A week ago, after about 30 months, I finally finished my first novel. Of course, I felt the joy of achieving something that, actually, I wasn’t sure I could achieve. Under the joy, I felt a nagging discomfort, though. Something is amiss with my manuscript.
For a week, I couldn’t do anything about the nag. I didn’t know what I should be looking at. Yesterday, on my way home in a rush hour buss, in a sudden flash of understanding that changed. I love it when that happens. It never ceases to amaze me how my mind works. In my opinion, conscious thought processes have more prestigious status than they deserve, and the unconscious processes are undervalued.
There’s a major fault in my story. The fault reflects the mistake that I made in recognizing my antagonist (later Anta). How can I write a novel without recognizing my Anta? I must be the nitwit of all nitwits.
The real Anta is a group of people, not just one person. In retrospect, it’s easy to see that the person I pictured as Anta is actually a catalyst (later Cata) that causes a change in the group mentality of Anta. I guess that I made the mistake in the assumption that Anta is actively working against the protagonist (later Prota). In my book Cata acts, but Anta is sitting back until it’s time to strike the decisive blow against Prota.
In revising the story, I need to make the sitting Anta more visible. That should be an interesting exercise.
For a week, I couldn’t do anything about the nag. I didn’t know what I should be looking at. Yesterday, on my way home in a rush hour buss, in a sudden flash of understanding that changed. I love it when that happens. It never ceases to amaze me how my mind works. In my opinion, conscious thought processes have more prestigious status than they deserve, and the unconscious processes are undervalued.
There’s a major fault in my story. The fault reflects the mistake that I made in recognizing my antagonist (later Anta). How can I write a novel without recognizing my Anta? I must be the nitwit of all nitwits.
The real Anta is a group of people, not just one person. In retrospect, it’s easy to see that the person I pictured as Anta is actually a catalyst (later Cata) that causes a change in the group mentality of Anta. I guess that I made the mistake in the assumption that Anta is actively working against the protagonist (later Prota). In my book Cata acts, but Anta is sitting back until it’s time to strike the decisive blow against Prota.
In revising the story, I need to make the sitting Anta more visible. That should be an interesting exercise.
No comments:
Post a Comment