On writing: kill your darlings

[StillStunned]

Last night, in the "What are we all writing" thread, I wrote:

Inspired by REH's Conan, I'm doodling away at another sword & sorcery story. The heir to a throne is temporarily turned into a ghost while her twin sister goes on a rampage of debauchery to discredit her.

Add in a pair of hunky barbarian princes, one who can "hear the wind", the other who can "see the wind". They might be able to help her, if she can free them from the dungeon below the palace. Not sure how she'll do that.

Today, I realise that I can't make the story work with them in the dungeon, and I might as well make it another story about Sligh and Avilia (even if it's not told from their POV).

So the 400 words I spent describing the princess's decision to go to the dungeon, and more importantly the slow and moody trip down to the dungeon - it all has to be cut. Another darling on the cutting room floor!

 

[big_cane_sugar]

I say publish your darlings anonymously online.

 

[AStrangeDesire]

Last night, in the "What are we all writing" thread, I wrote:



Today, I realise that I can't make the story work with them in the dungeon, and I might as well make it another story about Sligh and Avilia (even if it's not told from their POV).

So the 400 words I spent describing the princess's decision to go to the dungeon, and more importantly the slow and moody trip down to the dungeon - it all has to be cut. Another darling on the cutting room floor!

A couple of days ago, on final edit, I got feedback that a part I thought was particularly good, referencing back to something that happened quite a ways back in the story, didn't work. Got the comment 'I don't remember what you're referring to here'.

I tried to make it work, gave more background to what I was trying to come back to. To breath life into it. But it just made it awkward and felt forced. So it got slashed.

I thought I'd been clever. Maybe too clever. And another darling was tragically lost, dying silently and without fanfare on the floor of the editing room. Gone forever. Never to be remembered. No one there to even shed a tear as it faded into obscurity.

^ that's my eulogy to it.

Edit: that came off way too serious, it was supposed to be a fun, over-the-top bit about killing your darlings

 

[Kumquatqueen]

Sometimes it's just realising that a piece of story is perfectly good, just needs to be in its own story to be able to breathe and be appreciated. A bit like gardening - a rose garden is great for your roses. Hollyhocks and dahlias are also great, but will detract from the strong impression your roses make. Put them in the area on the other side of your hedge, and you have two impressive gardens rather than one mish-mash.

That minor character doesn't need to get it on with your protagonist - or at least, not necessarily in the story where your protagonist is already busy.

Do I follow my own advice? Well, I've just removed a subplot from my On the Job story, because it just detracted from where the main story was going. And I'm very proud of myself!

 

[NotWise]

I say publish your darlings anonymously online.

Only if they sign the release.

 

[Britva415]

In other threads we've mentioned Chekov's Gun. If you're reluctant about killing a particular darling, you can embed it more firmly in the story: either by [...] or else by inserting a CG earlier that foreshadows your darling.

I feel like this can work as long as the darling is something happening. If it's not an event, then it doesn't fit the pattern: Chekhov's Gun has to be fired, not just named and described again. If the darling does something, something related to the stakes of the story instead of just "being a gun again", then to me this is what would be meant by "serving the story."