%%USERNAME%%    %%ACCWORDS%% %%ONOFF%% |
 |  This is a continuation of my blogging here at WdC |
|
This will be a blog for my writing, maybe with (too much) personal thrown in. I am hoping it will be a little more interactive, with me answering questions, helping out and whatnot. If it falls this year (2024), then I may stop the whole blogging thing, but that's all a "wait and see" scenario. An index of topics can be found here: "Writing Blog No.2 Index"  Feel free to comment and interact. |
| Pseudo-reality In visual entertainment, there has been a thing called “mockumentaries”. These are fiction stories told in the format of a traditional documentary. Normally done for comedic effect, the best I have seen is This Is Spinal Tap, The Rutles being a close second. And anything by Sacha Baron Cohen is about as funny as genital psoriasis, but he knows the mockumentary format. When it comes to non-comedy, Lake Mungo, an Australian horror film, uses the format. There is some “found footage”, interviews, on location filming, creating a psychological horror that got a lot of critical acclaim at the time (2007), though I found it a little mild. Still, it shows what can be done with the “mock documentary” format. So what? Pseudo-reality In writing, this technique is called pseudo-reality. Now, a quick word – this is not when someone writes a book of complete rubbish and tries to pass it off as a non-fiction work (see anything about non-medicinal cancer cures, the chupacabra or Hulk Hogan’s (alleged) autobiographies). This is when a fiction work is written like a non-fiction work. How does it work? You need a story, and that is vital. This is not a technique for pantsers. My two attempts were two of the only times I have plotted. You also need to read non-fiction books about events. Not biographies, not how-to books, but about events. Stories that work best in the pseudo-reality field are ones that affect a small number of people directly, but which could have witnesses. You need to see how interviews are written, decide if you want to use diary extracts or text messages or blog posts (so you need to know the year your events take place). And, something a lot of people forget, is you need an over-arching tie, a narrator, for lack of a better term. This could be someone looking back on the events as they put them forward, a person who had been involved trying to get everything together, or even just a journalist. Also, non-linear narrative does not work in this style of writing. What you need to do You have your story, you need the characters and the setting, like any other story you plot. But it is best to plot it in scenes. Then look at each scene and decide which format it is best to relate that scene. Your choices can be (but are not limited to): Interviews Diary extracts Extracts from other books Text messages Emails Blog posts Letters Eyewitness accounts Newspaper articles The Narrator’s parts are like a journalist, and so the story does tend towards the tell. This means everything else needs to be compelling. Remember, all of this is fiction. You need to make up the books, etc. (Stephen King used this to punctuate elements of the book Carrie.) Do NOT use real books or real encyclopaedia entries or the like. So, is it epistolary? As a reminder: "20241222 Epistolary Writing" .No, it is not. Whole chapters are not the works of one person; scenes are. So if it is a monster story, and you are looking at a scene where a group of teenagers is attacked, it might be: Interview subject 1 (why they went) Interview subject 2 (why and how they went) Interview subject 1 (what they first did) Narrator (adding detail) Interview subject 3 (the noise) Interview subject 2 (who went to investigate) Narrator (adding context) Interview subject 3 (what was heard next) Narrator (explaining and clarifying the attack) Transcript of 000/911 call (someone telling police there’s been an attack) Narrator (adding context) Interview subject 1 (finding the body) Narrator (adding context) Text message (trying to get more friends down there) And so on. It reads very much like a non-fiction book, but you can see how this can be used to increase tension. It is not the equivalent of a found footage film, either. There are many different ways of presenting the story. Negatives * It is seen as experimental by many publishers. * It can become too bogged down in the extras so the narrator is left out. * It can feel gimmicky. * It is really hard to get all the voices sounding different * Does the story need this? Why use it Why have I used it? Simple – I was telling a story that has been told time and time again. Yes, I knew I had some differences, especially in setting, but not enough to make the story stand out. Pseudo-reality can give new life to worn tropes. And it was fun to try! So, just a thought – why not give this a go? It might work, it might not, but you never know until you try it. |
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
Not directed at you. But it's mind-boggling how many strangers still call it 'brave' or ask 'why did you do that?'