This and That

A miscellany for you this week.


I'm not a fan of writing rules, as you know, but this list from legendary film makers Pixar hits the spot.


And speaking of legends, master novelist Ray Bradbury passed away this week.  Here is a lecture he gave in 2001 to new writers.  Enjoy!

On Silly Rules

I don't mind a lot of the silliness I see posted on writers' forums, but one thing that really annoys me are those blanket "Never do this" or "Always do that" type. You know the kind of thing. Apparently Mark Twain once famously said "If you see an adverb, kill it". Well good for him, but does every writer on the internet have to quote that in their signature? Okay, maybe not every writer, but I've seen it enough times to set my teeth on edge. For one not insignificant thing, it's a crock of shit.

Then there's the ubiquitous lists. Ten things Agents hate, or variations on the theme. We all have pet hates, agents included. But why poke them up everyone's nose on blogs and forums? To me it's an attempt to create a formula that will guarantee acceptance: Avoid these pitfalls and you too can write like (insert great novelist here). But here's the uncomfortable truth: there is no formula. For everyone who hates adverbs there are just as many who love them. For every editor who tosses a manuscript that opens with a prologue, there is bound to be at least one who finds it intriguing and wants to read more. There Are No Rules. That, my writer friends, is the only rule.

That's what makes literature an art rather than simply a craft. It might be inadvisable to start a novel with It (yes, I've seen that silly rule a few times) but there have been great writers who've managed to pull it off. It's your job as a writer to test the boundaries, to push the limits and see what you can get away with. Tastes change. So experiment. It's your right as an artist. And you duty. If there was a coverall formula for writing good fiction how boring the world would be.

So for your sake as well as your readers, do it your way, and ignore silly rules.

Rules? Nobody told me there were Rules!

Everywhere you go on Writers' Forums you run into lots of excellent and not-so-excellent advice. Little nuggets and homilies, usually littering people's signatures, like "If you see an adjective, kill it!" and "The Road to Hell is paved with Adverbs".

I've been knocking around these places long enough to see a few sacred cows built up only to come crashing down when someone comes up with an exception to the Rule. The net result is I no longer believe in rules. Of course you need grammar and spelling, those kind of rules. But once you get to the creation of fiction anything goes, and there is only one rule as far as I can see: IF IT WORKS, DO IT.

So why do these so-called rules get bandied about? I think it comes from well meant feedback people get from their submissions - an Editor or Agent mentions the fact that Wannabe has too much description in his first chapter. Wannabe then relays this to his group as "I was told not to have weather in the first chapter" and before you know it it's been enshrined in marble.

The point about being creative is you have to be flexible and open to any new ideas. Same with your method of working. There are no hard and fast rules about how a manuscript comes into being; some people painstakingly outline, research for months and plan every detail meticulously before they write a word. Then they sit down every day and churn out thousands of words at a time without pause. At the other end of the spectrum some take the Nanowrimo approach, barely plan anything and bash out a rough draft full of holes and margin notes to ADD LATER. Some write a passable first draft that hardly needs a spell check, others go through a hundred drafts before it resembles something readable. Does it really matter? Is one way right or wrong? It seems to me writing a novel is such a personal endeavour it must take a personal approach. So do what suits you best, and don't listen to any so-called Rules.

The Rules and why you should ignore them

I read a lot of blogs by writers and editors, not to mention writers' forums. In this isolated life it's a good way to feel connected and as long as you let it all slide off your back does no harm at all. (Note: this isn't true of everybody - some people can't join a website without ending up in a fight with someone and seem to thrive on it. But I've always believed arguing on the internet is a bit like taking part in the Special Olympics; even if you win you're still mentally challenged.)

One thing bloggers seem to be particularly fond of is preaching about the Rules; particularly published writers and editors who see it as their mission to educated the Ignorant Unpublished. Not only is this arrogant in the extreme it's pretty self defeating. No one likes to be preached at, so all it's likely to do is reduce your readership. Those who care about getting it right will find their own way, the rest aren't serious and won't take it to heart anyway.

But who's to say what the Rules are? The adverb debate continues to rage on various writers' boards and blogs. This is such a circular argument it astonishes me how many intelligent individuals keep getting drawn into it. And at heart all it reveals is their own gargantuan ego: Do it my way, everything else is wrong. Yes, I know J K Rowling has adverbs but she's published and therefore a Great Writer and exempt from the Rules which only apply to lesser mortals like YOU.

The sad part is they alone are blind to it.

I watched Tracy Baines' brilliant interview with Agent Peter Cox this week and was struck by something pertinent that he said in the last segment about passion being the only thing that really matters. People get too bogged down, nitpicking over the Rules and ticking the boxes, they lose sight of the bigger picture.

I agree with this view. Your story should move the reader, transport them to another time and place, let them see and feel what the characters are living. Nobody picks up a book to count how many adverbs are in it. If the use of language supports the story, it doesn't matter how long/short it is, how many adverbs it has, how many full stops or semi-colons or anything. No one gives a shit. Make them forget their own lives for half an hour and you're winning. Reading is entertainment, after all.

The Rules of Writing

Have you ever noticed how much time and energy people waste on writers' boards debating the "rules" of what constitutes good/bad writing or more importantly acceptable/unacceptable to publishers?
As a wide-eyed newbie I soaked it all up like a sponge at first, but inevitably you reach a point where you're getting conflicting advice.

Here are a few I've heard along the way:

Adult fiction should be 80k words long.

Changing POV mid-chapter will get you rejected.

Using adverbs is a sign of sloppy writing.


On the word length question, I have it on very good authority - I'm talking editor at a major publishing house - that a story is as long as it needs to be. If they love your story they couldn't give a tinker's cuss for the word length. So, reading between the lines if you're rejected on the basis of word length it's just another way of saying your writing isn't up to scratch.

The fact is - and this has taken me a while to realise - there are no rules. If you tell a good story well, you can get away with just about anything. It's all in the writing, and don't let anyone tell you different.

As an illustration, here is another great blog from The Book Deal to prove my point.