A Kingly Right

[Akuma]

So how come Stephen King and all the famous writers
are able
t o do. whatever. they.
w
a
n
t
with writing formats?
It seems like average joes like you and I don't get away with that stuff as often.

Is it a cost issue or something else? Don't tell me there are rules to writing I don't know about!

[blacbird]

Because he can. Before Stephen King became Stephen King, he couldn't. Your job is to become Stephen King. Then you'll be able to use dumb typographical gimmicks, too. In the meantime, you're stuck with just needing to tell a good story.

caw.

[Jamesaritchie]

So how come Stephen King and all the famous writers
are able
t o do. whatever. they.
w
a
n
t
with writing formats?
It seems like average joes like you and I don't get away with that stuff as often.

Is it a cost issue or something else? Don't tell me there are rules to writing I don't know about!

It's for two reasons. 1. They've made their publishers many, many millions of dollars. Do this and of course you can get away with many things average Joes aren't even allowed to try. Stephen King, and other writers of his ilk, have alreayd proven their worth. New writers have not. 2. The things these writers "get away" with usually work. If they fail, it won't be very long before they aren't allowed to do them, either.

And the number one rule to writing has always been "The writer who sells the most books is the one who makes the rules."

Having said this, other than length, I don't think King and his ilk really get away with much of anything. They usually tell stories that please millions of readers, they usually write pretty well, and they usually have characters the majority of readers like. Do this, and you're doing exactly what you're suppose dto be doing. If you can sell a few million copies of your book on top of this, publishers should let you try things beginning writers aren't allowed to think about, let alone do.

[Flapdoodle]

Because he can. Before Stephen King became Stephen King, he couldn't. Your job is to become Stephen King. Then you'll be able to use dumb typographical gimmicks, too. In the meantime, you're stuck with just needing to tell a good story.

caw.

He can't. That's why he invented "Richard Bachman" to do "un-King" stories (Like Roadwork).

[Jamesaritchie]

He can't. That's why he invented "Richard Bachman" to do "un-King" stories (Like Roadwork).

But the publisher allowed him to create Richard Bachman, and put a ton of money behind that name, as well.

[Linda Adams]

He can't. That's why he invented "Richard Bachman" to do "un-King" stories (Like Roadwork).

Actually, he was writing so many books that he had to publish under another name. At the time, the publishing industry thought too many books by one author in too short a time would oversaturature the market.

[Flapdoodle]

Actually, he was writing so many books that he had to publish under another name. At the time, the publishing industry thought too many books by one author in too short a time would oversaturature the market.


Maybe I imagined that preface:

http://users.cybercity.dk/~nmb21186/aboutbachman.htm

I'll have to dig it out again - I only read it 18 months ago.

I'm sure I read that he created Bachman so he could try out things that weren't very "Kingish"

[Jamesaritchie]

Maybe I imagined that preface:

http://users.cybercity.dk/~nmb21186/aboutbachman.htm (http://users.cybercity.dk/%7Enmb21186/aboutbachman.htm)

I'll have to dig it out again - I only read it 18 months ago.

I'm sure I read that he created Bachman so he could try out things that weren't very "Kingish"

The link you give says that Bachman was to prevent market over-saturation, but I don't think it really matters. Whatever the reasoning, King got to do it his way. Besides, King has always written many types of stories and novels under his own name.

[willietheshakes]

So how come Stephen King and all the famous writers
are able
t o do. whatever. they.
w
a
n
t
with writing formats?
It seems like average joes like you and I don't get away with that stuff as often.

Is it a cost issue or something else? Don't tell me there are rules to writing I don't know about!

What sort of things in particular are you talking about?
I ask because stylistically I think King was more daring early in his career, when he was just a fledgling...

[BlackCrowesChick]

I don't think he does that many strange formats at all. Sometimes, there will be parts with something hand-written, drawn in, or in a different font than the rest of the book, i.e. in Bag of Bones everything the fridge magnets said was in a different font. In Misery, the parts of the book within the book (the one the main character was writing) were in a different font, and there were supposed to be letters missing from his keyboard, n was the main one, I think, so there were hand-drawn in n's where they belonged in those sections of the book. I don't usually see this type of thing in other people's books, so perhaps this is what you meant. I don't see anything wrong with it, though. Its an interesting way to go about it and you're right that beginning writers probably wouldn't be allowed to publish things that way.

[blacbird]

My prejudice is that if you need to use a strange formatting gimmick, there's probably something wrong with your story.

caw.

[TrickyFiction]

He can't. That's why he invented "Richard Bachman" to do "un-King" stories (Like Roadwork).

Wait... Richard BACHman? Obviously, I'm out of the loop.
Is that an homage? It seems to be.
I didn't know King was a Richard Bach fan.

[BlackCrowesChick]

Wait... Richard BACHman? Obviously, I'm out of the loop.
Is that an homage? It seems to be.
I didn't know King was a Richard Bach fan.

No, he got Bachman from the band Bachman Turner Overdrive, and I believe Richard is from Richard Burton. He combined the two to come up with his pseudonym.

[TrickyFiction]

No, he got Bachman from the band Bachman Turner Overdrive, and I believe Richard is from Richard Burton. He combined the two to come up with his pseudonym.

Ah. Well, that makes sense. It's a funny coincidence.

[Akuma]

Wait... Richard BACHman? Obviously, I'm out of the loop.
Is that an homage? It seems to be.
I didn't know King was a Richard Bach fan.

In his earlier, more impressionable years Stephen King created the alter ego
Richard Bach Man, who would fight evil-doers with classical music and harmonic operas.
He later became too old for the job, however, and began writing novels based on his villains' schemes. All the names were changed, of course, and in no way did he connect them with Richard Bach Man in fear that suspicions would be aroused.

Of course, he admitted his past in his dying years, before he discovered immortality through the dark arts of necromancy and commercial advertising.

My prejudice is that if you need to use a strange formatting gimmick, there's probably something wrong with your story.

That is indeed prejudice. Though it's true that sculpting manure may not make it smell good, sculpting doesn't necessarily make things stink, I believe.

[Jamesaritchie]

My prejudice is that if you need to use a strange formatting gimmick, there's probably something wrong with your story.

caw.

Except with King, it works. He has good story, and uses some terribly minor formatting tricks to make it better. And I can't think of any formatting "tricks" he uses that are unusual, out of place, or that pretty much any writer wouldn't be allowed to use. . .if they could think of them.

[Jamesaritchie]

I don't think he does that many strange formats at all. Sometimes, there will be parts with something hand-written, drawn in, or in a different font than the rest of the book, i.e. in Bag of Bones everything the fridge magnets said was in a different font. In Misery, the parts of the book within the book (the one the main character was writing) were in a different font, and there were supposed to be letters missing from his keyboard, n was the main one, I think, so there were hand-drawn in n's where they belonged in those sections of the book. I don't usually see this type of thing in other people's books, so perhaps this is what you meant. I don't see anything wrong with it, though. Its an interesting way to go about it and you're right that beginning writers probably wouldn't be allowed to publish things that way.

I agree. Though the few formatting tricks he does use are always appropriate, and from the ones I've seen are also tricks any writer would be allowed to use. And have used, in fact. They work well, and add to the story. There's really nothing terribly unusual about having someting like tyhe magnets in a different font. That's no more a "trick" than what many writers, including little old me, do.

"Bag of Bones" was one of King's best novels, and fully deserved all the praise it received, and all the awards it won.

[Akuma]

Alright, so we've established who can and cannot do wierd formatting. But I'm still unsure as to why one writer can and another can't.
Are there cost issues? Or is it just unfamiliar territory for publishers?

[ChunkyC]

What sort of things in particular are you talking about?
I ask because stylistically I think King was more daring early in his career, when he was just a fledgling...
King's first novel was Carrie. Then he wrote Salem's Lot. Neither was formatically unusual in any way that I can remember, though I admit it's been some time since I've read them.

Those two novels made him the best selling author in America and made his publisher millions. From then on, he could do pretty much whatever he wanted. And that's the why. Any author who has shown he or she can sell books will be given more leeway than an author without a track record.

[blacbird]

But I'm still unsure as to why one writer can and another can't.

Most writers, I think, prefer not to mess with odd typographical formatting, even if they have the clout to do so, preferring instead to write stories.

caw.

[willietheshakes]

King's first novel was Carrie. Then he wrote Salem's Lot. Neither was formatically unusual in any way that I can remember, though I admit it's been some time since I've read them.

Those two novels made him the best selling author in America and made his publisher millions. From then on, he could do pretty much whatever he wanted. And that's the why. Any author who has shown he or she can sell books will be given more leeway than an author without a track record.

You should go back and re-read Carrie. The reason I asked the question is because Carrie is likely King's most daring book stylistically and formally. The incorporation of the extratextual material (magazine articles, notebook scrawls, news reports, AP tickers, police radio signals, graffiti, etc) along with the fragmented stream of consciousness chunks as Carrie falls apart at the novel's climax are, in my opinion, the furthest he's ever been stylistically. More so because of the amount of this material in a relatively short novel. Yes, these are generally presented in standard font and punctuation (save for those stream of consciousness passages), but there's nothing straightforward about itl -- in many ways, it's almost a collage...

And this was King's first book, long before he had Kingly privilege.

[Jamesaritchie]

Most writers, I think, prefer not to mess with odd typographical formatting, even if they have the clout to do so, preferring instead to write stories.

caw.

You don't need clout, you need to know when to do it, and when not to. Even rank beginners are allowed to use formatting techniques for certain things. Writers, new and old, have often used formatting techniques for signs, for letters, for notes, for police reports, for clues, and for a hundred other things. Stephen King is a pauper when it comes to doing such things.

And anyone, new old old, rank beginner or old pro, would likely have used the same formatting technique King did in Bag of Bones. If they were smart, that is.

I think you need to read more. There's nothing uncommon about odd formatting for certain things in a novel. Never has been. Just because you use them doesn't mean you're telling any less of a story, and often means you're telling more of a story. That's really an odd statement.

It seems odd someone should complain about something so old and time tested in this age of interactive novels, novels with hyperlinks, novels with sound, novels with a hundred fonts, novels that drip blood, etc.

[ted_curtis]

And anyone, new old old, rank beginner or old pro, would likely have used the same formatting technique King did in Bag of Bones. If they were smart, that is.


JK Rowling did this in the first Harry Potter book (which was her first) with the letters from Hogwarts. And it worked well because the strange font increased the mystery and exotic feeling.

[BlackCrowesChick]

"Bag of Bones" was one of King's best novels, and fully deserved all the praise it received, and all the awards it won.

I completely agree. Bag of Bones is my favorite novel. :)

[cwfgal]

You don't need clout, you need to know when to do it, and when not to. Even rank beginners are allowed to use formatting techniques for certain things. Writers, new and old, have often used formatting techniques for signs, for letters, for notes, for police reports, for clues, and for a hundred other things. Stephen King is a pauper when it comes to doing such things.

There's nothing uncommon about odd formatting for certain things in a novel. Never has been.

I'd have to agree. I've seen plenty of odd formatting things done in all kinds of books by any number of authors. I don't think it's a special privilege of any sort.

Beth

[Kasey Mackenzie]

I'd have to agree. I've seen plenty of odd formatting things done in all kinds of books by any number of authors. I don't think it's a special privilege of any sort.

Beth

Ditto. I've seen several first-time authors use unusual or different formatting in their books. If it fits the story and it's not unduly burdensome (er, forgive the leagal jargon) publishers seem to be perfectly fine with allowing it. The thing is that it really has to fit the story and add something to it, not just be done for doing's sake. At least from what I've seen.