- Joined
- Jul 13, 2009
- Messages
- 2,757
- Reaction score
- 517
I just started writing the Gunslinger as its a 3rd person semi apocalyptic different universe story. (Much like my own)
One of the things that has spun me round (round round baby right round) is HOW MANY RULES he breaks. Take a look...
---
Rule 1: Make your opening chapter exciting.
He opens with the line "The man in black fled across the desert and the gunslinger followed." He then spends 10 pages describing the desert, and the grass, and the mountains and the wind, before finally having the next action. "The gunslinger knelt down and touched the burnt grass"
Rule 2: Adverbs.
All. over. the place. Seriously it was impressive. The thing is, every time he used an adverb, I couldn't come up with a better verb to replace it. Or I could come up with a suitable verb to replace it, but it just read better with the adverb.
Rule 3: General sentence structure, grammar, and dialog.
I can't explain this one other than to say, it reads unlike anything that would normally constitute "good writing" according to the websites/handbooks.
Rule 4: Show don't tell.
There is so much telling here, its mind boggling. I also boggled at how little action there is. In the course of 50 pages or so, maybe only 4 or 5 ACTUAL things happen!
Rule 5: Changing tense / flashbacks
At one point the gunslinger (around page 30 or so) decides to tell Brown a story about how he came to know of the man in black. We get a chapter break and the entirety of the next section is as a flashback in a different tense!
In this flashback he we find out how he came to be in bed with the scarred up bartender. This flashback is not told as if he were telling a story though, its as if it were from a different book.
Then, you guess it, The bartender then has a flashback!
Yes, that's right, a flashback from a different POV, in a different tense, told within a different tense flashback!!!! All within the first chapter!
---
I don't know what I'm getting at here, I suppose. I also realize that King is a master and can therefore break the rules because its assumed that he knows them. I also realize that the old-dog-tired adage of if it works, it works, holds true. (Despite, god almighty how I hate that phrase) The thing is the book si excellent and at no point do I question his motives or methods.
I had the thought, that if I took the first 10 pages of this book and published it under my own name to the syw forum it would be likely be ripped to shreds as boring, not enough showing, not enough action, lack of definition in the dialog, etc, etc, etc. (I see the same reviews/crits in the syw over and over again.)
It makes you wonder, how much do most of us really know about writing?
One of the things that has spun me round (round round baby right round) is HOW MANY RULES he breaks. Take a look...
---
Rule 1: Make your opening chapter exciting.
He opens with the line "The man in black fled across the desert and the gunslinger followed." He then spends 10 pages describing the desert, and the grass, and the mountains and the wind, before finally having the next action. "The gunslinger knelt down and touched the burnt grass"
Rule 2: Adverbs.
All. over. the place. Seriously it was impressive. The thing is, every time he used an adverb, I couldn't come up with a better verb to replace it. Or I could come up with a suitable verb to replace it, but it just read better with the adverb.
Rule 3: General sentence structure, grammar, and dialog.
I can't explain this one other than to say, it reads unlike anything that would normally constitute "good writing" according to the websites/handbooks.
Rule 4: Show don't tell.
There is so much telling here, its mind boggling. I also boggled at how little action there is. In the course of 50 pages or so, maybe only 4 or 5 ACTUAL things happen!
Rule 5: Changing tense / flashbacks
At one point the gunslinger (around page 30 or so) decides to tell Brown a story about how he came to know of the man in black. We get a chapter break and the entirety of the next section is as a flashback in a different tense!
In this flashback he we find out how he came to be in bed with the scarred up bartender. This flashback is not told as if he were telling a story though, its as if it were from a different book.
Then, you guess it, The bartender then has a flashback!
Yes, that's right, a flashback from a different POV, in a different tense, told within a different tense flashback!!!! All within the first chapter!
---
I don't know what I'm getting at here, I suppose. I also realize that King is a master and can therefore break the rules because its assumed that he knows them. I also realize that the old-dog-tired adage of if it works, it works, holds true. (Despite, god almighty how I hate that phrase) The thing is the book si excellent and at no point do I question his motives or methods.
I had the thought, that if I took the first 10 pages of this book and published it under my own name to the syw forum it would be likely be ripped to shreds as boring, not enough showing, not enough action, lack of definition in the dialog, etc, etc, etc. (I see the same reviews/crits in the syw over and over again.)
It makes you wonder, how much do most of us really know about writing?
Never compare what they do to what the typical writer can do. They're in a class by themselves, for both good and bad.
