggest mistake I can think of that is not on the list is over explaining magic or technology systems. For example, Paolini's "Inheritance Cycle" ended up with a decent first book however about half way through the second book we learn everything about the magic system so it becomes boring. Or "Voyager" where all the technobabble results explanations that obviously make no sense and are continuously contradicted. Neither one used an info dump to do it. If you contrast that to books like "Lord of the Rings" or "The Dragon Riders of Pern" the magic system is never explained and anything that magically happens is fantastic and even if it is commonly done it remains extraordinary. Another example from film is "Farscape" where literally nothing is explained almost to the point where the setting boarders on a bizaro world but because we do not and cannot understand the world so we just have to trust it and it becomes very difficult to say what is and what is not possible.

The truth is, most literature classes make up a bunch of bullshit that the author never intended.

1:41 I keep hearing people say this, but I disagree and think it’s the other way around: 1984 is ONLY remembered because it had good ideas, and NOT because it had an interesting plot or characters. The “story” is simply a vehicle for Orwell to express his political ideas. From a literary standpoint, the story itself is forgettable and it’s only redeeming qualities are it’s ability to weave the message into the setting and it’s simplicity. People only talk about the ideas and themes when discussing the book and rarely ever mention the characters by name. The plot is just a setup for Winston’s eventual betrayal, and characters themselves are one dimensional. Only three characters are named and they are all one dimensional. Consider their motivations: Winston is simply an audience surrogate whose only motive is to find out information about the world on the readers behalf and not get in trouble while doing it. He has no other interests or goals. He DOES have a backstory (albeit a vague one), but that only highlights the fact that none of the other characters do. O’ Brien is a mustache-twirling bad guy whose sole motivation is to serve the party. Making him conflicted about his actions or forced to obey orders he disagrees with to save himself or his family would have fleshed him out, but we get none of that. The Fire Chief in Fahrenheit 451 was a better O’ Brien-type character because it’s implied that he used to love the thing he now fights against. And then there’s Julia, whose despite being one of only three characters who has a name, has zero personality outside of wanting to have sex with Winston. That’s her only motivation. When Winston tries to strike up a conversation that isn’t about sex, she brushes him off. She has zero agency and never says or does anything that fundamentally alters the plot in any way. She’s so irrelevant that she could literally be replaced with a pillow and nothing would change because the story is entirely a struggle between Winston and the Party, which O’ Brien is the personification of. Big Brother is a personification of an otherwise faceless organization, NOT a character. We don’t even know if he even exists or is just a fictional character/mascot like Uncle Sam or Mickey Mouse, but most people make the mistake of seeing him as a person (such as a stand-in for Stalin) when he is really just an idea. - In my opinion, the personality cult around him isn't even the most important idea in the book (Orwell wrote an entire appendix about Newspeak but doesn't even give us a single quote from B.B.), but 90% of discussion around the book acts like it is. It also falls victim to point #1, wherein the book is consumed with worldbuilding such that it even stops halfway through to deliver a lecture about how the party functions instead of weaving it into the plot like a good author would.

How could I learn to be a better writer, without wasting money on a school?

How many of us wannabe writers just want to entertain? I always hear about the self insert fantasy or the soap box or the big brain running amok. Anyone else out their who just wants to take folks for a ride then bump fists afterward? Is that not enough to form a foundation for a novel?

Editing and Revisions are the most important things you need to face. Any writer who thinks their stuff is good after the first draft is a delusional idiot and their stuff sucks. Editing, cutting out as much crap as you can after you've written it, is a painful and necessary thing; it's something every writer has to sit down and do with an almost callous seriousness, their story will be better for it. And revisions, many many many revisions, are required to truly make a story good; you are the master of the future and past, you can play revisionist history as much as you need to to make yourself seem like a brilliant writer who had all the steps planned out -- so do that, go back and iron out all the wrinkles and plant all the seeds that will come to beautiful fruition -- don't think that the work you just hammered out is even worth showing to another human being, if you can be bothered to polish it at all then it isn't worth anyone's time to read. Writers who refuse to edit, and don't think that their story needs any revisions, are the worst writers of the most lazy, sloppy, pathetic, festering drivel ... and writers who mindlessly rely on auto-correct/spell-checker, and never bother to look up word definitions and synonyms, are also pathetic and awful. It's either the arrogance, ignorance, or laziness, but those notions/beliefs/habits are possessed by the worst (and most stubborn) writers.

Yeah Creative Writing Programs are worth shit!

THEY KILLED WARCRAFT 3! *throws chair*

So... 1 it's not important what you say but how you say it. 2 it's not important what you say but how you say it. 3 Don't write what you know, write what normies want to read. 4 If you are writing a book, write a book, not a screen play. Make sure to tell the audience what the characters are feeling, not show them. 5 Less is more. 6 Get out your cookie cutter and follow the formula. Also, Don't use every cookie cutter you have in your drawer. 7 It's not how you say it but what you say. Got it. 8 Your creative writing/literature degree was a waste of time and money.

You can really tell where the emphasis is on writing today: brevity. None of this "advice" explains how great authors like Tolkien wrote, because according to this he committed most of the "mistakes." If you want to make a quick sale or "climb the ladder," this constitutes worthy advice. If not, this constitutes suggestions only.

Hunter S Thompson said he learned to write by copying The Great Gatsby over and over, word for word. Also, Steven King is the single most overrated writer in the history of writing and no advice given about him or from him should be taken.