by Anne R. Allen
Ruth Harris and I have both written about how there are no rigid rules for writing good fiction, only guidelines.
Even guidelines don’t apply to everybody. Every genre has its own conventions. What is de rigeur for a romance can be deadly in a thriller. And what readers expect in a cozy mystery would be embarrassing in a gritty crime novel.
Then there’s literary fiction: successful literary fiction often breaks all rules and guidelines with reckless abandon. I’ve been reading a collection of George Saunders’ short stories that would probably crash any editing program because there are so many grammatical “errors.” But Mr. Saunders won the Man Booker Prize in 2017.
The problem is, we need to get a handle on the basics of writing before we go off and imitate George Saunders. Our grammar and storytelling skills need to be solid before we experiment. It’s the old saw of needing to learn the rules before we break them.
But what rules? What rules are worth learning, and what “rules” are totally bogus?
If you had the benefit of a good early education in word usage and grammar, you’re one step ahead. But your teachers probably taught you how to write a good research paper or business letter. They weren’t as likely to teach you how to write fiction or creative nonfiction, which take a different set of skills.
Where Are You on the Learning Curve?
It helps to be honest with yourself about where you are in your writing journey. You aren’t going to move up to the next rung of the ladder if you think you’re already at the top. But you don’t want to keep inviting people to climb over you while you cling to the bottom.
A lot of writers think they’re ready to graduate when they’re still in writing elementary school. Others stay in kindergarten their whole lives, scared they’re not ready for the big kids’ school.
Malcolm Gladwell said it takes 10,000 hours for a person to learn to do something well. But a lot of writers believe if they’ve completed one novel or published a few short stories they’re ready for a full-time writing career.
They probably aren’t.
I also know writers who have half a dozen gorgeously honed novels in their files that might be the next Pulitzer winners, but after a series of agent rejections, they’ve decided they’ll never publish. (Often the rejections come because they write lousy query letters, not lousy books.)
When I think about how both kinds of writers are reading our advice here, I feel torn.
I sometimes worry that the writers who need encouragement will take our craft posts as one more barrier to publishing their novels, and the ones who really need craft posts will take the more encouraging, inspirational posts as an invitation to throw their NaNoWriMo opus onto Amazon on December first.
I also worry that whenever I suggest people join critique groups or writing forums, they’ll be hit with a bunch of stupid writing rules that will hold them back.
Stupid Writing Rules
Unfortunately, stupid writing rules and bad advice can zoom around the booky quarters of the Internet as fast as Russian troll disinformation memes on Facebook. Newbie writers are mostly getting their advice online these days—from other newbie writers—so problems escalate quickly.
Last year I wrote about some Stupid Writing Rules that had been making the rounds in online writing groups. They’re still out there, probably getting stupider.
Some of my unfavorites:
- All adverbs and adjectives needlessly overburden your deathless prose.
- When the passive voice is used, your writing is considered bad.
- There are no reasons to use the verb “to be.”
- Don’t use contractions.
- Sentence fragments: bad!
- Never use a preposition to end a sentence with.
Okay, I’m being a little silly here. 🙂 Thing is: these can be useful as guidelines in some circumstances (see below) but they’re often, well, stupid.
Some of these come from guidelines for writing business letters that somebody remembered from high school. Others are techniques that can help a newbie catch and repair clunky prose while editing. Others are helpful tips for writing nonfiction, but not fiction.
But they’re all dangerous when they’re turned into rigid rules.
It’s like the old whispering game of “Telephone” where a phrase gets more and more garbled as each person passes it along. That means new writers can end up following some really bad advice.
The bad advice can lead to nasty dust-ups in writing gropus, as well as hurt feelings and sometimes even shattered dreams. When new writers come up against a wall built out of bogus “rules,” they can simply give up and decide writing isn’t for them. Or they ignore all advice and write something completely unreadable.
How Can You Learn from Critiques and Beta Readers?
A few years ago, I saw some advice from a well-respected bestselling novelist that had me screaming at the computer screen. He said beta readers always destroy your work and authors should never use an editor except to check for typos.
He instructed writers not to edit or rewrite and advised them to send a finished book into the marketplace now and deal with the consequences later.
I realized that might possibly be good advice for the kind of writer who is stuck in anxiety-ridden perfectionism hell, rewriting that one novel for years and asking the opinions of dozens of readers and critique groups and rewriting for every one of them.
It’s also probably okay for long-time professionals like the one who was giving the advice. He has written literally hundreds of successful genre novels.
But it is TERRIBLE advice for newbie writers who haven’t put in their time to learn to write fiction at a professional level.
These days most writers don’t learn to write fiction in college classrooms (and what they do learn there is often aimed at preparing teachers for other college classrooms, not writing for the general marketplace.)
Instead we get a lot of our education from workshops, critique groups and beta readers.
In order to get good results from them, we need to learn how to filter their advice. I talk about this in my post on Critique Groups: 6 Ways they May Hurt Your Writing and 6 Ways They Can Help.
Understanding your own Writing Personality
Writers, like everybody else, have different personalities and brain chemistry, which is why no writing “rules” work for every single one of us. It’s also why time constrictions and deadlines work on different writers in wildly different ways.
We need to be aware of our own writing personalities and style when reading writing advice, because it often it can be exactly what you should NOT do for your personality type.
Do you tend to rush in and do something as quickly as possible and only read the directions if it goes wrong? Or are you the kind of person who has to read the directions three times and make sure you have all the tools necessary before you begin?
Those two personality types need to approach rules in very different ways.
Dunning-Kruger Confidence
Some new writers have what I call “Dunning-Kruger Confidence.”
I have to admit this was me. When I decided I wanted to write for a living, I thought I had all the skills I needed. Hey, I got perfect Verbal and English Achievement scores on my SATs! I had published a bunch of poetry, written several produced plays, and I read fiction voraciously. So of course I knew everything I needed to know about writing a novel!
Um, no.
Did I know how to tell a story? Not even a little bit.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is the scientific theory that says the most confident people are often the most ignorant. The more you know, the more you know you don’t know.
And I didn’t know $*&% about writing a novel.
So I spent years writing lovely chapters of something that didn’t hold together in any way. But I queried agents with that “book” for years, until one finally said. “This is like reading a bunch of episodes of a sitcom.” Bingo.
I needed to find some guidelines for storytelling.
I was among those people who don’t realize what a long road it is from newbie to professional writer, and how many stages there are along the way.
Fearful Perfectionism
On the other end of the spectrum from my overconfident young self are Fearful Perfectionists, who are often intimidated by those with Dunning-Kruger Confidence, so they’ll take bad advice from us, even when we’re spouting a bunch of stupid writing rules.
Many wildly talented artists are plagued with self-doubt. Often the very best suffer the most. (Sometimes this can be caused by the “creativity wounds” I talked about last month.
Impressionist master Claude Monet never thought his own work was good enough. In 1908, at the height of his powers, he destroyed fifteen of his water lily paintings that were about to go to Paris for a big show. He said. “My life has been nothing but a failure, and all that’s left for me to do is to destroy my paintings before I disappear.”
Those damaged paintings would fetch millions now. Even then they were valuable. Perfection is in the eye of the beholder, and it may be that your work is perfect in somebody’s eyes.
The perfectionists need more TLC than the know-it-alls like me. So those nurturing, “take care of your muse” posts are what they need.
Everybody Needs Guidelines
No matter where you are on the learning curve, guidelines help. Here are some guidelines—as opposed to rules—to counter my list of unfavorites above.
- Too many descriptive words slow down your storytelling.
- Use of the passive voice weakens your argument in an essay.
- A search for the word “was” in a fiction manuscript can help you ferret out weak constructions that could be strengthened with a more dynamic verb. (But beware the “Was” police!)
- In a formal business letter, contractions look too casual.
- Academic essays, formal papers and most print articles require the authority of complete sentences.
- Putting a preposition at the end of a sentence can sound childish.
- And most important, it’s good be aware that a certain amount of what you hear from critiquers is going to be unadulterated hokum. If it sounds crazy, it just might be.
So when you’re confronted with stupid writing rules and a critique or beta reader who insists on enforcing them, smile sweetly and remember the words of Somerset Maugham:
“There are three rules for the writing of a novel.
“Unfortunately no one knows what they are.”
by Anne R. Allen @annerallen November 18, 2018
(Featured image: “The Pedant” by Thomas Rowlandson, 1756-1872)
What about you, scriveners? Are you annoyed by stupid writing rules? Have bad rules ever kept you from writing your best work? Do you find people in critique groups try to enforce stupid writing rules? Have you ever run afoul of the “Was” Police?
BOOK OF THE WEEK
99C/99p Countdown Sale!!
COUNTDOWN!!
HOW TO BE A WRITER IN THE E-AGE: A SELF-HELP GUIDE
co-authored with Amazon superstar and NYT Bestseller,
only 99c/99P in the US and UK for five days
November 16th — November 22
No stupid writing rules here. Just warm, down-to earth advice about how to navigate the treacherous waters of today’s publishing world. You’ll see a lot of books out there about how to write, and a whole lot more that promise Kindle millions. But this book is different. It helps you establish a professional writing career in this time of rapid change—and answers the questions so many writers are asking.
***
OPPORTUNITY ALERTS
WOW! WOMEN ON WRITING FALL FLASH FICTION CONTEST $10 ENTRY FEE; CRITIQUE OPTION FOR AN ADDITIONAL $10. Deadline November 30, 2018. The honorable guest judge this season is Literary Agent Heather Flaherty with The Bent Agency. Short fiction of any genre: 250 – 750 words. Reprints and multiple submissions okay. Limit: 300 entries. First Place: $400, publication, interview, and $25 Amazon Gift Certificate. Many great 2nd, 3rd, 4th place prizes. Top 10 stories to be published in Women On Writing ezine. Deadline November 30.
SERVICESCAPE SHORT STORY AWARD NO ENTRY FEE. They’re looking for any genre of short fiction. Maximum 5,000 words. Prize is $1000 in addition to publication in SERVICESCAPE. Deadline November 30.
Columbia College Literary Review Editors’ Prize contest. FREE! They’re looking for creative nonfiction or fiction. Up to 5000 words. Prize: $100 and publication in the 2018 edition of CCLR. Deadline December 1.
Bad Dream Horror/Humor Anthology. They’re looking for original horror fiction with a strong sense of comedy. They discourage old tropes like vampires, zombies & werewolves. 1500-8000 words. Pays 6c a word plus royalties. Deadline Dec. 31st.
DISQUIET LITERARY PRIZES $15 ENTRY FEE. Fiction, Poetry, and Nonfiction categories. Up to 25 pages for prose 10 pages for poetry. The top fiction winner will be published on Granta.com, the nonfiction winner in Ninthletter.com, and the poetry winner in The Common. Grand prize winner will receive a full scholarship including tuition, lodging, and a $1,000 travel stipend to Lisbon in 2019. Runners-up and other outstanding entrants will receive financial aid. Deadline January 10, 2019.
Don’t let those published short stories stop working! Here are 25 Literary Magazines that will take reprints.
Excellent advice as usual, Anne.
“Often the rejections come because they write lousy query letters, not lousy books.”
Agreed. Sentence fragment. To emphasize!
I’m willing to bet that most writers hating creating blurbs, elevator pitches, and query letters. However, those little tidbits showcase talent–or lack of it–and need just as much care as our writing projects.
Rules exist for a reason. But many were invented decades ago and make writing seem antiquated when followed.
I broke a couple of rules in this comment. Ha. So there!
Kathy–Love your rule-breaking! I’m always sad when I see a great writer whose work is languishing because they haven’t bothered to learn how to write a query letter. It’s a very stylized art form, like a sonnet. 🙂 So it requires practice. Same with bios and blurbs. The balance between over the tip bragging and effective pitching is tough to learn. But if you don’t, the best book in the world won’t make it.
Thanks, Anne. Useful, practical advice as always! Rules are required for sports, computer coding, chemistry, etc. Rules *sort of* work for recipes tho experienced cooks use recipes as guidelines with lots of leeway for adding/subtracting/substituting. Creative work BY DEFINITION cannot exist within a structure of “rules.” Just ask Picasso, Hemingway, Andy Warhol, JKRowling. See?
Ruth–You’re right: rigid rules are only going to produce slavish copy-cats, not real creative work. (I’m the same way with recipes. I can’t follow them exactly. So boring.)
I had one editor tell me to tell my students not to hire professional editors before sending their work to a publisher. His point: the publisher wants to see what the *writer* can write, not what a good editor finishes up with. However, he also said that a good novel writing class, plus beta readers who are well-published authors, will go a long way to helping you get that novel into something that might be readable.
Lots of great stuff in this article, as usual, Anne!
Melodie–That is excellent advice! I’ve also heard it from a number of literary agents. Newbies do need to get feedback from critiques and beta readers, but agents and editors want to see your own work, not something that’s already been polished by somebody else..
Thanks for the common sense look at a common issue facing all writers, Anne. As you so well put it, there comes a time in a writing career that you know enough of “the rules” so when you break ’em, you do so intentionally. And as for those three writing rules in novel writing, once I quit looking for them I stopped running my Monets through the shredder 🙂
Garry–“Don’t run your Monets through the shredder” would be a great motto for those perfectionist writers. Congrats on leaving the “rule quest” behind!
Nice post. I sometimes like to re-read authors like Anne Tyler, just to get a take on the writing style. There was a famous writing school once in the Midwest that required all writers in the class to begin each class by reading 30 minutes of a classic author. Not for story, but for style and technique. The point was that everyone consumes information on a sub-conscious level, and what you read sticks with you when you start to write. At least as far as style goes anyway.
Ryan–I love the idea of reading a classic author before you write. It can “prime the pump” so to speak. Anne Tyler would be a great choice. I should reread her. She’s a master of smooth, spare prose.
Amen! I’m particularly fond of your term “unadulterated hokum”. In writerly circles there’s a lot of that going around. Thanks for making it clear that in this case a grain of salt won’t quite do; one must take writing rules & advice with a salt lick.
CS–There is indeed a buttload of unadulterated hokum out there. (Maybe the Wordmonger might like to write about the fact that there’s nothing risque about the word “buttload”. It comes from an archaic word for an extra-large barrel: a butt. Like the “butt of malmsey” the Duke of Clarence was drowned in I only found that out recently.)
Hey Anne,
Good post and great point. Unfortunately, their are entire cottage industries built on said ‘rules’ so there is a lot of resistance to resisting them. Haha.
I had a period where I was rules nervous, went through that adjective and ‘was’ stage for a while too. It didn’t improve my writing though – actually, it seemed to ruin my writing. That kind of clued me in to the being too strict with the rules. And using my own judgment on such things (typos notwithstanding).
I don’t think there is anything wrong with rules, even grammar or writing rules, but I do think that there may be a deeper problem for some in that they don’t trust themselves enough to differentiate one thing from the next. All rules and / or guidelines don’t necessarily hold the same weight. And many of these rules come from the same mindset that is constantly seeking to work out Amazon’s algorithms so they can figure out how to be a ‘best seller.’
Too many writers have been convinced that there is some already mapped out, easy to follow process to writing a novel and that if they just copy others or follow all the rules they’ve read about, they can do it too. (And don’t get me started on the chumps that proclaim, anybody can write a book and be a best seller – EVEN if you don’t like writing.) Here’s a rule or maybe a truism or maybe just my opinion – Writing a novel is hard work. It takes time, patience, skill and often lots of drafts to get there. Yes, some can write faster than others, but it doesn’t mean they are lacking any of the aforementioned elements in turning out a good novel.
In my case, once I realized the rules weren’t getting me anywhere, I just started reading and studying craft. I had the great fortune to stumble upon 32 essays on writing by Chuck Palahnuick, which absolutely blew my mind and really shifted my mindset, and countless other books that I devoured. None of them, though, offered a 90 days to bestsellership. You absolutely need guidelines but you also have to trust yourself enough as a writer to know what works for you and what doesn’t.
Anyway….
Cheers,
Annie
Anita–I think you’ve hit on exactly the problem: people want a surefire formula for writing bestselling books. Of course there isn’t one, but there is an industry that’s devoted to selling fake formulas to those people. They spread disinformation all over the Internet. Nothing works but what works. And you need readers to tell you that. It’s why I like critique groups, even though I don’t follow their advice. I know when I’m losing them: that’s where I need work.
Another rock solid post, Anne, thank you. I open every single workshop I present with the words, “There are no rules to writing, only what works for the writer.” Then I urge the group to try some of my suggestions and see if they work; if not, try something different. I also tell them that nobody can write well in a workshop, including me.I aim to create a climate of safety where the members feel free to experiment and take risks, It’s astonishing what comes out of these simple steps.Off to share this link on Twitter next.
Valerie–A safe environment for writing is so important. I’ve heard so many horror stories from writers who have been shattered by rule-spewing “gurus” who look for things to criticize instead of allowing creative seeds to blossom. It sounds as if your workshops provide that.
I try, Anne. A couple weeks ago a group member tried something new and it worked for her. She said I’d “undone” the damage the snowflake method had caused her, proof positive that what works for one writer won’t necessarily suit another.
Anne writes: “Newbie writers are mostly getting their advice online — from other newbie writers.” I think that must be true. There are so many hundreds of posts out there giving advice on writing, and not always good advice as you say, Anne.
I feel lucky that when I was starting to write fiction, there was none of that online (free) advice. I was lucky to have books on the craft like Sol Stein’s “Stein On Writing.” Anyone who has ever visited my website can sometimes see photos of my bookshelves that display all the books I own — and which I faithfully read– about the craft. Did those make me an accomplished novel writer after decades as a journalist? No, not necessarily, but I did get traditionally published eventually.
I also agree wholeheartedly with Anne’s viewpoint that just because you’ve mastered writing in one field doesn’t mean you are immediately guaranteed success in another field. Writing for newspapers is different from writing for magazines which is different than writing for TV which is different to writing screenplays (Different to? than? from??? Rule please!)
When I went to law school after writing in all the above fields, I had to take a special class in writing because guess what? Legal writing is different again from any of the above, but mastering different aspects, and different rules for different fields of writing comes with the territory of — yes, being a writer!
Joanna–Every kind of writing requires a different skill set doesn’t it? I can write creative essays, but I’m not much of a journalist. I wrote freelance for years, but I did best with opinion pieces, not factual, unbiased reporting. That takes training I didn’t have.
And the law has a whole different set of rules,. My sister was an editor for a legal publishing company for many years, and we’d often discuss the big differences in our work.
BTW, if you’re a Brit, it’s “different to” and if you’re a Yank, it’s “different from.” Or so my UK publishers have told me.
You already know I love all your posts, so thank you again for this one. I learned all the “rules” and wrote using those rules. I didn’t start finding my “voice” until I started breaking a few of them. I used to go through my 80,000-word novels, taking out all the adverbs and every “was”, etc… It made for a pretty crappy book. I must say, though, that I didn’t learn how to write well until I found a content editor to help me along and a line editor to help my dorky mistakes too. Thank goodness for both of them.
Patricia–I find that “voice” often only comes when you know enough to break the rules. That’s so sad that the “rules” bullied you into taking out all the “wases” and adverbs. Such bad advice. Whether you learn from editors, critique groups, beta readers, or classes, I think it probably takes the same amount of time to learn to write. Which is way longer than we think. 🙂
Terrific as always Anne! Had to put off my required Sunday reading today for a bit, but really glad I got to this.
I wonder if maybe a good yardstick would be: if the GOAL is to make you feel the writing itself, or you yourself, are inadequate, then it is indeed a “Stupid” writing rule! Because that’s the aim.
In other words, you can often tell when the author of the rule is sincere and trying to help you, and when they’re panting with eagerness to get up a rung above you (or push you a rung down) to feel better about themselves.
Will–Oh, you’ve got it! So much of what happens in critique groups and forums (“fora” if you’re a Latin snob) is to “defeat” everybody in the group to become Alpha. Some people are not there to help others but to conquer them. We are so very not-far from our “lower primate” ancestors. We just use different weapons. 🙂 Thanks for the insight.
Great post, Anne. If only I’d seen something like this when I was a novice writer. I spent 15 years in Fearful Perfectionism, and when I finally kicked the stupid rules to the curb, I went too far, all the way into Dunning-Kruger Confidence. Thankfully the pendulum finally settled somewhere in the middle, thanks to some great beta readers and a fantastic editor.
Kassandra–Aristotle was right about the Golden Mean. The center is where truth lies, even though it’s usually boring. 🙂 I had to follow that pendulum, too.
Being a ‘more mature’ person/writer, I have read more rules and regulations that I’d like to admit to. Then (tut!) – both word usage and exclamation mark…someone quite (tut) famous wrote “There are no rules…” Being a perpetual learner (there is no other way) each time I write, be it an article, poem, short story or book,I edit it as ruthlessly as I can and then edit it again. I double.check facts and do my very best, while rarely thinking it’s good enough,…but at least I try. Complacency or too much ego can hold a writer back. Of course authors should strive to be THE BEST, but individualism and originality should overcome absolute perfection.(If there’s such a thing…)
Joy–So many rules and guidelines are out there, we could spend all our writing time reading them, couldn’t we? Some are useful, others aren’t. None apply to every writer all the time. The most important thing to learn in our writing journey is probably the knack of finding a delicate balance between what’s helpful and what’s bull****. 🙂
I am INTENSELY annoyed by stupid rules! Yes, guidelines can help with the editing process, but some of these “rules” seem to abandon all common sense (e.g. never use the verb ‘to be’. WTF??) I love down-to-earth posts like yours that put things into perspective.
Annabelle–Ruth and I try to keep it real here. There’s so much BS circulating around the Interwebz. And I agree–some of it completely abandons common sense!
Excellent advice. Thank you.
🙂
Interesting and helpful, as always. Thanks to you and Ruth for your thoughtful posts. You’re so right: once you have learned the rules, you can decide which to break. Like writing brief sentences, with or without a verb. One-word sentences especially. Really. And I always make up a word somewhere in a book or longshort story.
Cynthia–I always say it’s so much more fun to break the rules if you know what they are. Really.
I love made-up words! After all, Shakespeare made up tons of them. I hate it when the robots at Amazon tell me I have “typos” in my book when they’re spelled exactly right: because I made them up!
Many of these rules were formulated to help cater for the ‘junk food’ reader, who wants to gobble and guzzle a story without anything that makes his/her brain do more than a minimum of work.
colonialist–That’s very true. I find when the robots on this blog okay my writing for “readability”, it’s at a 4th grade level. That’s what’s considered “readable” these days. Everybody skims. Sigh.
Anne, on a slight change of theme, your use of the word “guidelines” reminded me that many inexperienced (or other types of) writers treat publishers’ and agents’ submission guidelines as just that. As I said when addressing a small local writing conference, “Publishers’ guidelines aren’t really guidelines. They are rules carved in stone, and you should treat them that way.”
As you point out, though, not so for writing guidelines…maybe that’s the source of the confusion?
Fred–You are absolutely right. For publishers and agents to call their rules “guidelines” is a gross misnomer. I have written many times that they are to be treated like commandments carved on stone tablets. The problem isn’t what these things are called, though. It’s the fact that people never question the source. They just parrot them without knowing what they really mean or why they were invented.
Thanks, Anne — once again you bring common sense to the forefront!
When operating as editor, I usually only have two ‘rules’ and hope they aren’t stupid, but they might be…
Don’t assume knowledge. Don’t forget that you’re writing this book for your readers.
These are based on my pet peeves when editing, so might only serve as pleas to my author clients, so I don’t suffer additional keyboard marks on my forehead.
I think of writing rules as applying only to language use, as in grammar, punctuation, etc. The structure of the story, and whatever makes the story particularly yours, needs only guidance, because, as you say, rules can never ensure the same results in every type of writing.
Thank you for stopping the world and reminding everyone that writing is a personal (!) creative endeavor, and few rules exist that define who you are…so…
Sorry for delayed comment – I keep setting you aside on Sundays, so I can relish the read — and then, something always happens to deny me that pleasure. But better late than never, eh? Is that a ‘rule’?
Maria D’Marco
Maria–That is a very good guideline. “Don’t forget your readers.” “Don’t assume knowledge” is a great one too. Sometimes people do write very personal stuff that seems aimed at maybe 15 people, with jargon and “insider” references. Obviously they can write and publish that, but they’re not likely to have much of a readership.
Some rules are pretty hard and fast: including the basics of spelling and grammar. I’m not going to pick up a book by somebody who can’t use an apostrophe correctly, and I think a lot of readers feel the same way.
Thanks, Anne. You so well put it.
M.M. You’re welcome. Writers need a reality check every so often. 🙂
You are so right or should I say correct. I wrote a novel and loved it but the critique group said I had to go back and remove all the was, adverbs and adjectives. Also the entire book needed to be in one point of view only. And change the title. Ok, they are more experienced than I am so I did all they said. Then a well published writer in our chapter read it and said it was one I needed to put under the bed and start another one. This one was just a woman suffering empty nest syndrome. I had to ask around to find out what that was but I did and the darn book would not stay under the bed. Next time I pulled it out a few friends read it with all the changes and said it didn’t read well. What did that mean??? Back under the bed it went. Then at a conference I was working on really nothing when one of the published authors I had just met ask me to tell her my story I did and she loved it. Hope again and out from under the bed it came again. Worked on it and let another pub’d author read it. She started on the POV tip and I changed and changed it until I was lost. What the heck is POV. I knew what the RULES said but it just didn’t work and still doesn’t. My Son was over the other day and he and I were talking and he asked me to tell him the story. He thought it was a good story. I have pulled it out from under the bed again and just sat down and read it. It is good but the title is wrong and I don’t recognize the story. I have changed it so many times to make it fit all the all changes insisted must be made. Now what do I do. I think I’m going to put this on the shelf in a nice binder and be proud I finished a novel. I think I’m going to write just to write because I love it. I’m no longer going to write to submit but just for the pleasure. I’m a widow and retired with a good retirement so the money would be nice and the recognition would be great but my own accomplishment will be enough reward. I’ll try to get better as I go but if I like what I do and it sounds good to me it will join the first one on the shelf and that will be ok. I love hanging out with writers and tell people when they ask “Im a writer, Women’s Fiction with suspense. I will be reading your blog and trying to write again. I usually agree with all you bring to us.
50–Would you believe most of us have been exactly where you are? There’s so much to learn and so much of what you hear puts up unnecessary barriers.
Most of us do have a practice novel “under the bed.” It took me 20 years before I had the chops to turn my idea into something publishable. It was like I was trying to play Carnegie Hall before I’d learned to play scales. I’d bitten off more than I could chew.
That didn’t mean I couldn’t write a publishable novel. I just had taken on a hard one.
One tip that helped me for POV is to tell the story in first person. Maybe not keep it in first person, but write several chapters as practice. If the protagonist doesn’t see it, feel it, or hear it, then find another way to tell the story.
Do give your complex story a rest and start with something simple. Write a short story or even some flash fiction. Enter some contests. You just might win. There are lots of ways to get your confidence back. Best of luck!
Anne, I have just found your website. Thank you so much for all this kind, helpful advice. I am a newbie writer and have definitely found myself reading all these ‘rules’ to improve my writing. Some have helped but some just seem a little too strict. Like a mother telling you how to hold your knife and fork. I am reading more of your articles. Thanks!
Tanya–Welcome! All these “rules” have a really dampening effect on creativity don’t they? And some of them are just plain wrong. I’m going to be putting together a book of my posts, plus some new material called “Stupid Writing Rules…and Smart Guidelines” for fighting the misinformation newbies get on the Internet.
Oh that would be amazing! I will be first in line…
This: ‘…they’re all dangerous when they’re turned into rigid rules.’
I’m old-school so I knew how to write essays, dissertations, how-to books, user guides…but I didn’t have a clue how to write fiction. I spent close to 13 years as an apprentice storyteller before I felt ready to publish anything. Not because I’m such a perfectionist, although I am, but because clear, logical, precise, easy to understand prose is not storytelling.
I’ll never write lyrical prose, but I’ve become a decent storyteller – and I break every rule in the book if that’s what it takes to make the story work. 🙂
ACFlory–I think it may be harder for academics to learn to write fiction than people who know nothing at all about grammar or English usage. I know my mom, an English professor with an Ivy PhD, had to work hard to keep her characters from all sounding like PhD candidates. You’re right that story drives fiction, not rules.