Over-Generalized Advice

[dinuriel]

Is there any piece of common writing advice that you just can't bring yourself to agree with, whether it be because it conflicts with your writing style, or because you just don't find that the text flows when said advice has been put to use, or any other reason?

Throwing this up here because a lot of the "how to write" things I've come across lately seem to agree on a lot of things, which disturbs me somewhat--not that they're saying anything to offend me personally, but I have a fundamental problem with the idea that there can be right and wrong ways to write.

[Stacy]

"Don't start with your character waking up."

That's how Valley started. It fit with the whole themes and ideas of the story, so screw stupid rules.

"Always have strong active characters."

Because humans are never weak. Because there's not a story in weakness. Because reading about a character who changes and grows and is weak at points and grows stronger isn't as emotionally engaging as reading about one who starts out and stays strong and never has problems dealing with the events of the story.

"No alliteration. Alliteration is bad."

I like beauty and rhythm in my sentences. And I imagine it would be pretty hard to make sure you never wrote a sentence in which similar sounds appeared. I mean - see, right there I committed the horrible sin with "sentence" and "similar sounds".

"No adverbs."

Personally (lol, I kill me) I did see an improvement in my writing when I went through and slashed all the words ending in -ly. But then I read Psycho, and learned from the master. Oh, Robert Bloch did have the occasional clumsy adverb. But sometimes, sometimes they worked.

So I'm experimenting now with bringing some back in. Like at the end of the intro to 10.04. And if you ask me, they work there and the passage wouldn't be the same without them.

I'm sure I will think of more later, but now I need to go write my essay post on art as experience.

[dinuriel]

I hate to apply the term "rules" to any form of art. It makes it seem so... objective and formulaic. Kind of like math. Not that there's anything wrong with math, but I don't think many people express emotion through equations.

Valley's beginning definitely worked. It fit in the context of the story and was executed very well, regardless of what any "How to write" article says about waking openings in general.

Definitely agree with you about characters. Most people aren't born strong and stay strong in spite of whatever life throws at them. We all have our weak moments, and characters are no exception. I suppose it's possible that the phrasing "strong character" might mean "strongly-written character", in which case I can agree, but in terms of inner strength, not every character is going to have it.

Nothing wrong with alliteration as a stylistic device, and you're awesome at incorporating those poetic elements into your prose, Stacy.

Adverbs... yeah, I'm trying to lay off the adverbs too, but I don't see anything wrong with the occasional well-placed one. Sure, they're a bit extraneous a lot of the time, but they still exist for a reason

I think the biggest thing for me personally is with dialogue tags. The general consensus these days seems to be "Avoid them where you can--and if you have to use them, use weak ones". I can agree with the first part--they can interrupt the flow, at least with my own writing style--but when they have to be used, give me something like a "snapped" or a "muttered" or a "consented" over a "said" any day.

That just may be symptomatic of my upbringing and rebellion against said upbringing, though. The Christian private school I attended in elementary and junior high used to assign book reports every month, but we were only allowed books from the school library, most of which were written by people who didn't actually identify--at least not primarily--as writers: pastors, missionaries, theologians, etc. They were also published by religious publishing houses who seemed more interested in converting people than entertaining them. As a result, almost any given book in that library included passages like this:

"You should have come to church with us, dear," she said.

"Honey, I had a lot of work to do," he said.

"It could have waited a couple hours," she said.

"But now I can spend more time with you and the kids," he said.

"I don't know; we have been seeing some signs of the end times," she said.

So... yeaaaaah. "Said"s make my brain try to ram itself out of my skull. By the time I hit junior high, I'd developed a practice of reading with a stress ball in hand. Every time I saw a "said" dialogue tag, I'd strengthen my grip, and every time I saw a different tag or a bit of dialogue without a tag, I'd ease it; if it got to the point where I couldn't squeeze any further, I'd just give up on the book.

Aaaand there are a few more, I'm sure, but I'm trying to cut back to one rant a day

[pinkfiend1]

You see I always taught that "said"s were bad and that you shouldn't really use more than in a page or soemthing like that. It was one of the reasons I could never do dialogue. But then reading a lot of "said"s drives me batty as well dinuriel.
I also taught that descriptions were good, we had a few assignments in English on writing a descriptive piece,- a snapshot of something you saw out of a train window. Or people waiting at the bus stop so we could out own Canterbury tale on one of them.

I guess everyone gets taught different things, and "the rules" seem to change on a whim.

[thelunarfox]

Pink, I was taught the same as you. I was taught "said" was bad and that we should find alternate ways of saying "said" to make it interesting. I fall in the middle for the most part. I use said when I need it to be clear. Otherwise, I don't bother with dialog tags.

But there are some tags that really annoy the crap outta me: "consented" "agree" "asked" "argued". Seriously? Most of those words just repeating what's in the dialog.

"'Are you hurt?' he asked." Did he really ask that? Really? Am I asking this?

"'You are right,' she consented." Again, not necessary. By verbally agreeing, you don't have to tell me again she agreed.

"'Hello,' she greeted." I think I can rest my case here, lol.

That's the only time it gets in my way and makes me roll my eyes. I pretty much try to skip over dialog tags while reading to avoid this all together.

[celebkiriedhel]

I pretty much ignore most rules. I have writing books I've read, and the turkey city lexicon and so on - and most of them I can understand that an over-use would be bad. But I think the only rules that I've ever agreed to without hesitation are:

1. Write what's in your heart,
2. Write so that other people can understand what's in your heart,
3. Go where the writing takes you, despite your fear.
4. All other rules are optional.

I find abiding by those rules are hard enough without getting into all the arbitrary ones.

So you get the random word rules. Don't use adverbs - i.e. don't over-use adverbs.
Not using an adverb when a sentence needs it makes the sentence lose power.

Use Said, don't use said - I think that it shows how absolute that sort of advice is, by the simple fact that they can't agree themselves!

I think putting those sort of restrictions on your writing for a time can teach you new things - but then stuff it! Write and edit how you feel the writing works.

I think the biggest fallacy I've ever heard is the one that says you have to be talented to be a writer. That's a load of bullsh*t.

Everyone has a story to tell, and all the rest is about finding your voice. The ones that are writers are because they've found it. That's all. And then they keep writing until it becomes second nature.

And ok - I'll get off my soap box now.

[Stacy]

Nov 8, 2010 23:05:24 GMT -5 @celebkiriedhel said:

I pretty much ignore most rules. I have writing books I've read, and the turkey city lexicon and so on - and most of them I can understand that an over-use would be bad. But I think the only rules that I've ever agreed to without hesitation are:

1. Write what's in your heart,
2. Write so that other people can understand what's in your heart,
3. Go where the writing takes you, despite your fear.
4. All other rules are optional.

I find abiding by those rules are hard enough without getting into all the arbitrary ones.

So you get the random word rules. Don't use adverbs - i.e. don't over-use adverbs.
Not using an adverb when a sentence needs it makes the sentence lose power.

Use Said, don't use said - I think that it shows how absolute that sort of advice is, by the simple fact that they can't agree themselves!

I think putting those sort of restrictions on your writing for a time can teach you new things - but then stuff it! Write and edit how you feel the writing works.

I think the biggest fallacy I've ever heard is the one that says you have to be talented to be a writer. That's a load of bullsh*t.

Everyone has a story to tell, and all the rest is about finding your voice. The ones that are writers are because they've found it. That's all. And then they keep writing until it becomes second nature.

And ok - I'll get off my soap box now.

You're full of awesome and win.

[dinuriel]

Pink: I was never really taught anything about creative writing and what was "good" and "bad". I grew up in an anti-artsy place and having creative hobbies was about as socially acceptable as being a drug addict (my mother always hastily changes the subject when people ask about my major and asks me every month or so if I've decided to switch to sciences yet), so the only writing we ever did in school was of the essay variety

I think the accepted "rules" at any given time go in cycles. The current "rules" seem to have a lot to do with Stephen King's "On Writing". I have nothing against King--he's not a personal favorite of mine, but you can't deny that the man has talent and he's made the most of it--but there's never going to be a method that works for everyone and I wish people would stop trying to insist that there is.

Lunar: I try to avoid dialogue tags wherever I can too. I can see your point about them overstating the dialogue and that's a valid concern to bear in mind while writing. But yeah, at the end of the day, if a dialogue tag is absolutely necessary in order to maintain the flow, I'm willing to use pretty much anything but "said". I often wonder if the out-there nature of some of my tags bothers people, but I figure that at the end of the day, the only person who is absolutely guaranteed to read any given thing I write is me, and "said"s give me twitching fits, so I avoid them at all costs

Kiri: That's pretty much my philosophy too. It might not hurt to have some "guidelines" when you're just starting out (I hesitate to call them actual "rules"), but after you learn what works for you, just write whatever way comes naturally.

[laura]

Ha, I had to look up some rules to see if I agree with them or not, lol! I do read this kind of thing, from time to time, but then I kind of tend to forget it and let it just work there in the back of my brain. I think that's probably the best way to approach any kind of creative "rules".

I'll vouch for the "said" rule. I do also tend to avoid them, if I can. The writing usually comes across stronger and more vivid if instead of using a tag, you pair the dialogue with a gesture or action. But you can't always do that either, so if I'm going to use a dialogue tag, it'll be said/says. They're useful *because* they're so frequently used and boring. They *are* bland, and they're supposed to be, because then they read invisible. They're supposed to be inconspicuous to the reader.

I rarely use a dialogue tag other than said/says. Very occasionally, I might use a shout, or a whisper, or something like that. The worst thing you can do though is pair up a frilly dialogue tag with an adverb, lol! "Don't do that," she reprimanded pompously

I can't really think of any rules I don't at least see the point of why they're a rule in the first place. Guess I'm not a rebel, lol!

But maybe the "don't write in second-person" rule. I like second-person, dammit! lol! I always get told off when I use it though.

[blackdaisies]

LOL I feel out of my league here. Not in a bad way, this thread was really interesting for me.

I personally don't care about "rules" when reading work. It's not like I have a check list beside me when I'm absorbed in a story marking off all the times a writer's used an adverb badly, or said "said" too much. Some people can be technically great writers... but I'm in it mostly for the story, not how awesome they are at grammar and following the "correct" code of writing.

I'm making these observations as a reader because my work is more like a comic book and though I do try to at least be grammatically correct, I don't really follow any set of rules other than my own. It needs to work for me first. I will say that I'm glad I'm writing script style. I have an awful time deciding how to break up dialogue. I'd probably be one of those that use "said" too much.

[dinuriel]

Nothing wrong with second-person! Actually, that reminds me of another "rule" I've been breaking recently--the "If you use first-person, keep the same narrator throughout the entire text" rule. One of my novels is told in several first-person POVs, a couple of different ones per chapter separated by just an asterisk. I figure that particular work needs both the personal touch of the first-person and the enriched detail of the multiple POVs, so as long as the reader can get a sense of who's speaking right off the bat, then why not?

As for the "said" rule, I can understand the logic behind it, but that doesn't do anything for my aversion to the word. I've just seen it so thoroughly overused by people who wrote without the true intention of actually writing and never bothered to spice things up that it raises a flag in my brain. I don't have much a problem with seeing it in texts now (though to me, the word is still not as invisible as the author intends), since I'm out of grade school and I get to pick my own reading material, but the thought of a "said" dialogue tag in my own work makes me just as physically ill as the thought of a fancy-pants dialogue tag+adverb combo.

But for most of the conventions, I don't have a problem with them per se--I just have a problem with the fact that these conventions being presented as "rules". The idea of that just makes art seem so elitist and structured, while it is by its very nature free and personal.

[dinuriel]

Sorry Mela--you slipped a stealth-comment past while I was typing up my last one

I fully agree. Certain stylistic decisions can enhance a story, but if one is a technically great writer but doesn't have a great story in the first place, how can anyone expect to be entertained? It would be like trying to have a conversation with someone who got three hours of sleep the previous night and hasn't had their coffee yet--there's a physical presence there, but you're not going to get much out of the exchange.

But yeah, I don't think anyone should feel obliged to follow any rules set forth by someone who doesn't know them from Adam. Some of them might work as guidelines, but they aren't hard and fast and they aren't a package deal, no matter how they might be treated as such.

You know I love your story, and since I'm currently enrolled in a playwriting class, I have a newfound appreciation for how difficult and complex the script style can really be. You do it brilliantly

And what league? There are no leagues--we're all just writers having a discussion about writing

[thelunarfox]

Nov 9, 2010 12:14:26 GMT -5 blackdaisies said:

LOL I feel out of my league here. Not in a bad way, this thread was really interesting for me.

Actually, I used to feel out of my league here too when I first poked in. It was part of why I held off for a bit before joining. But please continue to add to the conversation. We know what we like as readers, so that's an important view point. And most time when I'm talking about writing, I'm more talking about my view point as a reader than a writer.


I know the point of the thread is to look at over-generalized advice that doesn't fit everyone, but I'd love to share this piece of over-generalized advice I happened across again that I think is very true. It's always in the back of my mind, and is something I learned actually a long time ago but never thought about in terms of writing.

The main rule of writing is that if you do it with enough assurance and confidence, you're allowed to do whatever you like. (That may be a rule for life as well as for writing. But it's definitely true for writing.) So write your story as it needs to be written. Write it ­honestly, and tell it as best you can. I'm not sure that there are any other rules. Not ones that matter.

-Neil Gaiman

Basically, you can do anything you'd like to do so long as you do it with confidence and you do it honestly. I think that there is a bond of trust between the reader and writer that must be earned, and once you've got that in however your manage to do it, they'll forgive you for just about anything. *thinks of Misery for some reason* Huh!

[laura]

Nov 9, 2010 12:22:41 GMT -5 dinuriel said:

Nothing wrong with second-person! Actually, that reminds me of another "rule" I've been breaking recently--the "If you use first-person, keep the same narrator throughout the entire text" rule. One of my novels is told in several first-person POVs, a couple of different ones per chapter separated by just an asterisk. I figure that particular work needs both the personal touch of the first-person and the enriched detail of the multiple POVs, so as long as the reader can get a sense of who's speaking right off the bat, then why not?

Well I'm breaking that one too then, lol! My novel has two alternating first-person narrators, and I make no apologies for them! I've been told by many people not to attempt it, especially as a first novel.

There's another thing though, I've heard all sorts of rules on what I should or shouldn't attempt as a first novel. Especially the alternating first-person thing. A lot of people I've talked to about this act like I'm about to tackle a land mine, lol! I just couldn't see myself telling this story any other way.

People like to assume that for a first novel you should try a simple, straightforward, chronological, third-person narrative. Or at least, the people I run into seem to assume that. I think that's bunk though. Why not attempt something challenging? What if it actually works? Or am I just the kind who likes to jump into the deep end and pray I can tread water? lol!

Oh, another rule I don't like - women can't write a male narrator, and men can't write a woman. I've seen both done well. (Not that I claim to be one of those cases, though I do attempt it quite often, lol!) But I know it can, and has been done.

[pinkfiend1]

I know Sidney Sheldon classic example of a man who can write women to perfection, consistantly. In fact I tend to prefer his female characters to his male, even in the lead spot. J.K Rowling of course wrote Harry Potter to perfection as well.
As for rules isn't there the saying that "rules are meant to be broken".
Switching between narrators is a good thing in the most part in my opinion because then you can a proper feel on the other characters, and if you're telling a story based in different parts of the world or something it can be the only way as thrid person doesn't necessarily always work.
Different stories call for different approaches, and different writers have different styles, and can write better in their own unique style, and in a lot of cases if they break out of their mould it doesn't go well.

[mdpthatsme]

I usually write in voice. The character's voice, not always my own. It comes a time when my mother has to prove me to be insane when I say that "I don't always agree with my characters, but I have to write their views nonetheless." This is when my mother looks around for help.

I believe...coming from a person with no experience in hearing what an agent thinks about my work...that there shouldn't be rules on one's writing style. Because a writer's style is what makes their work unique. It's what keeps readers coming back. Without the certain appeal of the style sometimes suspense isn't delivered correctly.

I could never write the same appeal of mystery and thrill as Stacy with In the Valley of the Sun, or the suspense of Ruin, Lunar. It's just not in me. [shrug] I wish that the market wasn't graded on if you follow their rules or not because there's soooo many great writers out there and funny enough most of them are apart of this forum.

If I had to give advice on how to write a piece...which I might add would take me down a long tunnel path filled with alligators...I would say (or type) to follow your instincts, emotions, feelings (both mentally and physically), and experiences rather they be real or fantasy. Mine are mostly (echo: mostly) fantasy.

[dinuriel]

Laura: I honestly can't imagine writing an entire novel from the point of view of a single character. I know it's been done, and I know it's been done well, but with the way I approach individual scenes as a writer, I take a lot of consideration into whose POV will most likely invoke the reaction I'm aiming for and it's not always going to be the main character's or even a major character's.

Personally, I don't see much sense in approaching a first novel any differently than a second or a fifth or a sixty-eighth. Like you said, why not try something challenging? And really, your first novel might not end up being your most notable work, but it's still the one that paves the way for the rest of your literary career, so just do what works for you

And absolutely women can write male narrators and men can write female narrators! Whoever says otherwise must be missing out on several great reads.

Pink: I agree about the narrators. I sometimes feel that I never really "know" a character until I've written from their POV, whether it be first-person or third-person.

And exactly, every writer has a different style and every story calls for a different approach. Personally, I don't think I would have ever become interested in literature at all if every piece by every author was written according to the same, stringent structure.

MDP: My mother does that too! I'm pretty sure my relatives have a pool going on about the date when I'll plunge into total insanity

I also have no idea what an agent would think of my work. I don't think my own stuff is all that well-done, especially my sim stories, so I do worry about what agents will think of my manuscripts... but at the same time, I don't feel like I should risk compromising my writing style just to publish a book and make some money and maybe avoid working various part-time jobs to make ends meet. It's a shame that the market these days seems to be about the structural "rules", for sure; there are so many ways to write, and it is my naive and idealistic hope that the public will one day want to broaden their horizons. No one else could write Valley and 10 like Stacy does, and no one else could write Ruin like Lunar does, and no one else could write The Gang like you do

That's probably the only advice I could give too, or at least without feeling like a hypocrite about giving it--go with your instincts and write what feels right. Once you get to know your characters and your world and your story, you just... know.

[Stacy]

Okay. So I had this long post written out, and then CHROME crashed on me. Apparently it does not like Blogger - I was trying to look at the comments on someone's blog on there.

So, to sum up. Sigh.

Dinuriel - Awww, thank you.

Mela - You are NOT out of your league here! And you should post more. And you should make a thread for your story in the Stories forum so everyone can read it. And I will be reading your replies to my comment on your LJ soon, and I really appreciate them - even if it's you cussing me out, lol. If so, I imagine I needed it.

And I think everyone here agrees with you. No - I know everyone here agrees with you. First rule of the VSS Prose Fight Club - there are no rules.

mdp - Awww, thank you. And yeah - we all have our own styles. I know I don't have romance or a happy ending in me, lol.

Okay. Off to start on 10.08.

Oh, and yeah - I've decided that I am perfectly okay with publishing my stuff for free on my little blog for the rest of my life. I have a great job to pay the bills with - which I got a raise earlier this year! I think I'm making $11.25 an hour now? I don't know - I never open the deposit slip thing. Anyway - I have shelter and food and clothing and a computer and an internet connection, and I love my job and it's a small local company with ethical caring owners who treat the employees like family. So yeah - I'm good on that front.

I'd much much rather write what I want to write and share it with a few people (which hey, Valley has had about 1300-1400 readers, judging from the number of times Ending has been viewed) than have to worry about agents and editors and writing to the market and all that.

Which I'm not dissing people who do want that - I used to too, just a few months ago. It's only in the last couple of months that I've let go of that dream.

*rereads* *realizes she should probably let go of the dream of being friends with all of Valley's readers too*

It's like WoW. WoW is really fun and addictive. But then you become class officer. Hey, it's still fun!

But then you become raid officer. And it becomes a job. And people don't show up to the raids you schedule because they don't want to do new hard stuff. They want to do the loot pinata bosses, sure - those raids have a waiting list. But the new stuff, where you'll wipe a lot and learn from your mistakes and keep rezzing and repairing until you bring the new boss down by the skin of your teeth - which is the most fun the game can offer to you personally - that's too hard. Too risky.

So you log out in front of SSC and don't log in for almost a year.

Writing, for me, is like a solo progression raid. I don't have to depend on 24 other people wanting to show up and put effort into it and solve problems and make a lot of mistakes and pay high repair bills. And I can do it on my own time.

And mainstream publishing is kind of like a mid level raiding guild (Never got into the hardcore ones, what with having a 40 hour a week first shift job) - publishing houses tend to want the books they know will give them loot. And I will have to deal with that, and I will burn out and give up.

And writing is not raiding. Writing is life.

[Stacy]

So I'm writing a post in my art as experience thread, and I wanted to share this bit in this thread.

Genuine art cannot be created by anyone who merely follows standard artistic rules. A genius is required, that is, a person who creates original art without concern for rules.

Schopenhauer's Aesthetics

I declare you all to be geniuses.

And err - hey, I can write 10.08 all tomorrow night if I want! I'm off Thursday!

And...next week I'm off all week! Whoo vacation!

[blackdaisies]

Hehe, thanks guys for making me not feel too out of my league here.

I'm still trying to understand some of these rules. It's not okay to use adverbs? What? Maybe I'm more out of it than I thought I was. But yeah, I totally appreciate that Neil Gaiman quote, mostly because I love his works so much and I never got the sense from them that he had to follow any set rules of writing creatively.

Stacy, I also appreciate your WoW analogy. WoW was fun until stupid guild politics ruined it. If writing becomes "work" like that, you definitely lose something.