Rules for Writing by Daryl L. L. Houston on April 12, 2012
So, do any of these rules for serious fiction writers strike a chord with you? What are your own rules for writing (fiction or otherwise)?
- “The reader is a friend, not an adversary, not a spectator.” Agree. I guess that’s why I blog because it’s difficult to “find” friends” who are willing to stick around for a while. Adversaries fight for nothing; while spectators take up bandwidth.
- “Fiction that isn’t an author’s personal adventure into the frightening or the unknown isn’t worth writing for anything but money.” Disagree. My favorite [ahem] author happened to have written many “fictional-based” material that include his personal adventures that are frightening and unknown. He had made lots of money but now begs because he drank his “Cool-Aid”.
- “Never use the word “then” as a conjunction – we have “and” for this purpose. Substituting “then” is the lazy or tone-deaf writer’s non-solution to the problem of too many “ands” on the page.” Disagree. Using the conjunction “and” to connect two sentences is too harsh; whereas utilizing “then” gently leads the reader into the next event.
- “Write in the third person unless a really distinctive first-person voice offers itself irresistibly.” Disagree. I find speaking and blogging in the first person easier though rather self-absorbed. Writing in the third person distances the author from a personal point of view and no one would dare question someone with multiple personalities. That’s scary.
- “When information becomes free and universally accessible, voluminous research for a novel is devalued along with it.” Dis/agree. Without the internet, I’d be stuck with outmoded data and a rotting mind that knows nothing beyond itself. But too much data can add confusion to a simple solution and so far no one could seem to agree on anything.
- “The most purely autobiographical fiction requires pure invention. Nobody ever wrote a more autobiographical story than “The Metamorphosis”.” Disagree. You’d be surprise how our current POTUS was an elaborate invention to “transformational change”. His plan truly worked (as per his recent speech yesterday). The “shapeshifters” have truly outdone themselves this time.
- “You see more sitting still than chasing after.” Disagree. If you know how to do those OBE, you’re lucky. But it’s more fun to get up; to observe and take notes and “then” to sit still and blog about what you saw/heard/sensed.
- “It’s doubtful that anyone with an internet connection at his workplace is writing good fiction.” Disagree. I didn’t know writing could be this much fun. Without the internet, I wouldn’t realize how much time/effort/energy is spent on “creating” a “fictional environment” behind a personal computer and/or as an anonymous blogger.
- “Interesting verbs are seldom very interesting.” Disagree. When I don’t recognize any word, my curiosity is activated; so that I end up reading more on word definition/usage and lag behind on the original reading material. The more fanciful the verbs the more I wonder if the story is real.
- “You have to love before you can be relentless.” Disagree. I have loved and now refuse to budge from my seat of resentment, which fuels my blogging experience unfortunately enough to remove me from participating in creating a bridge to nowhere.
Leave a Reply