This is a very good point. I have reasonably decent language skills, but I can't find story for nuthin'. And I've read a number of novels lately by authors with less than stellar writing chops—but the storyline kept me reading.
Are we TOO good at the craft?
- Thread starter ShaunHorton
- Start date
- Status
This is a very good point. I have reasonably decent language skills, but I can't find story for nuthin'. And I've read a number of novels lately by authors with less than stellar writing chops—but the storyline kept me reading.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 14,683
- Reaction score
- 24,618
- Location
- Massachusetts
- Website
- elizabethbonesteel.com
This is exactly what I was clumsily trying to get at. There are rules that are proclaimed inviolable, yet there are great books out there that violate all of them.
There's a legit argument, though, that we have to learn to obey the rules before we start breaking them. I had a life drawing teacher who felt strongly about that - he was producing abstracts for his own career, but he was highly skilled at photorealistic drawing. Writing isn't perfectly analogous, but certainly we need to know the rules of grammar before we start manipulating and ignoring them for artistic effect.
Having said that - I do think we need to take chances with our writing if we're called to do so. We need to play with tense and structure and POV and narrative beats. Most of the time we'll end up with a chaotic mess that nobody else is going to want to read - but we'll have learned something in the process, maybe tapped into something of ourselves that we can nurture.
I think often advice to newbies and developing writers is too geared toward "don't do the unexpected because you won't be able to sell it" when maybe the advice needs to be more along the lines of "don't unconsciously do the unexpected, and don't worry so damn much about the market." It's more important long-term, I think, to grow as a writer than to sell every word that you ever write.
Mmm.
My take on it, is that at the end of the day I'm not trying to sell my book to English teachers.
That said, I've got pride, so it behooves me to try to edit and research and not be too silly unless it's a silly book to begin with. But story trumps all else.
The sad fate of the writer is that our palate gets refined, and we get a lot more sensitive to how the story gets told. To the point that eventually, we pull away from the bulk of the very demographics we're trying to entertain unless we reign that part of ourselves in.
It's kind of like losing enthusiasm for eating at a particular restaurant after you've spent some time working in the kitchen. Just not the same after that.
My take on it, is that at the end of the day I'm not trying to sell my book to English teachers.
That said, I've got pride, so it behooves me to try to edit and research and not be too silly unless it's a silly book to begin with. But story trumps all else.
The sad fate of the writer is that our palate gets refined, and we get a lot more sensitive to how the story gets told. To the point that eventually, we pull away from the bulk of the very demographics we're trying to entertain unless we reign that part of ourselves in.
It's kind of like losing enthusiasm for eating at a particular restaurant after you've spent some time working in the kitchen. Just not the same after that.
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2015
- Messages
- 51
- Reaction score
- 2
Craft is important. To me, it is essential to drawing the effect you want from the reader. Don't lose sight of it. You have practiced this many years and learned from it. As to these pieces being published, I've seen lots of bad writing in magazines and anthologies. You have to remember that these pieces have one thing in common- they don't have to stand on their own. I don't know about good or bad writing, but I do believe in effective and ineffective. If the names were confusing to you, they probably were confusing to most other readers, which is a very ineffective way to tell a story. That's universal and even a success getting by with it does not mean it's a good idea. I go through my manuscripts, list all of the characters and make sure their names are all different and sound very different. I also don't like the technique of calling the same person by different names, like first and then last and then their trade, etc. If his name is Joe, call him Joe so we know who the hell you're talking about. Now, if his wife calls him Joey, that's fine. It's realistic and we know who is being addressed as well as who is addressing him since an effective writer would never have two people calling him Joey. The only reason for his wife to call him that is to show HER relationship with him and nobody else's. Only Claire calls Frank Underwood Francis and it's highly effective. They have a much closer relationship and she knows him much better than anybody else. I have a friend everyone calls JC, but his wife and ONLY HIS WIFE, calls him Johnny. That's just one little element of craft right there that works and makes sense. Craft is essential and no, you are not wasting your time honing your skills. They matter to the utmost, especially for the writer who plans on hanging around for year after year and churning out great writing.
My rule of thumb is: No reason exists not to do the best you can with the time and resources you have available. That is one of the great satisfactions in writing, or almost any other endeavor.
caw
caw
I think this is a silly thread, but will add my couple cents in, anyway. Conversations about luck are really about jealousy. it's human nature to be jealous of those more successful than ourselves. And, there are no rules. Those things we call rules are really about giving the reader the smoothest journey from words on a page to the reader's imagination.
Story trumps all in fiction. In fact, I think it's more important than all the other aspects combined. Our job as novelists is to entertain readers; everything else is a bonus or even superfluous. We all need to write what we're passionate about, in a manner that pleases ourselves, but never lose sight of the fact that we really need to make readers we've never met care about what we're writing: enough of those folks to be "commercial." If any of us want to be paid for what we create, it has to appeal to a bare minimum of people.
Here's an example: my first completed novel was simultaneously on the desks of editors at five major publishers back in 2008. In my noobiness, I was thinking/hoping for an auction or preemptive offer. And every one of those editors said some variation of: the novel was compelling, beautifully written, a good story, with great characters. But in the end, there was not a single offer because none of those publishers saw it being worth the chance of a 25,000 copy first printing. Bad luck? Bad timing, certainly, but ultimately a slap upside the head that reminds me to shoot for more universal appeal in what I write. That is our reality if we want to be published by the big boys. Was I crushed for months? Absolutely. Did I stop writing seriously for years? Yep. It was/is a damn fine novel. And it will find a home after the one I'm currently writing does.
I have not compromised how I write. I write what I love in a way that I can be proud of. I still hate poorly written shlock, and am incapable of producing it, but now I do imagine some composite reader looking over my shoulder: I try to please myself and her at the same time.
So, enough of luck. Let's all just write the best damn books we can.
Story trumps all in fiction. In fact, I think it's more important than all the other aspects combined. Our job as novelists is to entertain readers; everything else is a bonus or even superfluous. We all need to write what we're passionate about, in a manner that pleases ourselves, but never lose sight of the fact that we really need to make readers we've never met care about what we're writing: enough of those folks to be "commercial." If any of us want to be paid for what we create, it has to appeal to a bare minimum of people.
Here's an example: my first completed novel was simultaneously on the desks of editors at five major publishers back in 2008. In my noobiness, I was thinking/hoping for an auction or preemptive offer. And every one of those editors said some variation of: the novel was compelling, beautifully written, a good story, with great characters. But in the end, there was not a single offer because none of those publishers saw it being worth the chance of a 25,000 copy first printing. Bad luck? Bad timing, certainly, but ultimately a slap upside the head that reminds me to shoot for more universal appeal in what I write. That is our reality if we want to be published by the big boys. Was I crushed for months? Absolutely. Did I stop writing seriously for years? Yep. It was/is a damn fine novel. And it will find a home after the one I'm currently writing does.
I have not compromised how I write. I write what I love in a way that I can be proud of. I still hate poorly written shlock, and am incapable of producing it, but now I do imagine some composite reader looking over my shoulder: I try to please myself and her at the same time.
So, enough of luck. Let's all just write the best damn books we can.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2011
- Messages
- 11,748
- Reaction score
- 12,182
- Location
- Atherton Tablelands
- Website
- snailseyeview.medium.com
I'd suggest that "poorly written schlock" is a reader's assessment of a writer's work. I'm not sure whether a writer can make that call about their own work.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2011
- Messages
- 11,748
- Reaction score
- 12,182
- Location
- Atherton Tablelands
- Website
- snailseyeview.medium.com
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2016
- Messages
- 1,389
- Reaction score
- 500
I similarly consider much of what I write as "poorly written schlock." I have some days when I'm especially good at writing such schlock.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2016
- Messages
- 1,389
- Reaction score
- 500
I can agree that it's best to focus on what we can control (like writing the best books we can) much more so than what we can't (things like luck and chance), but I think it's okay to recognize the reality of all the various factors that are involved (those in our control and those outside of it; those that have to do with the quality of our work and those that have to do with other issues).
And no, it's not just jealousy that motivates conversations about luck. Rarely is there a single cause for any one thing, and there's not a single cause for us to consider that luck (or whatever we call it based on our beliefs) plays a role in success. How big or small that role is varies for different people in different situations. Even some successful writers will acknowledge the role of luck or something similar in their success, and there's no jealousy there.
Also, some writers' "best" and well-written books might not be seen as marketable enough, even if an agent/publisher recognizes their quality. They'll only be taken on if the agents/pubs can envision the book taking off.
It has nothing to do with jealousy for me, and everything to do with world view. I don't think we have free will or agency, and can only observe--though even that we have little control over, since our powers of observation are also outside our control.
Being born with skill, opportunity, and drive is certainly luck in that context; everything is, if you have that world view.
In contrast, believing you are the architect of your own success could arguably be seen as a form of egotism (to offer a different perspective).
Being born with skill, opportunity, and drive is certainly luck in that context; everything is, if you have that world view.
In contrast, believing you are the architect of your own success could arguably be seen as a form of egotism (to offer a different perspective).
Last edited:
Yes. I aim for exquisitely written schlock here.
I similarly consider much of what I write as "poorly written schlock." I have some days when I'm especially good at writing such schlock.
I'd say it's more that we try to perfect the factors we can control, as we should, but that's not necessarily what will knock readers' socks off. There's a big fat X factor in anything artsy.
Last edited:
- Status