J.K. Rowling

[Elwyn]

I started the Da Vinci Code thread to get ya'll opinion on Dan Brown's writing; which I did get. Now, I'm taking the book back to the library because I don't want to learn how to write from someone who ya'll say cannot.

Now, how about J.K. Rowling? And, how about the old Hardy Boys books by Franklin W. Dixon? They seem to flow pretty well and are easy enough to read.

Again, I don't want to "learn" bad habits. I want to learn "good" writing which, to me, would be an easy (fast) read that the reader can easily follow and understand. It seems the story line is another matter entirely.

Thanks!:)

[Bufty]

Don't intend to be facetious, Elwyn, but - story apart - if it was as easy as reading a 'good' book and copying the style, we'd all have made it.

[Jamesaritchie]

I started the Da Vinci Code thread to get ya'll opinion on Dan Brown's writing; which I did get. Now, I'm taking the book back to the library because I don't want to learn how to write from someone who ya'll say cannot.

Now, how about J.K. Rowling? And, how about the old Hardy Boys books by Franklin W. Dixon? They seem to flow pretty well and are easy enough to read.

Again, I don't want to "learn" bad habits. I want to learn "good" writing which, to me, would be an easy (fast) read that the reader can easily follow and understand. It seems the story line is another matter entirely.

Thanks!:)

I like Rowling's writing a good bit. Many blast her for too many adverbs and adjectives and say her dialogue tags break the rules, but I think they're wrong. Many of the rules used when writing for adults do not apply when writing for children.

Children like and often need such things, and a smart writer changes the way he writes when aiming at children.

I used to read The Hardy Boys, and Nancy Drew. Both were pretty good, though I think the Drew books were better written, for the most part.

I do think picking up style from otehr, successful writers can be a very good thing, but style won't get you published. Story and characters will. You can learn both from other writers, however, assuming you have the talent to do so.

[jst5150]

Read lots of books from lots of styles. Watch plenty of movies and television. Look at plenty of art. Touch nature and architecture. Listen to people you enjoy speaking or telling stories.

Sleep.

Read more. Watch more. Look more. Touch more. Listen more.

Write.

Sleep.

Practice your writing.

Read. Watch. Look. Touch. Listen.

Sleep.

Rinse and repeat.

Style emerges.

The End. :-)

[Sarita]

I like Rowling's style. She knows how to keep kids interested in reading. Extra kudos to her for that!

Besides, it doesn't kill you to read a "bad" book every now and then. I think you mentioned earlier that you read On Writing, by King. He talks about several books he calls "bad", he read them, learned from them, and moved on.

[jst5150]

Never fails. The first exposures are the most commercial ones. :-) Never a bad things. And certainly, many commercial successes cannot be faulted for their writing abilities.

However, and just some food for thought, maybe pick up some work by Jack Kerouack (sic), Michael Moorcock or something translated by Umberto Eco (which is heavy, but it's meant to be heavy). "The Name of the Rose" blows away anything "The Da Vinci Code" could ever be writing-wise. The Movie was very cool, too, with a young Christian Slater and Sean Connery in what is considered his comeback film.

The focus, really, is on what you want to achieve. Barrell-chested Norman Mailer importance or Dan Brown sell-a-billion success. Either is admirable.

In any case, if you concentrate on one form of media, you may be selling yourself short (and reiterating my otherwise cryptic point from above). Maybe Dan Brown's writing isn't top shelf, but he didn't have to wait until he was dead to go smug with the blue mock and the camelhair jacket on us.

And JK Rowling's a billionaire. Now. Not while she's dead.

Meanwhile, Ernest Hemingway is ... important.

Knosh on that one, kids. :-)

Shalom

[Christine N.]

Hemingway... bleck. Don't go there. F. Scott Fitzgerald... *zzzzz*. LOL

I enjoy Rowling's style, and while some do say she uses too many adverbs, it seems to be a British style thing and not a writing thing. That's just what I've heard from friends across the pond.

If you want to read well-written fantasy, you can't go wrong with Tamora Pierce. She's got great stories and a flowing, readable, well-done style.

[BlueBadger]

I enjoy Rowling's writing a good bit, I think she definitely has style and talent. I don't attribute her overuse of adjectives / adverbs to "style", though. I don't think there's any reason for writing to be clumsy, regardless of what age group it's for.

In fact, comparing the first book to, say, the fifth, I find it's a much smoother read, and it's still an engaging story. Order of the Phoenix had Harry's infamous half-page all-caps "rant". There was no excuse for that, period. If any of us tried to sell the all-caps thing, we'd get laughed at, guaranteed.

But I don't blame Rowling, I blame her editors 100%. Someone is saying, "More pages means more money!" and I highly doubt it's Rowling herself. Thankfully, there was a large improvement on the editing in book six.

[badducky]

Writing for children is much, much harder than it sounds. I respect anyone who can pull it off with the level of success Rowling has mustered.

One of the strangest things about J.K. Rowling isn't just that she's very successful among children, but that many adults enjoy her writing as well. And, unlike DaVinci Code from the other thread, these people do actually read these massive books cover-to-cover, for enjoyment alone. No real "ideas" are being shoved down their throats, just a story about weird kids growing up in fantastical circumstances. People are reading it for the story alone, and these books don't sit on shelves, but get shared and passed around the family.

That takes talent.
Is it my cup of tea? I read the first one, and shrugged at it. So, no.

Do I respect her talent? Most certainly, I do.

[Shadow_Ferret]

Although I don't begrudge Rowling her fame or fortune, I must admit it took me several tries to get through the first Harry Potter book. It was just too "British" sounding for me and it didn't seem to pick up until Harry actually arrived at Hogwarts. I don't think I ever truly empathized with him. But I was impressed with her imagination. If I could steal anything from her, it would be that. :)

[BlueBadger]

Writing for children can indeed be difficult, but kids still don't need a million adjectives and adverbs to guide them (and again, the early HP books didn't seem to be as plagued).

I love literature for children / young adults. I'll often take it over adult stuff. I'm a fan of the "Silverwing" series by Kenneth Oppel, and I also thought "Holes" was a superb book. Both of those had clean, flowing prose.

Ferret: Agreed on Rowling's imagination. I absolutely love her take on mythical animals, particularily dragons. In an age where every fantasy writer seems to be changing history's more fearsome beast into fire-breathing My Little Ponies, it's nice to see her do the basics so well.

(Especially the way she "coordinates" the dragons by country/region and not colour, which is the common method)

[MadScientistMatt]

But how much does "style" influence the success of a wildly popular novel? I'd say that the prose just needs to be clear enough that you know what's going on without suspending disbelief - no cases where you wonder "Hey, whose thought is that?" or think, "Come on, nobody talks like that!"

What I really remember from books like that are the characters, settings, and the story. I usually don't "see" the prose itself.

[Stew21]

jst - I like the points you make. The more you read in different styles, genres, categories the better. The more "other" things you experience such as architecture, mythology, film, art, etc the better! These are all things that will fold into your characters identities, dialog, your metaphors and your imagery.
They don't all have to be "good". Try the different styles you see, look at mistakes you see in other books, and make sure you don't do it. Its as important to know what is wrong as it is to know what is right.
Someone mentioned Hemingway. When I had to read The Old Man And The Sea in h.s. I hated it. When I read A Moveable Feast, when I was older, I grew an entirely new appreciation for him. What did a learn? You don't need long explanatory sentences full of phrases to elaborate each point. Sometimes the simplest formed sentence is the best. I learned from him. I think that is a wonderful thing to get from a book. I'm sure he's not on a lot of people's "favorite authors" list, but hey, I managed to learn something of description of places/scenery from him, and a little something about forming sentences, using the "truest" word, and being declarative. Do I want to write just like him? Nope. But I'm glad I read it!
So do what JST suggested - read, write, practice writing some more, go out and see as many things as you can, and write about it, give yourself prompts and write about it, try to tell a story you already know in a new and different way. Fill your "tool box" with as many tools as you can and use the experience.
Have fun discovering your style. Devour books as fast as you can and try to take something away from each of them, whether what to do or what not to do. Fill your mind with anything and everything that will contribute to your ability to write a good story. Music, art, other books, movies, mythology, nature, science, etc.
Good luck! :) I hope the journey to good writing is fun! I'm having a blast

Trish - mid-journey

[badducky]

One of my favorite books, to this day, is "The First Two Lives of Lukas Kasha" by Lloyd Alexander.

I also read "Free Stallion" by what's-her-face's... Joan of Arcadia? What's her name... google... google... Amber Tamblyn's book of poetry "Free Stallion", and I wondered what the heck it was doing in the teen section.

Not to say it's nobel material -- because it's not -- but it sure beat the stuffing out of Jewel's poetry (which is still in the poetry section), and Tamblyn shows a more promise than many of the new poets I've read in otherwise good literary magazines.
But, this is all part of the strangeness of marketing. You can't just go to one section of the store to find good writing.

I still don't understand why Ursula K. Leguinn is in the sci-fi fantasy section, and Margaret Atwood is in Literature...

[BlueBadger]

Well, I remember being shocked the first time I heard that Watership Down is supposed to be a children's book. XD

[Simon Woodhouse]

Besides, it doesn't kill you to read a "bad" book every now and then.

I've learnt quite a lot from 'bad' books. I find them inspirational too, in so much as if something terrible can get published and make it onto a book shop shelf, then there's hope for all of us.

[Nexusman]

A step-by-step approach to writing a series and generating millions of dollars:

1. Have a likeable main character in a rotten home situation.
2. Send him to a magic school.
3. Let him have fun with his friends.
4. Have him defeat an evil wizard.
5. Send him back to the rotten home situation.
6. Repeat six times. Add and remove characters as needed.

-Nick

[BlueBadger]

Speaking of learning from bad books, I must strut. I actually own a copy of "The Legend of Rah and the Muggles" by NK Stouffer, who sued JK Rowling for "ripping off her ideas."

Some of the "infringements" Miss Stouffer pointed out: Both books have castles! Both books are about orphans! Both books have a lake! No, I'm not making this up.

Her biggest bullet was the word "Muggle", which is simply a word for a non-magical human in the Harry Potter universe. In Stouffer's world, a "muggle" is ... a human who's been subject to a strange evolution as a result of a nuclear war or something.

It's really too odd to explain. You can read the intro to Stouffer's book on her page: http://www.realmuggles.com/. Yes, that's honest to goodness published text right there.

[Yeshanu]

I did like the first three Harry Potter books better than the fourth and fifth, which goes to show that longer is not better. The all caps thing nearly had me throwing the book across the room in despair, but fortunately I got over it. I hope the seventh book is at least as good as the sixth.

This brings home another point--if you start off a series really well and hook people, some folks (like me) will continue reading, even if the writing gets worse, just to see what happens.

Personally, I liked Prisoner of Azkaban best. The plot line seemed much more solid to me, and the twist with Wormtail was a genuine surprise.


Ferret: Agreed on Rowling's imagination. I absolutely love her take on mythical animals, particularily dragons. In an age where every fantasy writer seems to be changing history's more fearsome beast into fire-breathing My Little Ponies, it's nice to see her do the basics so well.

(Especially the way she "coordinates" the dragons by country/region and not colour, which is the common method)

She must not have played Dungeons and Dragons... :D

Actually, for fantasy writers out there, I really would suggest studying mythological creatures, and trying to leave the D&D stock characters behind.

[Yeshanu]

Speaking of learning from bad books, I must strut. I actually own a copy of "The Legend of Rah and the Muggles" by NK Stouffer, who sued JK Rowling for "ripping off her ideas."

Some of the "infringements" Miss Stouffer pointed out: Both books have castles! Both books are about orphans! Both books have a lake! No, I'm not making this up.



:ROFL:

Maybe the rest of us fantasy writers can join Stouffer, and make it a class action suit? I wouldn't mind a part of the action.

(I think the lawyer who took on this suit should lose his credentials. This goes beyond the silliness spawned by DVC.)

[BlueBadger]

She must not have played Dungeons and Dragons... :D

Actually, for fantasy writers out there, I really would suggest studying mythological creatures, and trying to leave the D&D stock characters behind.

w0rd! Though to be honest, I am completely sick of standard D&D fantasy, but I still think that Margaret Weis is too cool for school. Her "Doom Brigade" series had me laughing like crazy. It also says something about her writing that I didn't care at all about Raistlin in the Dragonlance Chronicles (gasp!), but I was crying by the end of the Legends trilogy.

'course, I was REALLY crying after what Lizards of the Coast made her do to the Heroes of the Lance in the Chaos War books, but I don't fault her for that.

[Sarita]

Her biggest bullet was the word "Muggle", which is simply a word for a non-magical human in the Harry Potter universe. In Stouffer's world, a "muggle" is ... a human who's been subject to a strange evolution as a result of a nuclear war or something.Totally off topic, but I just read about the Muggletonians of the 1600's, named after Lodowic Muggleton. They were some sort of religious group that said Muggleton had the power to save or damn whom he pleased. Sounds like they could sue Rowling too... :)

[cwfgal]

I started the Da Vinci Code thread to get ya'll opinion on Dan Brown's writing; which I did get. Now, I'm taking the book back to the library because I don't want to learn how to write from someone who ya'll say cannot.

Now, how about J.K. Rowling? And, how about the old Hardy Boys books by Franklin W. Dixon? They seem to flow pretty well and are easy enough to read.

Again, I don't want to "learn" bad habits. I want to learn "good" writing which, to me, would be an easy (fast) read that the reader can easily follow and understand. It seems the story line is another matter entirely.

Thanks!:)

Writers can learn from the "bad" as well as the good. Clearly Brown did something very right with his book(s). Being able to pinpoint what it was could prove enlightening and educational, and help you sharpen your own writing skills. The same with Rowling. Figure out why these books have done so well and you'll benefit your own writing.

Beth

[Yeshanu]

w0rd! Though to be honest, I am completely sick of standard D&D fantasy, but I still think that Margaret Weis is too cool for school. Her "Doom Brigade" series had me laughing like crazy. It also says something about her writing that I didn't care at all about Raistlin in the Dragonlance Chronicles (gasp!), but I was crying by the end of the Legends trilogy.

'course, I was REALLY crying after what Lizards of the Coast made her do to the Heroes of the Lance in the Chaos War books, but I don't fault her for that.


Not to hijack the thread, but I did like Dragonlance, at least the originals and Legends. However, far too many fantasy novels that aren't set in D&D worlds are still set in D&D worlds, if you know what I mean...

(I'm talking from experience here--it's taken me 20+ years to move away from simply re-writing adventures to writing a real novel.)

[Sheryl Nantus]

all I know is that I am THRILLED when I see dozens of kids lining up, barely able to carry their copy of the latest HP to the cash register.

if nothing else, they're reading.

which is a Good Thing.

[Christine N.]

It all goes back to what Uncle Jim always says - "Story trumps everything".

[DamaNegra]

I used to love the HP books... until the sixth one. Brief summary: Snape makes a blood oath with Malfoy's parents, loads and loads of hormonal teenagers, more hormonal teenagers, jealous hormonal teenager, oh, right, we're supposed to be talking about the dark lord. Well, bum bam! Kill Dumbledore, Snape's evil, Malfoy has mission, now everyone escape! Oh yeah, some more hormonal teenagers. Bah.

[Peggy]

I used to love the HP books... until the sixth one. Brief summary: Snape makes a blood oath with Malfoy's parents, loads and loads of hormonal teenagers, more hormonal teenagers, jealous hormonal teenager, oh, right, we're supposed to be talking about the dark lord. Well, bum bam! Kill Dumbledore, Snape's evil, Malfoy has mission, now everyone escape! Oh yeah, some more hormonal teenagers. Bah.So, you're saying the book touched on the topic of hormonal teenagers? :kiss:

I enjoyed book 6, but maybe it's because I haven't been a teenager for a l-o-n-g time, so I can look back on the raging hormones with fondness. Also, I learned the word "snogging", which sounds like more fun than "making out".

[DamaNegra]

So, you're saying the book touched on the topic of hormonal teenagers? :kiss:

Lol, it's just that I got so frustrated when I read it. I used to love the magic: the spells, wands, QUDDITCH!! OMG, QUIDDITCH!!

And then I get the book and... boom!! No more magic classes, not even QUIDDITCH!!! There's no QUIDDITCH!! How can I not be disappointed, when the part of HP that drew me in has been replaced by a bunch of hormonal teenagers? I mean, if she could really write about hormonal teenagers, but I found that part to be rather pathetic. Believe me, I live among hormonal teenagers.

[Jamesaritchie]

Meanwhile, Ernest Hemingway is ... important.

Knosh on that one kids. :-)

Shalom

Hemingway wasn't exactly a pauper. He was a bestselling write of his day, and made all the money he needed to travel all over the world, and do whatever he wanted to do. Had had the money, the fame, the imortance, the integrity, and his work is still being read.

I guess I'm just the odd man out. If tons of money really counted for all that much, I can think of a hundred ways to make it that are all easier and faster than writing. Money is a fine thing, but when it's the main focus, well, I know too many people like that already.

[Jamesaritchie]

A step-by-step approach to writing a series and generating millions of dollars:

1. Have a likeable main character in a rotten home situation.
2. Send him to a magic school.
3. Let him have fun with his friends.
4. Have him defeat an evil wizard.
5. Send him back to the rotten home situation.
6. Repeat six times. Add and remove characters as needed.

-Nick

Trouble is, if a thousand writers do exactly this, maybe one of them will do it well enough to grab a couple of million readers. Formulas do not make bestsellers. Writers good enough to turn a formula into a magic potion make bestsellers.

[Jamesaritchie]

Writing for children can indeed be difficult, but kids still don't need a million adjectives and adverbs to guide them (and again, the early HP books didn't seem to be as plagued).

I love literature for children / young adults. I'll often take it over adult stuff. I'm a fan of the "Silverwing" series by Kenneth Oppel, and I also thought "Holes" was a superb book. Both of those had clean, flowing prose.

Ferret: Agreed on Rowling's imagination. I absolutely love her take on mythical animals, particularily dragons. In an age where every fantasy writer seems to be changing history's more fearsome beast into fire-breathing My Little Ponies, it's nice to see her do the basics so well.

(Especially the way she "coordinates" the dragons by country/region and not colour, which is the common method)

Children may not need adjectives and adverbs, but they do love them, and that's what counts. Listen to a child tell a story of his own. It will be full of adjectives and adverbs, and you can watch their eyes light up when they hear them in a story you tell them.

With children, love outweighs need every last time.

[Jamesaritchie]

Although I don't begrudge Rowling her fame or fortune, I must admit it took me several tries to get through the first Harry Potter book. It was just too "British" sounding for me and it didn't seem to pick up until Harry actually arrived at Hogwarts. I don't think I ever truly empathized with him. But I was impressed with her imagination. If I could steal anything from her, it would be that. :)

You know, there may be someting to the British sounding bit. It sounded very British to me, as well, but that's one of the things I loved about it. I read almost as much fiction from the UK as I do American fiction.

One of my favorite writers is Jonathan Gash, particularly his "Lovejoy" novels, and it just doesn't get any more British than that.

[Celia Cyanide]

all I know is that I am THRILLED when I see dozens of kids lining up, barely able to carry their copy of the latest HP to the cash register.

if nothing else, they're reading.

which is a Good Thing.

I think it's important that they're reading something that's good for them, at least. When I was a kid, everyone was reading VC Andrews, and I don't think it improved them at all.

[Christine N.]

I enjoy the fact that VC has been dead for nearly 20 years, yet still manages to make the bestseller list with New novels.

I wanna be her in my next life. :)

Come on, James, you know that writer equate money with readers. It's the only real gage we have. Besides the advance, your royalty check is directly related to how many people bought your book.

So it's not REALLY about the money, but the books in readers' hands that the money represents.

[CaptMorgan]

I like Rowling's writing a good bit. Many blast her for too many adverbs and adjectives and say her dialogue tags break the rules, but I think they're wrong. Many of the rules used when writing for adults do not apply when writing for children.


You know, a writer once told me that you can only get away with breaking the rules when you know you're doing it. I think Rowling does this brilliantly.

[Jamesaritchie]

I enjoy the fact that VC has been dead for nearly 20 years, yet still manages to make the bestseller list with New novels.

I wanna be her in my next life. :)

Come on, James, you know that writer equate money with readers. It's the only real gage we have. Besides the advance, your royalty check is directly related to how many people bought your book.

So it's not REALLY about the money, but the books in readers' hands that the money represents.

Yes, but you can put just as many books in readers hands without writing something that has the sole aim of making money. I want readers, too. Millions of them. But this does not mean I'm willing to write anything and everything just to gain those readers.

Money and number of readers are important, but they are not all a writer has. Or shouldn't. For me, number of readers is certainly A gauge, but far from the only one. And when you get right down to it, it isn't even the most important gauge.

[Jamesaritchie]

You know, a writer once told me that you can only get away with breaking the rules when you know you're doing it. I think Rowling does this brilliantly.

I think she does, too.

[Danger Jane]

Lol, it's just that I got so frustrated when I read it. I used to love the magic: the spells, wands, QUDDITCH!! OMG, QUIDDITCH!!

And then I get the book and... boom!! No more magic classes, not even QUIDDITCH!!! There's no QUIDDITCH!! How can I not be disappointed, when the part of HP that drew me in has been replaced by a bunch of hormonal teenagers? I mean, if she could really write about hormonal teenagers, but I found that part to be rather pathetic. Believe me, I live among hormonal teenagers.

Haha, nice to see I wasn't the only one that felt this. I mean, of course I'm going to buy the seventh book. But the sixth read kind of like exploits in criminal psychology and Harry just wasn't very likeable. I didn't really enjoy reading about him, butI enjoyed the book.

I wish she edited the books more. They just don't need to be eight hundred pages long. So many parts could be cut out with no real impact on the book, except to help readers get through. My dad spent all of two years reading the fourth HP book because it was just so long.

[Azure Skye]

Rowling has a knack for something. She's a great storyteller.

[TrickyFiction]

I love the Potter books. I own all but one of them, and my husband and I read them together. They're strictly fun times. The characters are just outrageous enough to be animated, but still believable (they kind of remind me of Dickens' characters that way), and the story flows along very well. I take confort in the fact that Rowling already knows where this is going. It's more structured than a lot of series that size.

I agree with those who said some of the later books were a little too filled with adolescent crushes and hormonal teenagery stuff. Obviously, that isn't something I go for when I pick up a book. But, teenagers eat that stuff right up because they can relate to it. We must admit, at least, that Rowling is keeping her target audience in mind when she writes that sort of thing.

[Cheryll]

all I know is that I am THRILLED when I see dozens of kids lining up, barely able to carry their copy of the latest HP to the cash register.

if nothing else, they're reading.

which is a Good Thing.

I couldn't agree with you more!

Cheryll

[Kida Adelyne]

Lol, it's just that I got so frustrated when I read it. I used to love the magic: the spells, wands, QUDDITCH!! OMG, QUIDDITCH!!

And then I get the book and... boom!! No more magic classes, not even QUIDDITCH!!! There's no QUIDDITCH!! How can I not be disappointed, when the part of HP that drew me in has been replaced by a bunch of hormonal teenagers? I mean, if she could really write about hormonal teenagers, but I found that part to be rather pathetic. Believe me, I live among hormonal teenagers.

I hated the fifth book because of that. But I found it's not as bad in the sixth book. The only thing I hated about the sixth book was the ending. :rant:

I love the quidditch scenes too, and I will never forgive the fourth movie for cutting out the world cup.

[Christine N.]

Hey, they'll be NO Quidditch in the 7th book. She's already said as much.
I also give her props for spending serious amounts of time keeping track of plot lines. I've started files like that for my series - only two books are written, but I know what the last book (of 5-7, I haven't decided yet) will be. I just have to keep those good notes like she does.

[Lantern Jack]

Y'all wouldn't be gossiping about me behindst my back, wouldst you? If so, I should be forced to unleash some starved blast-ended skrewts on your soon to be scorched ends:guns:

[BuffStuff]

Margaret Weis rocks the body that rocks the party. She answered all of my annoying emails, too! The Dragonlance series often gets a bad wrap, but she is a very good writer by any standards.

In agreeing with many here, I don't believe there are any true "writing rules". It's all in what a writer is skilled enough to "get away with". I often think, that while certain "rules" are certainly good to follow for the newbie writer, they also foster a sense of limitation. There isn't enough focus on experimentation with writers and they become more afraid of "breaking a rule" than they are of experimenting to transcend the rules in the 1st place... which is what all great writers do, from Twain, to Hemingway (though Stephen Crane was doing Hemingway even before Hemingway) and on and on down the line.

In many critiques over the years that I've observed, people tend to crit with the same old party lines regardless of the author or the piece in question. Good advice is good advice but every rule has it's limitations, and often writers try to do writing that is SAFE for critiques, rather than attempt to break a certain rule (show don't tell, never open with weather, ad nauseum) in order to achieve a desired effect. No one wants to look the fool, of course, but it's a bit depressing when we as writers become so conditioned by them that we can't make allowances. Sometimes opening with the weather is needed, or it sets a mood, sounds beautiful, etc and is skillfully done. At other times, "telling" can be far superior to "showing". It all depends on the context.

[Jamesaritchie]

Haha, nice to see I wasn't the only one that felt this. I mean, of course I'm going to buy the seventh book. But the sixth read kind of like exploits in criminal psychology and Harry just wasn't very likeable. I didn't really enjoy reading about him, butI enjoyed the book.

I wish she edited the books more. They just don't need to be eight hundred pages long. So many parts could be cut out with no real impact on the book, except to help readers get through. My dad spent all of two years reading the fourth HP book because it was just so long.


The length of the books is one of the things I like about them. Takes all kinds, I guess, and it's a matter of taste, but I hate it when a writer edits a book down to bare story. I want lots of details, I want to be immersed in the world and the characters, as well as in the story.

But it doesn't take me all that long to read a Harry Potter book. None so far have taken me more than a week.

I also like dthat Harry Wasn't very lieable in book six. How many teenagers are likeable all the time? How many real people of any age are always likeable? For me, it made Harry much more real.

[Puddle Jumper]

Rowling be good if you want to write for kids. I breezed through those books I think faster than any book I've ever read as an adult. I was very disappointed with the style of the sixth book though. I thought it read more like fan fiction than a novel.

[FolkloreFanatic]

To reiterate: no magical formula, sometimes theme and timing is everything, decently written with terrific plots (at least until Book Six).

Personally, I think I would have attempted to plot out and write as much of a series as possible before the first book was published, even if I didn't intend to sell the entire series. I think Rowling really screwed up so many things in HBP to the point that they were unforgivable, but that's just my opinion, and it didn't stop me from rereading the earlier books or enjoying the movies.

There is nothing wrong with hormonal teenagers. Now, out-of-character, Mary-Sue hormonal teenagers, THERE'S a problem... ;)

[Christine N.]

Well, no there are some absolute 'writing rules'

- learn how to spell
- LEARN THE RULES FOR ENGLISH GRAMMAR AND FOLLOW THEM.
-learn how to write dialogue
-even if it's fantastic, make it believable.

Most of these are mechanical, technical rules, but without them you won't get past the slush pile. Everything else, the artsy part, is pretty much up for grabs. :) As long as you do it well enough that it can convince someone to publish it.

[badducky]

Speaking of Uncle Jim, is it just me, or do the covers to the Harry Potter books bear a striking resemblence to Uncle Jim's "Circle of Magic" books?


Uncle Jim's books are also about a young wizard...

[jst5150]

Well, no there are some absolute 'writing rules'

- learn how to spell

On who's continent? The UK like its armour, you know.

- LEARN THE RULES FOR ENGLISH GRAMMAR AND FOLLOW THEM.

ee cummings, James Joyce and a few others called and left a voice mail for you on this one. It might be hard to understand, though ... :-)

-learn how to write dialogue

She turned like she was a weathervane in the wind or something like a weathervane in the wind, you know, that turns. Like she did. Then she said something. "Is there anymore pie?" I opened my mouth to say something back, but no words came out because I needed a Mentos and Vaporub.

-even if it's fantastic, make it believable.

I tend to like it the other way around.

And, so I can add to the JK Rowling element of this, it's very cool that there's a new mythology bourne from what she's written. How often do you get THAT distinction?

[Jamesaritchie]

On who's continent? The UK like its armour, you know.



ee cummings, James Joyce and a few others called and left a voice mail for you on this one. It might be hard to understand, though ... :-)
?

You mean there are people who actually read e.e. Cummings and James Joyce voluntarily? Who would have believed it.

It's true enough that you don't always have to follow the rules of good grammar, but you had darned well better know the rules, and you'd better be able to follow them when they need to be followed. Grammar broken through knowledge can be wonderful, but grammar broken through ignorace always produces bad writing.

e. e. Cummings and James Joyce both knew the rules of grammar from the get-go.

I think both failed miserably in how they wrote, but I'm not sure the way they used grammar had anything to do with it.

[Elwyn]

So from the info I've gleaned from this forum, and the one about The Da Vinci Code, I'm going to take Dan Brown's book back and check out ones by by Margaret Weis and Tamora Pierce.

Sound like a good idea?:flag:

[Kida Adelyne]

So from the info I've gleaned from this forum, and the one about The Da Vinci Code, I'm going to take Dan Brown's book back and check out ones by by Margaret Weis and Tamora Pierce.

Sound like a good idea?:flag:

If you model after Tamora Pierce, don't pick up her nasty habit of having characters step out of the darkness/through the door EVERY TIME they join a conversation. Other than that, she rocks!

-Ally

[Danger Jane]

If you model after Tamora Pierce, don't pick up her nasty habit of having characters step out of the darkness/through the door EVERY TIME they join a conversation. Other than that, she rocks!

-Ally

She does have weird idiosyncrasies like this, but altogether she's a pretty engaging writer.

[Christine N.]

Thank you James, you knew what I meant and didn't have to be snippy about it :)

If you use British spelling, make sure it's consistent. If you break grammar rules, do them consistently, and so well that that the reader doesn't realize it. But know what you're doing, like James said.

If you don't know the rules, you don't know when to break them. Smartypants. And if you make it fantastic, even unbelievable, make it plausible. If no one believes your reasoning, if they don't suspend their disbelief long enough to get past your strange ideas, then no one will read your bloody book. :P


And yes, Tammy does rock. She's a darn nice lady too.

[BlueBadger]

Regarding British spelling and consistency: What if you live in Canada? We use a mix of British and American spelling. ;)

I lean more towards the British side, but I've had critics tell me that Canadian spelling isn't acceptable -- if I'm going to use anything remotely British, I must use all the terminology as well ("petrol" instead of "gas", etc.) Personally, I don't buy it.

[jst5150]

I wasn't trying to belittle Christine's thoughts. All true. I was merely saying there are other directions for writers to travel.

And James Joyce got high a lot. :-)

Regret any offense to Chrstine

Shabbat Shalom

[pdr]

e. e. Cummings and James Joyce both knew the rules of grammar from the get-go.

I think both failed miserably in how they wrote, but I'm not sure the way they used grammar had anything to do with it.

James Ritchie, you just explain where e.e.cummings failed! He's one of the few good things that ever happened to American literature. Helluva lot better than Hemingway.

[willietheshakes]

You mean there are people who actually read e.e. Cummings and James Joyce voluntarily? Who would have believed it.

...

e. e. Cummings and James Joyce both knew the rules of grammar from the get-go.

I think both failed miserably in how they wrote, but I'm not sure the way they used grammar had anything to do with it.

James, I agree with you on most things, but this is the stupidest freakin' post I've ever read on this board.

[Adam_Atlantian]

I haven't read all the great classics you guys have. All i've read is C.S. Lewis , J.K Rowling, Hemingway (I thought i would die reading the old man and the sea), and The Scarlet Letter. But i don't think you should take others books and copy a style. I think you should read everything you can get your hands on. Since i was little my family read to me and then i read to me and now i'm a writer with all the great influences from more then fifty authors. (I cant remeber all of them. The ones up top are just the recent ones. All those styles are mixed in my head and that's what gives each author a different style.

I think it would be better to read everything you can.

[Ronda]

OK so I guess I'm bad... I liked the DaVinci Code. I can learn something from any book. I think that although some of Brown's premises needed better development, he did a good job of building suspense in the first half or so of the book. I don't know what anything looked like on the page since I "read" it via a Library for the Blind recording.

I love the Harry Potter series, though I would definitely give all the books verbosity surgery. I was able to get into the story and enjoy the books I've listened to so far. Still waiting for the altest one to be released on the special 4-track cassette tapes the Library of congress uses for those of us who can't read print.

I would say that if you want to read DaVinci Code, read it and learn what you can from it. Hemmingway... blech is my personal opinion, but read some for yourself and decide what is good and what you don't prefer in that laconic style. I think all his people sound the same. If you take out the dialogue alone, you'd never know who's talking. So I learned something from that, and I try to make sure people have something distinctive in their manner of speech.

The opening scene of DC definitely caught my interest, then Brown made it so the reader could figure out who the bad apple was going to be, so I learned from that as well.

I love the Sword of Truth series by Terry Goodkind. He does an excellent job of characterization and plotting, but he has a tendency to have a character represent a platform too much for my taste. As the series goes on, the platform is more and more evident. There is a line between skillfully presenting a theme and overdoing a platform, and I think he is has crossed it in his later books. He gets that from Ayn Rand's philosophy, which he espouses. Still wonderful writing, but I don't want to write exactly like him.

All writing is an opinion. Sure, there may be some things that are universally considered "bad" or "unprofessional," but overall, we each like different things.
You don't have to copy anybody's style to learn something about writing - characterization, dialogue, plotting, theme, or whatever - from any book. Do you like the way one author handles thoughts? Keep a notebook handy and write a sample, or copy a page for your own personal file to remind you. Do you like the way someone describes a setting? Take notes and learn from it. Don't ever refuse to read a book simply because other authors don't like it. You can, if nothing else, learn how you DON"T want to write your book.

Warmly,
Ronda