Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Meghan McCarron. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Meghan McCarron. Show all posts

Sunday, April 30, 2017

Ted Chiang on his Writing Process

Note: I have simplified and organized Chiang's responses. It may alter his intent somewhat. Feel free to consult the originals instead. 
  1. I usually think about [an idea I'm interested in] for a long time, and 
  2. write down my speculations... about how [they] could become a story. [From the McCarron interview:] I think about different possible stories set in such a world; I can usually come up with a bunch of starting points, but I don’t know where those would go.... 
  3. I don't [write] the story... until I know how the story ends.... I write... the last paragraph... or a paragraph near the end.... *
  4. The second thing I write is the opening of the story.
  5. I write the key scenes or landmark scenes. [From the McCarron interview:] I don’t have the whole story worked out in detail, but I have a general sense of what needs to happen. Sometimes I’m able to borrow elements from the other starting points that previously seemed like dead ends to me, although not always. 
  6. Then I just in backwards and forwards [in almost random order].
--Ted Chiang in The Metahack Interview (interviewed by Avi Solomon). The book is "free" through subscription to Amazon's Kindle Unlimited program.

--Ted Chiang in Electric Literature (interviewed by Meghan McCarron)

* The explanation of why Chiang writes the ending first:

"[I]f you’re writing a mystery story and you have no idea who the murderer is and are hoping to figure it out along the way, then the odds are not good that the culprit you eventually decide on will match all the clues you laid out. Not all stories are mysteries or whodunits, but I tend to approach my stories in a similar fashion. I need to know “who done it” before I can start."
--Ted Chiang in an interview with Betsy Huang of Asian American Literary Review

Saturday, March 18, 2017

Ted Chiang on Explanation in Fiction and Non-Fiction

"[T]here’s something beautiful about a good explanation; reading one isn’t just useful, it can be pleasurable, too."
--Ted Chiang in Electric Literature (interviewed by Meghan McCarron)

Thursday, March 16, 2017

Ted Chiang's Advice to Slow Writers

"On the occasions that I have hurried to finish a story in order to have something to bring to a workshop, the need to meet the deadline caused me to make bad decisions with regards to the story, and I wound up spending more time fixing those mistakes.... 
"As for advice to slow writers, I’d say that writing is not a race. This isn’t a situation where only the most prolific writers get an audience; publish your story when you’re ready, and it will find readers."
--Ted Chiang in Electric Literature (interviewed by Meghan McCarron)

Monday, March 6, 2017

Ted Chiang on Literary Influences

"When I first began writing, I was influenced by Asimov and Clarke, and I would try to imitate their work very closely."
"[M]y writing matured... after I started reading writers like John Crowley and Gene Wolfe....  by then I knew better than to try imitating their work.... 
"[B]ut of all the writers I’ve mentioned..., [Edward Bryant's] work shows the clearest influence on my own...." 
--Ted Chiang interviewed by Gavin J. Grant for Indiebound

--and in Electric Literature (interviewed by Meghan McCarron)

Note: I did minimal splicing to serve up the interesting bits, economically.

Saturday, March 4, 2017

Ted Chiang on Philosophy in Fiction

"[I]f abstract philosophical questions were the only thing I was interested in, I’d probably write... speculative essays. [P]hilosophical questions are most interesting when they have significant consequences for a person’s life.... 
"[O]ne of the things that interests me as a writer is finding ways to make philosophical questions storyable [that is, the ability to make certain notions or ideas into stories]."
--Ted Chiang in Electric Literature (interviewed by Meghan McCarron)

"I do want there to be a depth of human feeling in my work, but that’s not my primary goal as a writer.... My primary goal has to do with engaging in philosophical questions and thought experiments, trying to work out the consequences of certain ideas."
-- and in The New Yorker (interviewed by Joshua Rothman)