This is going to be a very unpopular comment. My writing got dramatically better when I stopped believing my projects had a 'meant to be' form, a blueprint originating beyond me, a Platonic life of their own. The idea had me following the book around like it knew where to go and I didn't. It was almost impossible to explore radical plotting alternatives because of some sense that it might diverge from what the book was 'meant to be'. I knew what the industry wanted, but I kept vearing off because the book wanted to be something else. After I stopped investing in that belief, the reins came off (me) and I no longer hesitated to alter plot and character dramatically if a better idea came along. I was building instead of following. It was liberating.Heather B wrote:All these points are a lot to think about but I agree with Mira on writing something how it is meant to be written.
There is another thread on the forum about the difference between what a writer wants to write when they sit down and what actually comes out and the distress of not being able to get the two to match. I don't have nearly the problem with this I had with the 'meant to be' model.
Even less popular comment: Sometimes metaphysics is a study in relieving one of personal power and responsibility.