I have noticed that I have a tendency to make decisions with my writing that boxes me into corners in very unpredictable ways. On the one hand, I'm clearly not a writer who plays it safe. If this can be an example to writers who might be more fearful, who are afraid of not knowing and overplanning the plot, here's what it can look like from the other side. I see those who worry that their plot gets away from them. Ha!
In my first draft after the climax, I did not have a single character available who could present a solution. However, even after I had managed to unravel that mess, I will be honest it was not the last challenge I faced with completing the first draft. Now I've done the same thing to myself and that is.... write a plot involving a battle. In the novel manuscript, it was the last thing I wrote. I wrote every page, every scene, every chapter I could write before tackling the war. Somehow I was afraid of that MORE than I was a run away plot.
Or maybe they are somewhat similar. I make choices in the conflict that result in the necessity then to write a battle or war. Let me explain why this becomes such a massive undertaking. I could imagine writing contemporary, or historic fiction, or even modern historic battles, the answers are there somewhere to be found.
In my case, the layers become more complex how to plan a battle because this is an imagined alternate history in a secondary world. I will use a specific example to demonstrate how this complexity plays out.
In a short piece of one of the characters in the same world as my novel, there are known enemies which are always invading the waters out of hostility, trying to launch an invasion, which appear on the horizon during what is a routine exercise for him. So he rallies and launches backups to the fortified forts and navy which responds to this latest invasion.
This era in their history does not equate linearly to ours. However, this secondary world is very much like ours, and operates with many of the same rules, except that their historical and cultural events have happened in a totally different recombination, and that carries over to the advancement or evolution of technology in it's own course. Any time I want to create some military conflict, I have to research how certain ideas developed in our history, and then create a new timeline for what combination they would have had.
Sure, it allows a certain amount of freedom, but those combinations also have to make sense. For example, this week I had to research types of ships which were used. Were they man or sail powered? What kind of artillery would they have been equipped.
I do happen to have a naval strategy expert in my family, since my father was a Naval Captain and member of the Admiral's staff. However, even his limitations come with understanding mainly contemporary technology, and only broad strokes of historic tactics. In his mind, early warfare was fought in galley ships which were man powered by men rowing oars. That dictated a certain level of engagement that favoured ramming, and boarding was also a technique which was used. He assumed artillery would have involved anything that was found on land such as catapults or trebuchets.
There are a lot of people in the world who have this area as a hobby, so there are plenty of videos on YouTube. The answer there is that gravity powered artillery threw ships off balance, and would not have been used. However, for me the more important factor which none of their discussion of early naval warfare paid attention to is that galley ships lose relevance on the open sea. They were used on closed seas like the Mediterranean, Black and Caspian seas. Early naval battles on open seas, therefore, would have been in the Indian Ocean, and those ships would not have been galley ships. Given the prevalence of piratical activity along Indian Ocean trade routes, all ships would have to have been protected and armed.
We were able to conclude that sail advancement changed the kinds of ships being used, as well as tactics of engagement. Artillery had some very clear and creative strokes.
There were plenty of other interesting historical facts from our world's history. However, this is why every time I write myself into situations that require battles in this world is a major undertaking without any clear answers, and a great deal of digging to understand the answers for myself. While this is particular to the world building of my novel, I do not seem to be learning any time soon any lessons of writing or planning stories better which allow me to avoid these major difficulties to solve plot issues.
Whether you are a plotter or a panster, what kind of plot twists do you try to avoid or are there any directions your plots take which cause you to be afraid of the work to find the solutions?
Commentaires