Devon Robbins's picture
Devon Robbins from Utah is reading The Least Of My Scars by Stephen Graham Jones July 13, 2012 - 5:32pm

Here are some tips from day two of Thrillerfest from Lee Child.

http://www.writersdigest.com/whats-new/lee-child-debunks-the-biggest-writing-myths?et_mid=567850&rid=233694476

 

I agree with the guy. Too many aspiring authors think they need to learn and follow all these guidelines to good. Hubert Selby Jr. threw every rule out the window, and still achieved greatness. The last story in Last Exit To Brooklyn had like six pages that were in all caps, two hundred word sentences, and forward slashes instead of apostrophies.

 

I think people should just write what they want. Like Bukowski did.

ReneeAPickup's picture
Class Facilitator
ReneeAPickup from Southern California is reading Wanderers by Chuck Wendig July 13, 2012 - 5:36pm

Sure. But most of us also want to get better. So if a lot of people are telling you that a scene needs to be broken down and "shown" you may want to listen. There are plenty of times "telling" works, but there are plenty of times it doesn't. It's about balancing it correctly.

Jose F. Diaz's picture
Jose F. Diaz from Boston is reading Wolf Hall by Hilary Mantel July 13, 2012 - 5:50pm

I'm still in the arena of learn all the rules first and then you can go and do whatever the hell you want. If you don't know one style from another you may just be limiting yourself and pissing up-stream.

Charles's picture
Charles from Portland is reading Mongrels by Stephen Graham Jones July 13, 2012 - 5:51pm

I agree with the guy. Too many aspiring authors think they need to learn and follow all these guidelines to good. Hubert Selby Jr. threw every rule out the window, and still achieved greatness. The last story in Last Exit To Brooklyn had like six pages that were in all caps, two hundred word sentences, and forward slashes instead of apostrophies.

Right, and the Hunger Games has grossed like a kajillion sales. Doesn't mean it's worth using as toilet paper.

bryanhowie's picture
bryanhowie from FW, ID is reading East of Eden. Steinbeck is FUCKING AMAZING. July 13, 2012 - 6:00pm

Well, you'd get papercuts on your butt.  That paper is too hard.  I'd probably read it, though.

Devon Robbins's picture
Devon Robbins from Utah is reading The Least Of My Scars by Stephen Graham Jones July 13, 2012 - 6:11pm

@SparrowStark - I totally agree. I've read the rules and took what I need from them to fit my style of writing. I think style is a huge part the whole thing. I just think that a lot of people build a wall around themselves with the "tricks" 

Devon Robbins's picture
Devon Robbins from Utah is reading The Least Of My Scars by Stephen Graham Jones July 13, 2012 - 6:11pm

@SparrowStark - I totally agree. I've read the rules and took what I need from them to fit my style of writing. I think style is a huge part the whole thing. I just think that a lot of people build a wall around themselves with the "tricks" 

Fylh's picture
Fylh from from from is reading is from is reading is reading is reading reading is reading July 14, 2012 - 1:29am

I think people should just write what they want. Like Bukowski did.

Hahaha, aww, and you almost had me agreeing with you.

Bradley Sands's picture
Bradley Sands from Boston is reading Greil Marcus's The History of Rock 'N' Roll in Ten Songs July 14, 2012 - 1:42am

There's no reason to ever have someone look in the mirror just for the sake of describing their appearance if in something written in third person. And doing it in first person is just bad writing unless something else about looking in the mirror makes the action significant. There are many times when telling is more appropriate, but showing should be used more often.

Devon Robbins's picture
Devon Robbins from Utah is reading The Least Of My Scars by Stephen Graham Jones July 14, 2012 - 7:00am

No Bukowski for you? 

Fylh's picture
Fylh from from from is reading is from is reading is reading is reading reading is reading July 14, 2012 - 7:19am

I am very, very much not a fan of Bukowski. Not many writers can provoke such a feeling of embarrassed but unconcealed disgust in me. Cue someone calling me a snob, and me agreeing with them, etc, and some blithely uncomprehending but good-natured person asking me "Not even his poetry?"

No, not even his poetry. Especially not his poetry. I went through my Bukowski phase. It consisted of reading all the letters collected by, I think, Virgin Books that one year, several books of stories (including The Most Beautiful Woman in Town, which was the least bad) and various poetry collections. What did I learn? I learned that Bukowski's poetry appealed exactly to the kind of reader I wasn't, and that Bukowski's letters were entertaining but ultimately of less interest than their publication might suggest, and that his stories were not "honest" or "raw" but simply little excursions into a wonderful forest of outright stupidity. Pulp, the novel he wrote before he died, was occasionally funny but more often depressing because when he dedicated it to bad writing, I have a suspicion there was an element of disingenuousness about it.

jyh's picture
jyh from VA is reading whatever he feels like July 14, 2012 - 8:40am

little excursions into a wonderful forest of outright stupidity

lol

Michael J. Riser's picture
Michael J. Riser from CA, TX, Japan, back to CA is reading The Tyrant - Michael Cisco, The Devil Takes You Home - Gabino Iglesias July 14, 2012 - 8:54am

I think in order to break the rules, you have to learn them first. Otherwise you're not going to understand the true value in breaking them in any given instance. Most people you see who want to throw the rules out the window before they've really come to grips with them are shitty writers who don't produce anything worth reading, thinking they'll be the next <whoever> just because they threw caution to the wind. That's too easy. Breaking the rules is only a good thing in the hands of someone who knows the true significance of what a broken rule can accomplish.

Flaminia Ferina's picture
Flaminia Ferina from Umbria is reading stuff July 14, 2012 - 8:55am

“For me the end of a book is just as exciting as it is for a reader,” he said.

This. All the time.

Rules can help, but also enslave. Like all commodities.

jyh's picture
jyh from VA is reading whatever he feels like July 14, 2012 - 9:04am

I think in order to break the rules, you have to learn them first.

People say this a lot.  I never know what they mean by "the rules."  Elementary English?  Like subject object verb?

bryanhowie's picture
bryanhowie from FW, ID is reading East of Eden. Steinbeck is FUCKING AMAZING. July 14, 2012 - 9:11am

I think it's like murder: once you learn you shouldn't kill people, practice not killing people, and understand why you shouldn't kill people - then you're free to kill people.  Right?

avery of the dead's picture
avery of the dead from Kentucky is reading Cipher Sisters July 14, 2012 - 9:56am

@Howie - yes.

jyh's picture
jyh from VA is reading whatever he feels like July 14, 2012 - 11:07am

Writing = Murder

true, if you're good enough

also true if you're bad enough

Bradley Sands's picture
Bradley Sands from Boston is reading Greil Marcus's The History of Rock 'N' Roll in Ten Songs July 14, 2012 - 11:39am

I think in order to break the rules, you have to learn them first.

I think that statement only really applies to the rules of grammar.

ReneeAPickup's picture
Class Facilitator
ReneeAPickup from Southern California is reading Wanderers by Chuck Wendig July 14, 2012 - 11:47am

I think I agree with Bradley. "Show, don't tell" isn't even a rule, it's just an oft given piece of advice. If you showed, rather than told every last detail of your stories they would be un-fucking-readable.

And another person learns that Fylh is an unabashed, unashamed literary snob. Things just keep coming full circle around here. It's like...a comfy familiar place I come to when I don't want any surprises.

R.Moon's picture
R.Moon from The City of Champions is reading The Last Thing He Wanted by Joan Didion; Story Structure Architect by Victoria Lynn Schimdt PH.D; Creating Characters by the editors of Writer's Digest July 14, 2012 - 11:59am

I think in order to break the rules, you have to learn them first. Otherwise you're not going to understand the true value in breaking them in any given instance. Most people you see who want to throw the rules out the window before they've really come to grips with them are shitty writers who don't produce anything worth reading, thinking they'll be the next <whoever> just because they threw caution to the wind. That's too easy. Breaking the rules is only a good thing in the hands of someone who knows the true significance of what a broken rule can accomplish.

-  This is very true. It's like going to the casino, counting cards, but not knowing the rules of the game. In order to break rules, you need to know the rules. It's not necessarily breaking the rules, but bending them. I don't believe any writer 'breaks' the rules, but bends them in order to fit their style. You can do whatever you want, but know that not following those 'rules', to some extent, will leave you high and dry.

People say this a lot.  I never know what they mean by "the rules."  Elementary English?  Like subject object verb?

No, there's a lot more than that. Sentence structure, syntax, correct punctuation, etc... However, coming from J.Y., I believe that you do know the rules and 'bend' them to your specific style.

Here are some 'rules' from Elmore Leonard. These, at the time written, were merely a joke. Follow them, don't follow them, but I think there are some gems in here. For more detail, Elmore has a book written all about this.

"Elmore Leonard started out writing westerns, then turned his talents to crime fiction. One of the most popular and prolific writers of our time, he’s written about two dozen novels, most of them bestsellers, such as Glitz, Get Shorty, Maximum Bob, and Rum Punch.  Unlike most genre writers, however, Leonard is taken seriously by the literary crowd.
What’s Leonard’s secret to being both popular and respectable? Perhaps you’ll find some clues in his 10 tricks for good writing:   

1. Never open a book with weather.
2. Avoid prologues.
3. Never use a verb other than "said" to carry dialogue.
4. Never use an adverb to modify the verb "said”…he admonished gravely.
5. Keep your exclamation points under control. You are allowed no more than two or three per 6.100,000 words of prose.
7. Never use the words "suddenly" or "all hell broke loose."
8. Use regional dialect, patois, sparingly.
9. Avoid detailed descriptions of characters.
10. Don't go into great detail describing places and things.
11. Try to leave out the part that readers tend to skip.
12. My most important rule is one that sums up the 10.

If it sounds like writing, I rewrite it.

Hector Acosta's picture
Hector Acosta from Dallas is reading Fletch July 14, 2012 - 12:00pm

I think that statement only really applies to the rules of grammar.

 

I disagree. The biggest example is POV, which doesn't fall under the spectrum of grammar. It's a thing that messes up a lot of writers new and old. I know I had a hard time with it because I thougth that 'damn it, I'm a writer. I SHOULD show what all my characters are thinking and doing." It wasn't until I continously got told about it and I started tor read more that I realized why, when used badly, bad POV changes stand out so much.

ReneeAPickup's picture
Class Facilitator
ReneeAPickup from Southern California is reading Wanderers by Chuck Wendig July 14, 2012 - 12:03pm

"When used badly", not when used at all. So it's fair to say it isn't a rule. 

Bradley Sands's picture
Bradley Sands from Boston is reading Greil Marcus's The History of Rock 'N' Roll in Ten Songs July 14, 2012 - 12:05pm

That's not a rule. It's a guideline.

I was also responding to this, but didn't feel like quoting it:

People say this a lot.  I never know what they mean by "the rules."  Elementary English?  Like subject object verb?

Devon Robbins's picture
Devon Robbins from Utah is reading The Least Of My Scars by Stephen Graham Jones July 14, 2012 - 12:07pm

I think what it really comes down to is that either you're a good writer (at the moment) or you aren't. Not to say that if you aren't you never will be. People learn the craft just like anything else. the more you do it the better you get. You learn things that work for you.

 

words are words and you can string them together in a million ways to form an interesting story. 

R.Moon's picture
R.Moon from The City of Champions is reading The Last Thing He Wanted by Joan Didion; Story Structure Architect by Victoria Lynn Schimdt PH.D; Creating Characters by the editors of Writer's Digest July 14, 2012 - 12:09pm

"When used badly", not when used at all. So it's fair to say it isn't a rule.

- I'm a bit confused by this statement. Could you elaborate, please? :)

ReneeAPickup's picture
Class Facilitator
ReneeAPickup from Southern California is reading Wanderers by Chuck Wendig July 14, 2012 - 12:16pm

He was positing that POV shifts are a "rule", so the "rules" statement doesn't only apply to grammar. But there are definite rules for grammar and punctuation. I can tell you exactly what you did wrong and exactly how to do it right (or give you specific choices). POV shifts can be done. He even posits they can be done well. No one is saying you may never, ever have a POV shift. So it's not a rule, it's just something that has to be done especially well to work.

Michael J. Riser's picture
Michael J. Riser from CA, TX, Japan, back to CA is reading The Tyrant - Michael Cisco, The Devil Takes You Home - Gabino Iglesias July 14, 2012 - 1:28pm

I think we're really arguing semantics, here. I mean, nothing is really and truly a rule, not even grammar. You can bend grammar, and you can use improper grammar to good effect if you know what you're doing. But we all know that there are general things that make good writing and things that make bad writing. We critique because some shit just doesn't work, and it's not always "I didn't buy into your hero's motivation," or "You should use fewer semicolons." There are many undefinable things that aren't "rules", exactly, but are pieces of advice your average beginning writer should follow. Until they get beyond a certain level of proficiency in getting their point across, trying to be "clever" is going to equal disaster. Once they've been writing a while, once they know the difference between something that sounds authentic and something that sounds canned, once they understand the cadence of language, what's enough description and what's too much, all that kind of thing, then is the time to start breaking the language down, playing with it, making it sing or howl or scream.

In a sentence, I just meant that I believe people should learn fundamentals well before trying to bend or subvert language toward a purpose, because if one can't even write a basic sentence, paragraph, or story with some clue as to what elements are really making it work (or not work), whatever bending or breaking they try to do is going to be arbitrary at best.

EDIT - And reading this again, it sort of makes it sound like I don't think anyone should play around until they're somehow an awesome writer. That's not true. Part of getting there involves playing, and I don't mean to implty that there isn't a ton of playing around to do within the confines of more "normal" language or story elements. Just to clarify. Playing around is great, but I think the fundamentals give that play the contrast so one can really understand what it is the play can achieve.

Fylh's picture
Fylh from from from is reading is from is reading is reading is reading reading is reading July 14, 2012 - 6:19pm

There's a HUGE amount of "rules" that aren't grammatical that a lot of people hate seeing broken. Should a story end abruptly without any kind of resolution? If it does, someone's going to be pissed off. They may just not "get it" but they will feel like you broke an important storytelling rule.

Should the protagonist be "compelling" or even interesting? Does a book need any characters at all? Should dialogue be attributed? Could you get away with writing an entire book where the recto page is in English, the verso in French (untranslated)?

At some point you encounter a limit to what you think a book should and shouldn't do. You've found "the rules". You can then say "Oh but even though I personally wouldn't want to read something like that, doesn't mean someone can't write it." Correct, but that's irrelevant. There's a pretty strong social consensus about storytelling. "The butler was the killer the whole time!!!!" is less shocking than "The book has absolutely no plot and no distinguishable characters and yet it won the (insert prize)! Why did I waste my time?"

It's like having an incredible musician in your band who just doesn't understand why you want him to play something "that way": "But nobody DOES this in post-hardcore!" The fact that "nobody does it" is a pretty good indicator he's internalized the "rules" of that genre and doesn't want to see beyond them.

avery of the dead's picture
avery of the dead from Kentucky is reading Cipher Sisters July 14, 2012 - 7:55pm

"The book has absolutely no plot and no distinguishable characters and yet it won the (insert prize)!"

Who told you about my plans?

Covewriter's picture
Covewriter from Nashville, Tennessee is reading & Sons July 14, 2012 - 8:11pm

Show don't tell was an awesome and useful rule for me to learn at one point. I went back through my stories and did more showing. Then I went overboard. Now I have a balance because I am simply aware of what is showing and what is telling, and am in control of which I want to do. That is learning by knowing a rule at a basic level, and it was good for me. But I can now reject the rule whenever I want. It's more about knowing what you are choosing to do.

Fylh's picture
Fylh from from from is reading is from is reading is reading is reading reading is reading July 14, 2012 - 9:57pm

Who told you about my plans?

Sorry babz, an entire generation of mid-twentieth century French novelists beat ya to it. But you can still win the (insert prize) if you're willing to emulate, say, Franzen.

 

ReneeAPickup's picture
Class Facilitator
ReneeAPickup from Southern California is reading Wanderers by Chuck Wendig July 15, 2012 - 10:34am

Yeah, but if you call all of those things "rules" then there really is only one rule: Don't suck at writing.

Saying "You must have a compelling protagonist" is a rule implies there is some way to make that happen. Like, you have a boring as fuck protagonist, you're story goes in the workshop and everyone can say "you broke the compelling protagonist rule, here do x,y,z and it will be all better". But you can't. You can give suggestions on how to make the protagonist more compelling, but if the author of the story is a shit writer, they'll probably muddle through it without success.

To me, it isn't a "rule" unless there is a set way to do it. If I put a comma in the wrong place (as I am wont to do) someone can say "a comma doesn't belong there" or "you need this punctuation instead". There's no room for opinion on it (although once upon a time there was, the argument was settled, and now we have "rules" about commas).

GaryP's picture
GaryP from Denver is reading a bit of this and that July 15, 2012 - 11:42am

Comma comma comma comma comma chameleon. 

 

 

 

I'm a jerk.

ReneeAPickup's picture
Class Facilitator
ReneeAPickup from Southern California is reading Wanderers by Chuck Wendig July 15, 2012 - 11:40pm

Now comma isn't a word to me anymore.

misskokamon's picture
misskokamon from San Francisco is reading The Moonlit Mind July 16, 2012 - 12:55pm

You need to know the rules so you know where to break them later on. You don't want to break a rule unknowingly. Then you can't be called a genius! Just a stupid-head.

 

Blair's picture
Blair from Southern California is reading Needful Things July 16, 2012 - 4:31pm

I find myself telling other writers to "stop explaining" more often than I tell them to "show, don't tell."

Anyway, anyone who believes that there are hard and fast rules is probably pretty naive. 

Jack Campbell Jr.'s picture
Jack Campbell Jr. from Lawrence, KS is reading American Rust by Phillipp Meyer July 17, 2012 - 12:44pm

"Hubert Selby Jr. threw every rule out the window, and still achieved greatness. The last story in Last Exit To Brooklyn had like six pages that were in all caps, two hundred word sentences, and forward slashes instead of apostrophies."

There are a lot of other aspects of Hubert Selby's success that had nothing to do with breaking the rules. It was the sixties, people were drawn to anything that broke what they saw as institutionally opposed social convention. People were searching for anything alternative. Ginsberg and Kerouac were big.Television was pretty new. They didnt have cable or internet.

These days, it is a different society. Plus, Selby already did it, so it isn't fresh and rebellious anymore. It has been done. In fact, some people are still doing it.

Feel free to write however you want to write, but your chances of ever getting anything published in this era with that sort of formatting is slim to none, and that is slim to none compared to the average writers chances of getting a major deal, which are already slim.

You can definitely write whatever you want, but at some point, if it is worth publishing, you are going to have to decide how important breaking the rules is to you, unless you are already a proven commodity, then they will probably let you replace apostrophes with anything you want.

 

Devon Robbins's picture
Devon Robbins from Utah is reading The Least Of My Scars by Stephen Graham Jones July 17, 2012 - 5:45pm

"There are a lot of other aspects of Hubert Selby's success that had nothing to do with breaking the rules."

 

Thats what I mean. It wasn't breaking the rules that made him famous. I was saying that it didn't matter if he broke the rules or not. His writing has a character, one that is more important than "Show vs. Tell" or common grammar protocol.

 

"People were searching for anything alternative." 

 

People are still searching for the alternative, and probably always will be. Look at Clevenger (Nothing against him, I like my Clevenger too), the guy has two novels and a handful of shorts published, and people around here worship him.

 

A lot of bad writing gets published. There are books that you could go through and find every rule broken. Beside that, there is a reason that publishers have proofreaders and editors. Not every book that you read was like that when the author handed it over to the publisher.

 

Different strokes for different folks. I've had pieces published and praised that would probably be destroyed in the workshop here.

mcguy101's picture
mcguy101 October 19, 2012 - 11:31am

"Show don't tell"? I think Henry James threw the rules out the window and now everybody thinks this is the rule. Here's a news flash. It;s not. It's a cliche. It is about style over substance and limits the creativity of a story and the author writing it.

Yes, dramatizing scenes can be effective, but expository narration is effective too and should not be ignored. My biggest problem is that too many novelists seem to act like playwrites. Tell me a story. Don't show me one. If you want to write 90% dialogue, then write a play, screenplay or for television.To me, too much showing is just one of those things in the wrong format.

 

I agree with Mr. Child's view about this. So does this guy.

http://ezinearticles.com/?Debunking-the-Myth-of-Show-and-Tell&id=3851951

Pretty Spry for a Dead Guy's picture
Pretty Spry for... October 19, 2012 - 11:49am

I personally really related to Johnny Shaw's advice:

What's the worst advice you hear authors give writers?

Most of it. Anytime someone tries to convince a writer, particularly a new writer, that there are “rules,” that person should be ignored.  The idea that writing has absolutes like that is just an admission of a lack of imagination. Sure, there are things that are delicate to pull off, that may require a more experienced hand, but if some kid thinks that he can’t use adverbs just because someone arbitrarily decided a whole part of speech was bad, then the person who gave that advice should be ashamed.

In life and in writing, mistakes are a more important lesson that any arbitrary rules. If you want to progress, embrace the fact that some of what you write is going to suck. That’s a good thing. Because if you think everything you write is great—I hate to break it to you—you’re deluded.

 

http://litreactor.com/interviews/10-questions-with-johnny-shaw

JEFFREY GRANT BARR's picture
JEFFREY GRANT BARR from Central OR is reading Nothing but fucking Shakespeare, for the rest of my life October 19, 2012 - 1:48pm

No, that's stupid. No one should use adverbs. They are really awful. 

Devon Robbins's picture
Devon Robbins from Utah is reading The Least Of My Scars by Stephen Graham Jones October 19, 2012 - 2:20pm

Tell Bret Easton Ellis that adverbs are awful.

mcguy101's picture
mcguy101 October 19, 2012 - 2:22pm

I'm sure you're "really" kidding about that, Jeffery lol.

Nick's picture
Nick from Toronto is reading Adjustment Day October 19, 2012 - 3:24pm

I personally find "show don't tell" a bit stifling, and I think some of my stories have suffered a bit as a result. With what I'm working on now, I'm focusing on trying to tell the story, while unpacking ideas and statements into more detail (i.e. showing) here and there.


I think the balance of show versus tell depends somewhat on the scope of your story. Trying to "show" a story that takes place over the course of six months is a bit silly, but if your story is about a single incident on a single day, you might lean more toward showing.

jyh's picture
jyh from VA is reading whatever he feels like October 19, 2012 - 3:29pm

^ I agree about the time-frame. Immediacy should not always trump efficiency.

mcguy101's picture
mcguy101 October 19, 2012 - 3:54pm

There are a number of genres of fiction that really need a healthy amount of exposition. Sci-fi and Fantasy in particular usually require a strong authorian voice to help readers understand the technology and/or mythos of the story. Personally, I think that most stories benefit from a second grade class assignment ("Show AND Tell"), instead of the James attributed maxim ("Show, not tell").

Bradley Sands's picture
Bradley Sands from Boston is reading Greil Marcus's The History of Rock 'N' Roll in Ten Songs October 19, 2012 - 4:27pm

There's a time and a place for telling. Usually, showing is preferable, but that's not always the case. The trick is being able to know the difference. Mostly you should "tell" when you need to get information to the reader quickly. If you don't need to do this, than showing is preferable. Putting a little exposition here and there is far better than writing pages and pages of it. And there are some good stories that are composed entirely of summary rather than scene (or mostly summary and a few scenes), but that's difficult to pull off.

Devon Robbins's picture
Devon Robbins from Utah is reading The Least Of My Scars by Stephen Graham Jones October 19, 2012 - 4:42pm

I'd say around seventy-five percent of writing is telling, depending on the pace of the story. The showing part is using the human senses to make the story feel real. 

You can't really show a story with words. You can show scenes. You can't desribe the growling exhaust of the protagonist's 69' Mustang, and his heart thumping as the wind blows through his hair at ninety miles an hour if you don't tell the reader that he got in the car. Your story would be a perpetual daydream if you didn't tell the reader that things are happening.

People learn tips and try to turn them into rules.

Bradley Sands's picture
Bradley Sands from Boston is reading Greil Marcus's The History of Rock 'N' Roll in Ten Songs October 19, 2012 - 5:25pm

You can describe how particular things are sensed with words. I'm not really following. But yeah, if you think of writing that way, essentially everything is telling. But we're talking about telling things through scenes here rather than through exposition. And through natural dialogue rather than forced expository dialogue.

Mess_Jess's picture
Mess_Jess from Sydney, Australia, living in Toronto, Canada is reading Perfect by Rachael Joyce October 19, 2012 - 5:47pm

Jeffrey - my mother referred to Rowling today as "that adverb woman". I laughed, a lot. I don't like her books, but I don't think she's a bad writer.

My opinion on adverbs is stop using them until you know how to use them well. I'm in the "stop using them stage" - I still have concerns I use them awfully. But that doesn't mean that other people can't use them well, or properly. So I read Johnny Shawn's article today and thought about adverbs, and thought it was good advice.