The Do's and Don'ts broken with magnificent effect.

[Jay Aitch]

In recent times, I have read a lot about the faux pas of writing, in particular the use of adverbs, or verbs attached to a character speaking: "and she spoketh most vociferously, verbalising verbosely."

All great advice.

But I am also reading (for the umpteenth time) The Lord of the Rings, and the Great Man Himself bends, breaks and disregards the "rules" with gay abandon.

Unfortunately, I now see such literary no-no's as I read his work, where in previous years I brushed past them in ignorant bliss. I am not certain if new knowledge is a good thing if it pulls one out of the fantastical experience of getting lost in the land of Fairie and Tolkien's love of Fairytales.

Of course, if we were all as genius as Tolkien, then he would not stand out, and there would be other rules (or guidelines) to adhere to.

Just a thought

 

[Carol Rose]

And it also was written in a different era. Writing in Victorian times was very different than it is now because we spoke differently. Try reading Dickens lately without losing your mind tracking down all the " broken rules?" Rules change. They come and go. In one hundred years no one will remember who made the "rules" of today's writing, and no one will care.

What's most important to remember when writing is simply to tell your story, in your own voice, and worry about the other stuff on the back end.

 

[James Marinero]

I try to follow the rules - that is my natural inclination. However, with an old quality assurance hat on (I used to wear one in IT), I see rules as standards. The problem with standards is that they ensure a consistent level of quality. ' We build crap, bit it's consistent crap'.

So, a writer can follow the rules perfectly, but if the spark isn't there then it will be tossed.

Could it be that breaking the rules clearly - even outrageously - on the first page could grab the attention of an agent or publisher?

 

[Carol Rose]

Depends on what they're looking for I suppose.

I think a lot of writers make the mistake of assuming if they follow all the rules they are guaranteed to capture someone's attention. That's not always true.

You can submit the cleanest manuscript in the history of submissions and if the agent or editor isn't looking for that particular story, at that particular time, they'll still pass on it.

Writing cleanly and following the arbitrary rules is only half the battle. The rules don't take into account an author's voice, how well people can relate to their characters, or what kind of a commercial success their story might have in the eyes of the person reading it. A few editing errors here and there can be corrected and everyone knows that. Writing THE story they are looking for on THAT day is a matter of being in the right place at the right time.

It's no wonder all this taken together seems so elusive, or like some super-secret double-probation magical formula that only a few lucky individuals are given.

Write clean, by all means. Don't break rules merely for the sake of breaking them because you think it might gain you some attention. It will, but not the right kind. LOL!!

Honestly, the thing that grabs them isn't something you can plan, or foresee, or even predict. It's a SUBJECTIVE industry.

The reason everyone tells us to write by the rules is so we don't give anyone an easy reason to stop reading, and so we look like we've taken the time to learn our craft. But if they like the story - if it really grabs them - they aren't going to let a few extra adjectives or one adverb used as a dialogue tag stop them. If they do, they're probably not someone you want to work with anyway.

 

[James Marinero]

@Carol Rose - yes that's what I was going to say but too lazy to write it all ;-)

 

[Jay Aitch]

I have to step on the "rabid Tolkien fan" soapbox quickly (before it collapses under the weight of excess nonsense and beer gut). The whole Marijuana interpretation of the Leaf is utter wish-fulfilment nonsense. A nonsense carried on into the film adaptations. Tolkien himself smoked a pipe, and if anyone has read his preface: "Concerning Hobbits" he clearly states it is a variety of tobacco.

*Soapbox crumples and tosses the pedant to the ground, to embrace the hard ground with his nose*

I agree, Lex, that he was was first and foremost a linguist and English professor. He himself had doubts about the artistic merit of his work.

And Carol is correct as well. Consider Thomas Hardy, whose prose is dense, florid and frankly boring as the label on said crumpled soapbox. Previous writing styles had to describe everything in great detail ... in the age of Television, Internet, and Global Travel, our knowledge and imaginations have expanded and less is now more ... Except if you are a capitalist.

*prod, dig and poke*

 

[Jay Aitch]

Here's a thought ... Prod, Dig and Poke ... the names of three Victorian grave robbers?

 

[Jason Byrne]

In recent times, I have read a lot about the faux pas of writing, in particular the use of adverbs, or verbs attached to a character speaking: "and she spoketh most vociferously, verbalising verbosely."

All great advice.

But I am also reading (for the umpteenth time) The Lord of the Rings, and the Great Man Himself bends, breaks and disregards the "rules" with gay abandon.

Unfortunately, I now see such literary no-no's as I read his work, where in previous years I brushed past them in ignorant bliss. I am not certain if new knowledge is a good thing if it pulls one out of the fantastical experience of getting lost in the land of Fairie and Tolkien's love of Fairytales.

Of course, if we were all as genius as Tolkien, then he would not stand out, and there would be other rules (or guidelines) to adhere to.

Just a thought

And it also was written in a different era. Writing in Victorian times was very different than it is now because we spoke differently. Try reading Dickens lately without losing your mind tracking down all the " broken rules?" Rules change. They come and go. In one hundred years no one will remember who made the "rules" of today's writing, and no one will care.

What's most important to remember when writing is simply to tell your story, in your own voice, and worry about the other stuff on the back end.

F. Scott Fitzgerald is another good example of that.

Amazing, isn't it, to wonder whether the "greats" would even be considered "good" today.

 

[Nicole Wilson]

F. Scott Fitzgerald is another good example of that.

Amazing, isn't it, to wonder whether the "greats" would even be considered "good" today.

Or even Jane Austen or Charlotte Bronte. I enjoy their books, but MAN are those hard to decipher and slog through sometimes.

 

[Jay Aitch]

And yet, even the most turgid has something incredible about them. I can't remember George Eliot's style, but I do recall that I fell in love with her evocative storytelling.

 

[Carol Rose]

F. Scott Fitzgerald is another good example of that.

Amazing, isn't it, to wonder whether the "greats" would even be considered "good" today.

They are to me. But I know what you mean. There are all kinds of blog posts out there where someone sent in disguised manuscripts of classics and they were rejected, or stuff along those lines.

 

[Carol Rose]

Or even Jane Austen or Charlotte Bronte. I enjoy their books, but MAN are those hard to decipher and slog through sometimes.

YES. I love them both but they are difficult to read until you get used to the cadence again.

 

[KG Christopher]

I try to follow the rules - that is my natural inclination. However, with an old quality assurance hat on (I used to wear one in IT), I see rules as standards. The problem with standards is that they ensure a consistent level of quality. ' We build crap, bit it's consistent crap'.

So, a writer can follow the rules perfectly, but if the spark isn't there then it will be tossed.

Could it be that breaking the rules clearly - even outrageously - on the first page could grab the attention of an agent or publisher?

We build crap and it has a consistent level of crap, I like that, ISO900 how to define a 'standard process' is good also, can be applied to anything.

 

[KG Christopher]

Also keep in mind that Tolkien, flatly, was not a writer first and foremost. He was telling a story for himself that he cobbled together as he went. he was a language professor and linguist first, and this shows in those writing problems that are so extant with him.

...this is the part where inevitably some rabid Tolkien fan accuses me of blasphemy. To which I will reply by throwing not only my boxed set of the extended edition DVDs of Jackson's adaptation at their head, but also my *very* well-worn boxed set of the novels...from the 70's. End of tangent.

Anyway, that isn't to defame how creative Tolkien was, or how innovative, or massively influential, because those are obviously true. The point is that he was not a polished, devoted writer the way many here are (or are trying to be), and it shows. Consider the fact that when LOTR was first released, it was critically panned and bombed financially. It was clear into the 70's before the series took off...with hippies. Because of the "Halfling leaf" and "live in harmony with the natural world" vibes of the books. Really.

I gave my 70's unwin editions of LOTR to my cousin who used the jackets for roach paper and the 3 hard back novels as a stool for his coffee table, never saw them again and my mum threw out about 100 books of mine one time, cos they were cluttering up the place including a hardback of the Silmarilian from 1976...dont get me started

 

[Jay Aitch]

I gave my 70's unwin editions of LOTR to my cousin who used the jackets for roach paper and the 3 hard back novels as a stool for his coffee table, never saw them again and my mum threw out about 100 books of mine one time, cos they were cluttering up the place including a hardback of the Silmarilian from 1976...dont get me started

Verily the Valar will bear vengeance upon such villainy.

 

[Carol Rose]

I gave my 70's unwin editions of LOTR to my cousin who used the jackets for roach paper and the 3 hard back novels as a stool for his coffee table, never saw them again and my mum threw out about 100 books of mine one time, cos they were cluttering up the place including a hardback of the Silmarilian from 1976...dont get me started

People throw out BOOKS??????? I don't understand… *glances around, confused, begins to sweat, can't quite focus* Why would someone toss a book in the trash????? The world is tilting. Someone help me….

 

[KG Christopher]

People throw out BOOKS??????? I don't understand… *glances around, confused, begins to sweat, can't quite focus* Why would someone toss a book in the trash????? The world is tilting. Someone help me….

So I can cross you off my list for the book burning night?

 

[Chase Gamwell]

People throw out BOOKS??????? I don't understand… *glances around, confused, begins to sweat, can't quite focus* Why would someone toss a book in the trash????? The world is tilting. Someone help me….

I know I don't throw out books...I guess that's why I get strange looks when people see my collection of 77 Star Wars novels in my study. Haven't read one in years, but can't seem to get rid of them...

 

[KG Christopher]

I know I don't throw out books...I guess that's why I get strange looks when people see my collection of 77 Star Wars novels in my study. Haven't read one in years, but can't seem to get rid of them...

Bring them along to the next book burning night, I am sure we can find room for them

 

[Chase Gamwell]

Bring them along to the next book burning night, I am sure we can find room for them

But...but...Star Wars...

HOW DARE YOU SIR!!!

(I guess I should have said something about finding your lack of faith disturbing...)

 

[KG Christopher]

But...but...Star Wars...

HOW DARE YOU SIR!!!

I just don't get Star Wars, sorry, Phillip K Dick, love it, but -- A splinter in the minds eye?, pile them high and lets watch the flames rise

 

[Chase Gamwell]

I just don't get Star Wars, sorry, Phillip K Dick, love it, but -- A splinter in the minds eye?, pile them high and lets watch the flames rise

I sincerely hope you aren't using *just* A Splinter of the Mind's Eye as a metric for ALL Star Wars books. To be sure, there are some bad ones out there (looking at you Crystal Star), but a great many of them are fantastic space novels...and, if I may say so, relatively incomparable to Philip K Dick novels...

 

[KG Christopher]

I sincerely hope you aren't using *just* A Splinter of the Mind's Eye as a metric for ALL Star Wars books. To be sure, there are some bad ones out there (looking at you Crystal Star), but a great many of them are fantastic space novels...and, if I may say so, relatively incomparable to Philip K Dick novels...

I read a few back in the 80's, cant remember being too impressed, but I suppose its just all the star wars hype, like the game of thongs, it just puts me off sometimes

 

[Nicole Wilson]

I sincerely hope you aren't using *just* A Splinter of the Mind's Eye as a metric for ALL Star Wars books. To be sure, there are some bad ones out there (looking at you Crystal Star), but a great many of them are fantastic space novels...and, if I may say so, relatively incomparable to Philip K Dick novels...

Also, why are we burning books at all??? I give all my books to Half Price bookstore (a resale shop) -- on those rare occasions that I get rid of them. That way, someone else has a chance to read it.

 

[Chase Gamwell]

I read a few back in the 80's, cant remember being too impressed, but I suppose its just all the star wars hype, like the game of thongs, it just puts me off sometimes

Honestly, it depends on which books you're reading. Back in the 80s, there were only a few Star Wars novels out. Some of the really good stuff started coming out in the 90s, with the short story collections, the Timoth Zahn trilogy (seriously...GREAT trilogy. One of my all favorite villains of all time was Admiral Thrawn), and others (X wing series). If you don't care that 95% of those novels are no longer considered Star Wars canon, then I'd suggest you give it a second shot. Especially if you want something recognizable and accessible in the realm of science fiction.

 

[Chase Gamwell]

Also, why are we burning books at all??? I give all my books to Half Price bookstore (a resale shop) -- on those rare occasions that I get rid of them. That way, someone else has a chance to read it.

Heeeeyyy...I'm not burning books! I keep them! All of them!

 

[Jason Byrne]

Also, why are we burning books at all??? I give all my books to Half Price bookstore (a resale shop) -- on those rare occasions that I get rid of them. That way, someone else has a chance to read it.

We have Wonderbook, around here.

 

[Chase Gamwell]

Wonderbook

Is that a superhero I'm unaware of?

 

[Carol Rose]

Barbarians...

 

[KG Christopher]

@Chase Gamwell ok, you convinced me, I'me gona look at the X-Wing trillogy, partly because I love the lego x-wing, and my boy might get into them if I can wrench him away from minecraft.

No one got my 'game of thongs' joke?