There are many ways to get better at writing. One of them is imitation. Have you ever read a book and then, after it was done, wondered how the author stretched such a seemingly simple idea into so many words? Ever wondered why, exactly, it made you feel a certain way?

I have. I'm a big fan of Brandon Sanderson, and after I read his books, I am amazed at how long they are, and at the same time, how good. And I can't help but think: how?!

You can find out. All you need to do is get one of the books that you want to imitate in your writing, and imitate it.

Open it up, open up a document, and start typing. Copy entire chapters. The entire book, if you want to really get into it. It helps. However, there is a certain maximum amount of skill you can gain through simple copying. That part is only the first step of mimicking.

The next step is to write from memory. Glance over a paragraph, wait a few seconds, then attempt to write it down from memory. After that, try doing it with entire chapters. This helps a lot more than copying word by word, as you start to get an idea of how everything flows together.

Lastly, change. Copy the writing again, but do it differently. Each time you do it make small changes. Over time, you'll have something completely different, yet still quite good. For example, where the book might say:

Kelsier held the small, fluttering piece of paper pinched between two fingers. The wind whipped and tore at the paper, but he held firm. The picture was wrong.

You can say:

Rarity held the small, brilliant thought pattern in her magical grasp. It struggled away from her scrutiny, trying to flee back to its crystal, but she held firm. The pattern was wrong.

Two entirely different tones, contexts, and actions, but they're linked. And yes, this is an example from one of my stories. Because it works.

Edit: this is not to say you should use this to write your stories. The line I used in my story is only for the first two sentences, and the rest are entirely original. It's for learning, not actually doing.

Edit 2: Addressing concerns. I do know a fair bit about writing. I am giving advice that has worked. Next, if you say that this is a waste because you're not publishing work produced this way, you're an idiot someone who hasn't actually read this and instead skimmed. This is a writing exercise. Something to do to get better, yes? To those who say blindly copying won't help you get better, I literally said the exact same thing. Yes, there is a limit to what copying can do for you. Yes, you need to write your own stuff. But mimicking can help you, and has helped me. It works. It helps you find a style, a way to write. It helps you find out how elements work together, especially if you follow the advice that says go beyond blind copying.

6096204
I think you need to change it a little more than that. If I ran that through one of those plagiarism algorithms it would get flagged.

6096204

This is dangerous advice, because copying something in this way won't help you understand why it's good. Using this process, you may be able to create sentences that work, but they'll never work as well as possible because they weren't tailor-made for their intended purpose.

Imitation has its place, but it should be techniques that you copy, not words and phrases. When you see writing that strikes you, take it apart into all its little pieces and figure out why the author did what they did. Then take those pieces and techniques and use them to build something of your own.

Mimic, you say?

Brandon Sanderson held a twelve-session class for writing at BYU that I've watched twice now, working on a third. It is AMAZING and has helped me a lot.

The playlist with all of the classes in it

The first 318R class, which then will let you go on from there.

6096204
What you're advocating is called plagiarism. Just sayin'.

6096325
No it's not. You do not publish work produced this way. This is simply a writing exercise to help you get better.

6096204
Eh, this probably won't help many people. If you like reading other works, the chances that your writing style reflects that of your favorites is high. Not because we want to take their works and break them down as mundanely as possible to sound like them. That's called imitation. What you want to do is, like Haycart said a few posts earlier, is to find out why the things that person wrote are so engaging to and interesting to read. When your writing reflects your favorite author(s) works because you understand how their thought process works, it's called being inspired

And even so, after imitating the writing style of your favorite author, what do you gain? The only think you actually know is how to write like them. That's just forging words. Even if you don't publish them like you say in this comment: 6096385 getting in that habit is certainly going to show, as you won't understand how to create sentences, paragraphs and whole plots on your own. It'll just sound jumbled and clunky and unnatural.

If you want my advice, anyone willing to read this far, I'd suggest that you read a lot of your favorite author. Think about why a sentence or a plot point made you feel the way you felt, and then you try to draw that feeling out yourself. That way, you'll understand your own work and why it works while also appealing to an audience of people.

6096385
Copying someone's work isn't a writing exercise. It's theft. If you're not going to use it, it's a waste of time and laptop battery. If you do use it, then it's plagiarism. Either way, this is bad advice.

You seem to have this problem where you don't actually understand how writing works or how to get better at it, but you keep attempting to give advice on it. As I've said before, your ideas are flawed on a fundamental level because of how you're looking at the problem. If you want an example of what I mean by this, let's break down this post.

Your steps are as follows: copy the piece, then copy off of memory, then alter the piece to fit your needs. The problem with this, despite it being the literal definition of plagiarism (regardless of what you say, I refuse to argue with you over the definition of words. You're not the president), is that you are severely misinterpreting how the transfer of knowledge, skill, and information works. You can't just copy a thing and then suddenly be as good as the original creator, because you have no godly idea as to why the thing is good. Like, I can follow a Gordon Ramsey recipe to the letter and come out with an incredible meal, but that does not make me Chef Gordon Ramsey. Copying is not a good way to get better. Inspiration, however, is, but that's a whole other can of worms. If you want to get better at writing, using someone else's piece is certainly a good practice. But copying it isn't going to help you any. You need to analyze the story, figure out what works and what doesn't. You need to be able to identify a story's strengths and weaknesses. Otherwise, you're not going anywhere. You're a gerbil on a wheel.

And I know we've clashed before, and I know from our past experiences that you are going to stubbornly ignore my logic and reasoning, simply knowing within your heart of hearts that you're right and I'm wrong. That is fine. It's fine because I'm not typing this reply for you. You're clearly set in your ways, unlikely to change, and, I simply couldn't care less if you succeed or fail as a writer. No, I'm writing this reply for the new guys. For someone, some kid or something, who wants to start writing because they love stories and the way that writing makes them feel. The new guys who, like me, would come here in search of help, inspiration, and guidance. I won't let you sit here and sabotage fresh faces and rookie writers (inadvertent or not, you're crippling people who might take your advice).

6096204
How to be an unoriginal thief!
Step 1: Follow OP's advice.

It's been said here before, but I'll chip in.

This is terrible advice. It's advocating blind copying, with no knowledge of what made the original work.

As has been said, learn what elements make the original work, and then seek to understand when and where you can apply them to your writing, not the author's. Learn when and where to apply concepts.

Don't blindly copy. Brandon would say the same.

6096445

6096489

Posted to OP:

Addressing concerns. I do know a fair bit about writing. I am giving advice that has worked. Next, if you say that this is a waste because you're not publishing work produced this way, you're an idiot someone who hasn't actually read this and instead skimmed. This is a writing exercise. Something to do to get better, yes? To those who say blindly copying won't help you get better, I literally said the exact same thing. Yes, there is a limit to what copying can do for you. Yes, you need to write your own stuff. But mimicking can help you, and has helped me. It works. It helps you find a style, a way to write. It helps you find out how elements work together, especially if you follow the advice that says go beyond blind copying.

I can't help but notice that every time Lightwavers makes a topic it's always phrased in such a way as to make it sound like a lecture - like he's a professor and we're here to take notes.

6096543
I was under the impression that posts such as this were a form of self-promotion, and discouraged, while the group was open to people asking after specific topics, which could then be replied to by those who had answers, or could provide links to further material.

6096550

Somethin' like that.

This isn't qualitatively different from popular art student exercises that involve creating reproductions of famous historical paintings like the Mona Lisa. It's a well-known kind of writing practice. People in this thread need to un-twist their panties and pay some attention to what the OP is actually saying.

Except the part where Brandon Sanderson is a good author, because that, I disagree with in the strongest of terms.

6096517
So we've finally resorted to name-calling, eh? That's fine, it was an inevitability.

You have a tendency to contradict yourself by virtue of arguing every side of the argument. That way, you can never be wrong (except, of course, you are, to an almost comical degree).

As for not reading, I'll grant you, I did originally skim your post (because my skimming is actually above-average in terms of gleaning details and understanding texts, not to brag). But, out of respect to you and to give you the benefit of the doubt, I sat down and read your entire post, line-by-line. And, let me tell you this: It changes literally nothing about my original comment, nor does it change anything about what I'm going to say next.

You are wrong. You say not to blindly copy, though your first sentence literally tells your readers to do exactly that. That's a contradiction. You do this quite often, because you care so much about being right and people listening to you that you don't stop to think about what it is you're actually saying. And, as for the not reading things, you've got some balls on you for calling me out on that, seeing as you apparently didn't read my comment.

The main crux of what I was saying is that imitation as an exercise does not help if you don't know why a story is good. Imitating does not equal learning, and that's what your advice is trying to suggest. You clearly don't understand how writing works, how to write a good story, or even what you're actually saying, and you should not be giving people advice. Because every piece of advice I've read from you has been bad advice. You've been wrong, or ideologically flawed, or just so full of yourself that you refuse to see the simple, clean truth.

I've got one more point for now, because you're genuinely giving me grey hairs by now, and that point is this phrase:

But mimicking can help you, and has helped me.

This. This is the biggest problem with your general way of arguing, and this problem is two-fold.

A) You're making the massive assumption that is has helped you. I don't care much to go through your FiMfiction bibliography (which is the only thing I really have to go off of, mind you), but your library seems... unremarkable. Not bad, but nothing to write home about. I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but, for someone who seems to think he has the keys to the Holy Grail, I can't help but find your library to be underwhelming. So, basically, who are you to tell people how to do their jobs? If your advice is as solid, foolproof, and useful as you claim it is, shouldn't your stories be... better?

B) You're making the even more massive assumption that it is going to help other people. There's a reason that people like me are more self-taught in the art of the written word, and that's because people like you who give advice in these broad strokes fail to take into account how unhelpful that is to most people. At best, it will help inch a very small amount of people forward to a point that they have to figure stuff out by themselves anyway. At worst, it will confuse a significantly larger portion of readers and lead them astray. You need to think about this and how different you might be from the people who need advice and be aware of yourself. There's a reason I don't give people advice on their writing process. It's because I know my process is a mess. It's disorganized, messy, and just ugly to look at. It works for me, sure, but how will it help other people? You seem to ignore that, instead going along the route of "giving a bunch of people advice (which I'm not really qualified to give) and call people who debate with me idiots because I don't have an actual comeback on account of me talking myself into a corner and, effectively, playing myself".

Word of advice: Don't give advice. I've been told several times over that I give great advice, and I still hesitate to give people advice. You know why? Cause I'm not an expert on anything, and I don't want to lead people wrong. You don't seem to have this problem. This is the epitome of the blind leading the blind.

Second word of advice: Don't cheekily call your opponent an idiot in a debate, especially if your opponent is better at arguing than you. It just makes you look childish and immature on top of being wrong.

6096564
Actually, it is different. It's different because copying the Mona Lisa teaches an art student brush strokes and finesse techniques (I don't know the specifics, I'm not an art student). The point is, copying a painting teaches you tangible skills.

Copying a piece of literature, however, teaches you nothing, because literature is far more vague and ambiguous in nature and learning than how to physically move your hand. Learning how to do proper brush strokes can be translated into anything else you do (unlike pressing down keys on a keyboard). Copying a piece of writing, on the other hand, doesn't teach you any skills. All it does is make you spend an hour copying down a dude's book. If you want to learn how to properly write, you have to dissect and analyze.

It's apples and oranges, mate.

6096587
No it's not and you should read some exercise books on creative writing, because I have seen actual, published, for-real get-paid-for-writing authors give the same advice, to get you in the habit of experiencing what writing good prose feels like. Which you clearly don't, going by that angry, multi-page babby rant of yours.

Get that stick out your ass, "mate."

Imitation
Why you should copy other writers
Creative Writing Exercises for Imitation

Many well-known writers have described starting out by literally copying pages written by writers they admired. Since copying requires more action than reading, your mind and body will be more actively engaged with the work you are studying than if you simply read it.

Imitation as Inspiration: An Exercise for Writers

And that's literally just the first four results on Google. I personally like the "Imitation as Inspiration" article, I think it elaborates on the idea conveyed in the OP particularly well.

6096592
Calm down, mate. (I was saying mate before to be friendly, but now, it's entirely, 100% sarcastic). Few things.

Just because you've seen some actual, published, for-real get-paid-for-writing authors give the same advice doesn't mean it's good advice. Just because you get a thing published doesn't make you a good writer (For examples, see Stephanie Meyer and E.L. James).

I don't really quite see why you're so peeved, because my "angry, multi-page babby rant" was in no way directed to you. For your comment, I simply voiced how I disagreed. If you can't deal with that, maybe it's you with the stick up your ass. Mate.

I notice you say I'm wrong but don't tell me how I'm wrong and instead go into petty insults. That says to me that I'm actually totally correct, you have no comeback, and you're just seeing red because I dared to disagree with you in a thread. So maybe you should take a few steps and have a sip of some calming tea, mate.

You can't really have good prose in a rant, by nature of what a rant is, so I don't know how you're judging my prose based off of my "rant". Don't assume, mate, you know what they say about that.

Can't really cosign on your word choice of "rant", because rant implies I'm going off wildly with no rhyme or reason. Truth be told, I simply said what was on my mind in a fairly organized way. So, maybe you should practice more accurate word choice mate.

You dissing my prose is irrelevant because I never said anything about his prose. I mentioned how poor the advice is, how ill-advised it would be to follow said advice, and, hell, I even said that I don't like giving people advice because I'm aware of my own flaws. So coming after my prose (or lack thereof) doesn't make a whole lot of sense, m8.

Finally, I think my prose is pretty damn good, and I don't appreciate your saying otherwise. Why'd you have to take it there, mate, when I'm just trying to have a civil conversation?

6096605

I notice you say I'm wrong but don't tell me how I'm wrong and instead go into petty insults.

See above. Four links to websites with writing exercises and advice that explain why you're wrong, and in much greater detail than I'm willing to give here. It's literally a Writing 101 level student exercise, so please get over yourself.

And the part that bothers me is how incredibly full of yourself you sound while saying something factually wrong. Published, commercial authors don't know what they're talking about - but Mr. Fanfiction here? He does, oh yes.

6096609
A) Those links weren't in the reply you sent to me, so I didn't see them
B) If you think I'm full of myself because I disagree with you, maybe you've got bigger problems than what to do with a story
C) Never said they don't know what they're talking about. All I said was publication does not mean that they do know what they're talking about. It's not instant validation of their opinions
D) I don't need to be an expert to disagree with someone. My favorite analogy is the one of the helicopter: I am not a helicopter pilot. I've never flown a helicopter in my life. Hell, I've never even read a book on the matter. But, if I saw a helicopter on fire and stuck in a tree, I can look at that pilot and confidently say that the dude fucked up.
E) For all this talk about how angry and ranty I am, you seem to be the one who's throwing out insults and disrespect.
F) If I don't know what I'm talking about because I'm not a published author, doesn't that mean you know even less because you have no stories to your name?
G) I wasn't angry before. Now, I'm a bit miffed. I'm officially going to walk away from my keyboard. The high blood pressure just isn't worth it.

6096619

F) If I don't know what I'm talking about because I'm not a published author, doesn't that mean you know even less because you have no stories to your name?

No, because unless you can demonstrate how I'm arguing entirely from a position of ignorance, this actually is apples and oranges.

6096619

D) I don't need to be an expert to disagree with someone. My favorite analogy is the one of the helicopter: I am not a helicopter pilot. I've never flown a helicopter in my life. Hell, I've never even read a book on the matter. But, if I saw a helicopter on fire and stuck in a tree, I can look at that pilot and confidently say that the dude fucked up.

One sentence later...

F) If I don't know what I'm talking about because I'm not a published author, doesn't that mean you know even less because you have no stories to your name?

You can't make this up, folks!

Being a writer, and being an artist (or as I prefer to call myself, storyteller and drawing person :D ) I can easily see where the OP is coming from, and how the exercise works. Maybe because my stick doesn't have leaves and branches blocking the view? Who knows? This advice is about writing PROSE, not stories. To put in in drawing terms, it's about learning how to hold the pencil and not how to draw a sketch. It teaches your brain to switch to a way of talking and describing that is unlike your own, a valuable and needed tool for any writer. You don't NEED to know how or why it works because this is almost like putting on an accent. Again, it works the same way in drawing. You copy stuff, and then develop your own style through constant and long practice.

So yeah. It's a very, very different thing than writing a STORY.

Maybe you should put some time into actual reading and less skimming.

6096671

To put in in drawing terms, it's about learning how to hold the pencil and not how to draw a sketch. It teaches your brain to switch to a way of talking and describing that is unlike your own, a valuable and needed tool for any writer. You don't NEED to know how or why it works because this is almost like putting on an accent. Again, it works the same way in drawing. You copy stuff, and then develop your own style through constant and long practice.

And that's the long and short of it, really. It's an exercise for developing your prose and learning how to write them words good. It's not a lesson about story composition, it's the literary equivalent to weightlifting. Develop good style by getting into the habit of writing passages of text that have good style.

6096204

6096325

6096564

6096671
Replying to the seemingly four biggest responses in this comment chain (and I probably missed a few):

This kind of advice is what Stephen King gave in his On Writing book, because it does help; if marginally. The thing is, no one gets anywhere with writing if they haven't read writing. You can't just pick up a pen or open up a document and begin. You simply can't. You can have the basics of grammar and plot and structure and character development down, but you won't get anywhere without practice and trial and error.

Have you seen that one movie where a holed-up writer gets this African-American youth to copy out a novel on a typewriter, shouting things like "PUNCH THE KEYS FOR GOD'S SAKE?" That is what OP is describing. It's not plagiarism, it's an exercise. If you want to go further with the analogy, it's more-or-less a warm-up to the actual deal.

When you copy verbatim what an author is written, you unconsciously begin to look at it and figure out patterns that make it strong, provided you know that what you're copying is writing. Eventually something will click and you'll go "Oh, that's how he did it." This is because writing is not a textbook kind of lesson; you don't learn it from simply reading and taking notes. You learn through experience, even seemingly cheating experience. You learn through writing of any sort. Good, bad, bland, dead, whatever. So long as you're writing something, sooner or later you will learn.

I will admit, though, that copying word-for-word is not the strongest of exercises meant to improve your craft. I tend not to write for the sake of exercise so much as the sake for storytelling (not that I'm any good at that, either). If you think that mimicking works, go ahead and try it. Just be sure to brush up and incorporate your style in the end.

6096751

I will admit, though, that copying word-for-word is not the strongest of exercises meant to improve your craft.

Yeah, it's pretty much a beginner-level practice technique. Then again, the vast majority of young writers on this site are beginner level, so they can probably still profit from it in some measureable way.

6096204I think that's called plagiarism?

6096751
6096765

Yes, it's very much a beginner-level exercise, and a useful one.

Personally, what I prefer to do is more along the lines of a pastiche, that is, take an author and write an original story in imitation of their style, possibly of a specific story if it has an especially distinctive style. I have one that I've published on the site which is a pastiche of Daniel Keyes' "Flowers for Algernon", and was a very valuable writing exercise for me in the techniques of isolating perspective and managing exposition.

I'm currently working on one which is a pastiche of Robert Anton Wilson, and extremely challenging given the way he constantly breaks common writing conventions. Others in the works include a Walt Whitman poem, and stories in the style of Irving Welsh, Michael Moorcock, and Douglas Adams. With each one, I'm learning something new which I can eventually apply to my own style of writing.

6096895
Ah, Flowers for Algernon. I'll have to give your story a read sometime in the near future, then.