Half way through this interesting book. It's not on screenwriting, but there are some interesting comparisons. I'll come back and add some as I discover them. King says:

1) he generally does not plot his novels, and the times he has, it usually does not work out well. He doesn't even go into the story knowing the ending. He believes that plotting leads to characters doing things that are "false".

2) most of his stories are built around a simple "what if" proposition. What if, for example, a novelist was captured by his biggest fan and forced to write a story the way she wanted it(Misery). He comes up with a what if scenario, builds toward it with his story, then resolves it.

3) he writes 2000 words a day when on a project. He does one project at a time and does not take breaks. He believes a novel should take no more than 3 months for the first draft.

4) his day is split between reading and writing. He believes if you don't read, you are not a serious writer. It's not about adopting another writer's style, but it's about visiting these various inner realms. The bits and stuff of all these realms become part of his own tool box. He reads about 75 novels a year. He takes a book with him everywhere he goes. Avoids the "glass teat"of TV.

5) King used to teach high school English. He's not anal when it comes to things like sentence fragments. He understands that, used effectively, they can create succinctness and strings of isolated images, images which stand out more because of their isolation. Of course, he says, one should only risk playing with these things if they are sure of what they are doing.

He is, however, extremely anal when it comes to passive verb use and the employment of adverbs. It would say this is kind of a pet peeve for him, an area where he crosses over into slightly irrational, because there are situations the passive works best...such as when the subject has been set up by the previous sentence and therefore should not be placed as the object...but King's sensitivity is extreme on this, probably from correcting so many high school papers.

relevance for screenwriters:

Hard to say. I would not advise giving up plotting screenplays, for instance, but what King says about the importance of the characters' actions not ringing false is worth heeding. Personally, I plot my screenplays as much as I can...however, I don't let the plot become a prison. If the story wants to go in different directions, I often let it.

I think the "what-if" foundation is probably very useful to screenwriting, and is pretty similar to making something high concept.

And splitting one's time between reading and writing also has relevance...though different with screen. In screenwriting, I think a writer can be helped by a variety of things: reading scripts, watching film, and reading novels. I do think that since words are the main tool of a screenwriter, it's not enough to just write scripts and watch movies. But obviously, unless you're a pro writer like King, it's hard to find the time to both read and write, so we do the best we can.

I read this many, MANY years ago.  It's a good read for sure.  King is/was the master, so his words are gold.

I actually employ a similar technique in not plotting out my work, but starting with characters I get to know, a situation I create, and an effect I try to realize.

The only script I've written that I knew the ending before I started the actual writing was Key to my Heart, but the pre-writing on that one went on for months before I typed FADE IN.

Yeah I read this one years ago when I was in middle school. At the time, King was my favorite author and still remains one of my favorites today. The book was highly inpsirational and I would recommend it to any writer. However, take his advice with a grain of salt. His track history is far from perfect.

Stephen King's definitely my all time fav writer. I started with Cujo when I was like twelve. Started writing short stories shortly after trying to emulate him. Unsuccessfully, of course. But his books inspired me to write, which is the most important thing for me.

Unfortunately, I never read his On Writing, but I guess I should. His work ethic sounds daunting.

Steve

Actually, Steve, to my surprise it's not daunting at all.

He writes 2000 words a day. He does this in the morning and most days he's done by lunch. In the afternoon he naps, takes care of letters and stuff. At night, family time, reading time, Red Sox time.

When he's writing a novel, he writes every day. It takes no more than 3 months. Then he takes a break before beginning the next.

Each book gets a second draft and then a polish.

I think the thing to understand is he put in a lot of time writing when he was a teenager. A lot of time. He sent hundreds of short stories out to magazines, managed to publish a few. So he was very busy at a formative age. That kind of skill stays with you forever.

What do you, rent his upstairs apartment? Only kidding. I thought I read somewhere he does 10,000 words a day. Perhaps when he was younger. Or that might have been the advice he gave to writers trying to crack the biz.

I don't live upstairs, I'm reading his book. As indicated in the thread title, it's called On Writing.

If I had had to guess, I would have thought he wrote a lot more words a day. But he says 2000 a day, one rewrite(done at least 6 weeks after finishing) and then a quick polish.

10,000 words a day would be a lot, trust me.

I still see 2,000 as a lot. It's tough because I see the words in my head, but transferring them to "paper" is a challenge. It was even tough when I tried that Dragon speech stuff. It's like the prose and dialogue gets completely jumbled in my head, even though the story's clear as day. Go figure.

Fantastic book. Good call, Kev.

I suspect many writers would see 2000 as a lot. King's output is pretty unusual. I know Graham Greene talks about writing 500 a day.

The first screenwriting book I ever read had Lew Hunter recommending 10 pages a day, 15 at most, so that's always how I've always done scripts -- first draft in 6 - 9 days.

I was working on a novel this week, before reading King's book. I set myself the goal of 2000 words a day(just a coincidence), and I found I was doing 2500 to 3000.

As with screenwriting, the hard part is when you get stuck with where to go next in the story. King pushes through to his 2000 no matter. The rest can be fixed on second draft.

For screenwriting, 6 to 9 days would be very hard for me. Usually takes me 5 to 7 weeks. Because it's like being in a maze: if you take a wrong turn, it screws everything that follows up, so it's difficult to fix later on rewrite.

However, of my 10 or so scripts, the 2 that achieved the most recognition were the ones I cranked out. My zombie/gangster script was written in a few weeks, and I was really just trying to learn how to write action.

And I wrote a script last year in 2 weeks that just missed the Nicholls quarter finals. That was my first attempt at using the 8 sequence method. I didn't plan for that story to be written so quickly, it just came together.

I've been told that you have to read his books in chronological order because he sometimes references other works.

I found that out first hand when I was reading Needful Things.  A portion of Cujo was ruined for me with a simple paragraph.

Does On Writing have any spoiler moments like that?

As for this chronological business, I'm on IT right now.

His book On Writing is part memoir, part instruction how to write. He talks a little about some of his books, but only as examples.

Steve,
11/22/63 has a really creepy reference to It in it when the protag spends some time in Derry. Very good stuff.

I LOVE "On Writing". Love, love....LOVE! I read it when it first came out, and now have it on Kindle for my PC and listen along on "Audible". King himself is the narrator and it's not only filled with incredible insight but it's highly entertaining as well. When I listen to it, I feel like I'm hanging out with him. LOL. I've learned so much from "On Writing". There's a segment where he talks about creating atmosphere. He describes a bar he's using in a scene. He picks out all of the things that stand out to him and then whittles away the things that aren't very important. I took that lesson and apply it to everything I write.

So, I not only recommend the book, but if you can get the audible version, you won't be sorry. :)

Since I'm a HUGE King fan and people kept telling me I just HAD to get this book, I got the audiobook earlier this week. Looking forward to it!  :)

Quoted from KevinLenihan His book On Writing is part memoir, part instruction how to write. He talks a little about some of his books, but only as examples.

Yeah, but any huge spoilers that would ruin the read?

Quoted from SAC Steve, 11/22/63 has a really creepy reference to It in it when the protag spends some time in Derry. Very good stuff.

So I hear.  I have that one on my nook thing, but I have a ways to go.

Another interesting observation of King's: if you're a bad writer, you'll ways be a bad writer. No amount of training will change that. If you're a good writer, but not a great writer, you'll never be a great writer. Those people are freaks of nature and they are born to it(he doesn't consider himself one of them).

However, if you are a competent writer, you CAN becomes a good writer. You have to keep writing a ton and keep reading a ton. His book was written to help those people.

King is a personal fave. I've read most of his work. Yes, there are a number of references from work to work, but not in all. Listening (which is weird) to 11/22/63 for the second time.

On Writing is excellent, of course. His list of favorite writers is educational.

Stephen King is awesome.

currently reading "The Shining" and the discontinued/out of print "Rage" which I found on the internet.

This is a very good book and a pleasure to read. Strongly recommended.

R

King is King!

There will be no other.

I chew on an idea for months but then write everyday once I get started.

I start with my primary characters and a huge "what if"...

I then work through the story with general ideas in mind but no specific outcome.

It's the "what if" you wrap the story around.

From there, you pound and pound and pound at the story.

Shawn.....><

Quoted from Ledbetter   I like to pound and pound, and just like my best Antag, King...andn King, there will be mo other. I will chew, wrap, and pound and pound again I always have a very specific outcome...you get me? It's my story....pound pound pound... Shawn.....><

Yeah, I read this a few years and it was great.

Love the Kingy. 'It' and 'The Stand' are two of my faves. My only criticism of him is that when he writes a shit book he really makes it stink. 'Insomnia' and 'Dreamcatcher' are 2 perfect examples.

Quoted from stevie Yeah, I read this a few years and it was great. Love the Kingy.

I did too... read it years ago, I mean.  And, I passed it on. Every writer should read it imh.

Quoted from stevie My only criticism of him is that when he writes a shit book he really makes it stink. 'Insomnia' and 'Dreamcatcher' are 2 perfect examples.

Yep, I second that. 'The Stand' was a page turner and is one of my faves as well, but King writes so well sometimes I don't think he knows when to 'edit himself and get on with the story.' 'Needful Things' and 'Cell' hmm.

That said, I'd give my eye tooth to be able to write at his worst ;D cause at least someone could come in and edit me.

And, I know we're not talking about King's other novels on this thread, but while we kinda are :) I just want to mention 'Gerald's Game' as another lesser known novel of his that scared the crap out of me... and not in the usual King way.

I read every book King came out with when I was a kid. And I was a kid when he was first becoming famous. So Carrie, Salem's Lot, Firestarter, Cujo, Four Seasons(my favorite), Dead Zone, The Stand...just off the top.

But then I got to Tommyknockers and I quit. It was awful. It just went on and on like mindless droning. I quit King cold turkey and refused to read him for like 20 years.

Well, having just read his book on writing, I have learned that Tommyknockers was written at the peak of his drug and alcohol addiction. He would write all night with cotton in his bleeding nostrils from the cocaine he was fueling himself on. So no wonder Tommyknockers was junk. And that was when his family finally did an intervention, and he cleaned himself up.

For me, the drug is coffee. And there is a point where coffee is so unhealthy you can feel it. And yet you often need it to plow through what you're trying to do with  writing.

You can call Tommyknockers junk but I read it when it first came out and to this day I remember some of the scenes vividly...that poor dog. LOL.

There were some good things in it, but it was a story that should have been a few hundred pages instead of what felt like War and Peace. It seemed like King was just pouring words out. I was only about 16 at the time, but it ended my Stephen King phase. But maybe it's time for a new King phase!

Stephen King is my absolute favorite author. Has he written some turkeys? Sure, but of all my favorite authors, he cranks out more good stuff consistently than anyone else.

I could not get through Dreamcatcher, but he's also had some books that I found impossible to put down. Heart In Atlantis, Bag of Bones, 11/22/63 among many. Wind Through The Keyhole was a real surprise for me. I would have bet money on me hating it because I HATE fantasy stuff, but I ended up really loving that one too.

As far as stimulants go in order to be able to write, I used to do my best after a few beers. Now I can't write at all after one. I don't drink coffee either. Occasionally I drink an energy drink or a Pepsi, but that's it. I don't smoke either so, in a way, I guess I'm a bit unusual for a writer.  :)

Insomnia was mostly crap and WAY too long.

I didn't have a big problem with Tommyknockers and I actually really liked most of Dreamcatcher.

Needful Things was also a fave, but it looks like pees didn't really like it?

Salem's Lot for me was the high point.

Been digging on his newest lately -- "Dr. Sleep" -- which revisits "Shining" territory with an adult Dan Torrence.

A bit silly in some spots, but strong on the whole -- and you can "feel" him having a good time building out the Shining mythos.  It is written for fans.  I am about two-thirds into it and the story is building very well.

"Salem's Lot" hooked me as a lifeling fan in my teens, but I hated "Cujo", though I seem to be the only one that ever complains about that particular book.  Perhaps most dig the concept, but few have actually read it?

Anyway, big influence on me.  So much that it is almost an effort sometimes not to blatantly copy his style.

On topic, I can also give "On Writing" a solid recommend.

I've actually read Cujo, but have never seen the movie. I remember liking it, but that was so long ago I can't tell you why.

My favorite had been a short story in Four Seasons called The Body. A few years after I read that, I was pleased to see it become a film: Stand by Me.

I finished the book On Writing in less than a day. A helpful and interesting read.

Quoted from KevinLenihan I read every book King came out with when I was a kid. And I was a kid when he was first becoming famous. So Carrie, Salem's Lot, Firestarter, Cujo, Four Seasons(my favorite), Dead Zone, The Stand...just off the top. But then I got to Tommyknockers and I quit. It was awful. It just went on and on like mindless droning. I quit King cold turkey and refused to read him for like 20 years. Well, having just read his book on writing, I have learned that Tommyknockers was written at the peak of his drug and alcohol addiction. He would write all night with cotton in his bleeding nostrils from the cocaine he was fueling himself on. So no wonder Tommyknockers was junk. And that was when his family finally did an intervention, and he cleaned himself up. For me, the drug is coffee. And there is a point where coffee is so unhealthy you can feel it. And yet you often need it to plow through what you're trying to do with  writing.

I heard he was so fucked up  that he doesn't even remember writing Cujo, which is one of my favorites.

Yeah. For me, I didn't start writing UNTIL I stopped drinking! lol

Quoted from Dreamscale Salem's Lot for me was the high point.

Agreed, this is my favorite and King's favorite as well from what I hear.  Also loved The Langoliers.

It never ceases to make my blood run cold.  That one's my favorite.

Salem's Lot had a couple of parts too that made my hair stand up.

Quoted from KevinLenihan My favorite had been a short story in Four Seasons called The Body. A few years after I read that, I was pleased to see it become a film: Stand by Me.

One of my favourite pieces of work by King and, not surprisingly, one of my favourite films as well :)

I also don't think there's any other author with as many novels, novellas and short stories made into films. The more and more we discuss him here, the more I realize what an amazing writer he is.

IMO, some of his best books didn't turn into the best films, but some of his books that were good, but not great were made into amazing films. My faves being The Shining, Shawshank, Misery, Stand By Me and 1408. Disappointments being Hearts In Atlantis, Pet Sematary, Under The Dome, Desperation and Bag Of Bones.

I picked up Dream Catcher today.

Quoted from KevinLenihan I picked up Dream Catcher today.

I remember when it came out, was all excited, bought the novel, etc.  it starts very well  good concept but by the end is a muddled confusing bore fest.

Insomnia I have tried to read twice but never been able to finish. It's hilarious that for some reason I have never read The Shining or seen the film.

I think Ben Affleck is involved with bringing a new version of It out, not sure. A mini series would do it justice.

The Stand mini series looks a bit dated now but holds up ok. I remember watched the 9hrs of it of on video once weekend. Still think that any actor who plays Randy Flagg has to be a black dude. That's how I picture him when I read the book - he's described as the dark man! So he has to be a Negro dude!

Some of my other  faves by Kingy are the JFK one, Under The Dome, Pet Sematary and The Green Mile

Quoted from Grandma Bear I also don't think there's any other author with as many novels, novellas and short stories made into films.

You made me curious! And the internet provideth:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2011/03/11/bond_beats_bront_who_s_the_most_adapted_author_in_cinema.html

In brief:

1. William Shakespeare (831)
2. Anton Chekhov (320)
3. Charles Dickens (300)
…
14. Stephen King (127)

But none of those other losers gave us Maximum Overdrive.

Quoted from KevinLenihan I picked up Dream Catcher today.

Dreamcatcher is King trying to revisit the magic of It, but ultimately failing.

It's still a good book, I enjoyed it.  Better than the movie.

Quoted from Guest Dreamcatcher is King trying to revisit the magic of It, but ultimately failing. It's still a good book, I enjoyed it.  Better than the movie.

But the first hour of the movie is quite good...or great, IMO.

Me and Mr. King share some striking similarities when it comes to the novel craft:

Quoted Text 1) he generally does not plot his novels, and the times he has, it usually does not work out well. He doesn't even go into the story knowing the ending. He believes that plotting leads to characters doing things that are "false".

This I NEVER do.  Plotting takes away the fun of it.  Everything I write, even scripts, is written off-the-hip improvisation 100% of the time.  I never plan anything out with little diagrams and beat sheets or character graphs and storyboards.  

Whenever I write a script/novel, I write it off-the-top-of-my-head first.  Then if I feel it needs a rewrite, I'll just take what I used, build on it and IMO that's pretty much how you should tackle this profession.

Improvisation lends itself to originality at times.  Planning stuff never works for me.

Quoted Text 3) he writes 2000 words a day when on a project. He does one project at a time and does not take breaks. He believes a novel should take no more than 3 months for the first draft.

No more than 3 months, yep.  He's right on that account.  It took me 3 months to write my own first draft for Age of Shadows.  Came in at 418-pages.  I spent 2 months prior to that drawing the characters, landscapes and cities, very badly I might add.

So yeah, 3 months is about as long as it should take.  

HOWEVER!  The second draft is a bitch and takes longer for some unknown reason.  I've only managed 12 chapters in 6 months, which is way below my average.  Then again, I am balancing the novel with screenplays, so...

--------

Weird that me and Mr. King share those similarities.  I thought I was alone, lol.  Good to know other writers share my mind-set, or I share their mind-set, depending on how you perceive things (he's known, I'm not).