[Rhubarb]

This might be in the wrong forum, in which case someone move it, post haste!

I write a lot, but I've never had any formal training with it. Teaching yourself is a slow process, and means that you have to make up a lot of your own rules and monitor when you pick up bad habits.

After I'd been at it a while, and screened out a lot of the more obvious mistakes, I realised that there were a lot of rules and guidelines a writer needs to follow. Anyone who's actually had any writing education will get taught this stuff, but the rest of us have to just pick it up as we go. So I've put together a list of some of the more essential rules that I think a good writer should follow, and put them here. I'd be obliged if everyone else would contribute their own, so we can have a nicely concise list.

Bear in mind that each person has a specific style. Don't post stuff saying 'that rule doesn't work, that point is wrong'. What works for someone else might not work for you, and vice versa. My style is very character-based, so most of my rules correspond to that. If you're a writer worth your salt, you should be able to tell which rules to incorporate.

Bam.

This one's quite well-known, and is generally called 'See, don't tell'. Never just explain something, or relate exposition through narration, if it can be demonstrated through example or action.

Make sure that you have a set idea of what your characters are like - ie, 'This person is nervous, meek, cringing and easily intimidated'. Always stay consistant to that. If your character is all of those things, don't have them do something that shows bravery or independance. Having said that, an unexpected break in character can be very effective when used for plot-related reasons.

Also, have a tight range of characters. This is a big one for me. Make sure that while each necessary personality type is fulfilled (the brooding one, the shy one, and logical one, the reckless one), ALSO make absolutely sure that no one is too similar. Everyone should be distinctly different to everyone else. Everyone should fill a specific role, and stick to it. No one should be able to fill the role of another, or should be too lacking in distinct personality. If this happens, cut that character straight away.

Even the most aloof and high-handed character can engage the reader's sympathies by displaying human flaws or weaknesses.

Make every character (not just the lead characters) interesting or slightly special in some way, even if they only appear for a page or so before vanishing completely. Just add one or two outstanding details, physical or personal, as though you were discribing the fleeting impression of a real person who just passed you in the street. The fictional world in general will seem much more vivid, as opposed to just the main characters.

Dialogue and gesture are the most important tools of characterisation. If you want to describe appearance and clothing in detail, go ahead, but make sure it doesn't take priority, and make sure it tells you something about the character at the same time. Example - Sam Vimes is generally unshaven (cares little for protocal), is wiry, (seens a lot of action but is generally unhealthy), and has a someone haggard look (is worn down by experience) with a hardened exp​ression (very determined). Not the best example, but you get the idea.

Repitition of gesture can be a good thing, such as the text describing Mr Flay's knee joints popping and cracking almost every time he walks somewhere. The reader identifies with the details, and feels like he/she is experiencing them. Just don't overdo it.

When describing rooms and scenery, as with character descriptions, just pick a few of the more 'telling' details and elaborate on them. Give the place a mood. Give it a specific atmosphere, and keep it consistant. Note various outstanding details.

If a scene isn't working out, get rid of it or change it completely. DO NOT change the plot, even subtly, to suit the scene. You'd be amazed how often this happens in writing, and how detrimental it can be to your 'overall vision' or whatever you want to call it. Narration and characters have a habit of running away with themselves, and while this can be helpful, sometimes it's necessary to keep them on a leash.

Don't always explain how the character is feeling every damn time something happens or someone says something. J.K. Rowling does this a lot and it's seriously annoying. A well-developed character shouldn't need to have their every thought broadcast to know how what they are thinking in some of the more obvious situations. Sometimes you need to keep empathy going on, and obviously you need to provide a window into the character's mind, but jeez. Try to vary it a bit.

Make every scene have a reason behind it. If a meeting takes place to introduce characters, make the meeting itself be plot-related.

Following on from the previous point, make sure everything that happens in the story is either character- or plot-developing, or both if possible. And I mean EVERYTHING. Keep it tight and clean, like a virgin. I don't mean you should sacrifice your style just to hurry things along, but if a scene serves no real purpose and can be cut, get rid of it, even if it has some of your best writing in there.

That's all I can think of at the moment. Everyone go ahead and post their own rules. If this thread dies, I'll be very disappointed in all you so-called creative types.

[J m HofMarN]

A great post, and something that could definately prove useful around here. I've discovered a few other interesting rules through my time reading and writing.

For one thing, you CAN write what you don't know. Just be honest. For instance, when F Scott Fitzgerald had to write about his character going to war in This Side Of Paradise, he just went through it very quickly and made general vague comments. "There was a war, it was not much fun, he is glad it is over" The war didnt have a great effect on the character so it's alright.

Also, as Rhubarb pointed out, never use a simple stereotype for your characters. When I did my vampire hunter novels I gave every major character in the narrative at least one redeeming quality. They had human motivations. Having a purely evil character is good, but what are they evil for? It may not be terribly important to some readers, but figuring out what your characters are about will help you to write them more accurately.

I tend to like to provide a basic description of a character's looks, and naturally this should fit with their personality. However there is almost never an excuse for coughing up a completely factual and accurate description of any character's personality. This should come out in the narrative and be slowly revealed, perhaps even falteringly.

Which brings me to another thing. Your characters do not always tell the truth. Your main character might even be deluded, or perhaps slightly insane (Catcher in the Rye) Sometimes your character will see things in a way that you know them not to be, and you have to write it like that until your character realizess he/she is wrong, if they ever do so.

Your characters are not just outward personas. The book has to get into their inner world, at the very least the world of the lead. In private, he might enjoy frenzied masturbation, but does he do this in public? Of course not. Not only private and public, but different relationships will bring out different elements. Your character might be very respectful and flattering to a teacher while being venomous and sarcastic towards a parent. They're not going to behave the same way to everyone and seeing the different aspects of their behavior allows people to look at them in different lights and understand them better.

For instance, in my first novel, Hunter's Paradox, the hero, at various times, kills vampires without remorse, feels horrific guilt for killing a vampire, hides under a table from some vampires, nearly falls in love with one vampire, risks his life for another, etc etc. Your character cannot just go through the same situations over again. Your novel should be a series of interesting events that show different facets of the characters.

Thats all I've got for now. Zooop!

[Rhubarb]

Oh, here's another one. Not really about writing rules, but important nonetheless. One of the most essential things that a writer possesses is arrogance. Sheer blind arrogance. Other people might think your work sucks ass, but you know it's brilliant. Why on earth wouldn't other people want to read what you have to say? Those publishers just couldn't recognise your genius. Some day you'll find one who isn't so blind as to pass you over!

Of course, it's important to be able to take criticism and editing, and realise when you're doing something wrong. And chances are that even though you think you're an awesome writer, you also have an underlying fear that all your stuff is terrible... that you'll read it months from now and cringe. It's good to find that balance.

[barend]

I'm just going to say one thing...

reread.

as often as possible.
as much as you may think what you are writing is gold... you'll be suprised howmany times you ask "what what was i thinking" or "what the hell does THAT mean?"

[barend]

or "i can't believe i made how and many one word" or used "What" twice in a row.

[J m HofMarN]

Rhubarb, that's definately a big one. Balancing enough of an ego that it can heal from literally hundreds of bad reviews or rejection letters, and yet not having an ego big enough that you declare yourself a heathen god... it's a fine line.

Barend, I don't care what the American Medical Association says about you causing cancer, you're alright by me, mate.

[J m HofMarN]

Oh, and here are some of my own personal rules that, while not directly involving writing, tend to keep the jagged fragments of my brain from poking through my skull and flittering off.

1: Alcohol. It is required to survive. The general rule is that poets aught to drink wine and novelists drink hard liquer. Other drugs are optional. I'm a good tole model.

2: Eat occasionally.

3: When you're not writing, don't think about writing. Any job that follows you home is a shite job.

4: Keep bothering people no matter how many times they say they're too busy for your book.

5: If said people send you angry letters and say bad things about your book, you can crawl under a writing desk until you feel better. It helps, especially in combination with number one.

This post has been edited by J m HofMarN: 05 May 2005 - 02:25 AM

[Rhubarb]

1: Alcohol. It is required to survive. The general rule is that poets aught to drink wine and novelists drink hard liquer. Other drugs are optional. I'm a good tole model.

Ahaha, yes. This one was discovered by me fairly recently. Booze tends to make my imagination take greater leaps. Unfortunately, it also makes me incapable of writing. Oh, cruel irony.

3: When you're not writing, don't think about writing. Any job that follows you home is a shite job.

Depends how much you enjoy your job, I guess.

[Chyld]

Why Google thinks Sesame Street toys are relevant here, I don't know. But I always like to try and give my characters some back-story and padding before I start writing. This ties in with one of Rhubarbs comments.

[barend]

also...

i don't care if you did just get into bed... you storm out into that lounge room and write down that idea you just had, other wise the only thing you will remember in the morning is only that you had a good idea...

not what it was...

[J m HofMarN]

I have droors full of writing and most of the writing has ideas for other writing I scribbled down on it. The funny thing is the ideas are really just mneumonic devices, not actual ideas.

[Slade]

It's true. All of it!

And I've got prereq 1 down, although I drink alcohol when I need a rest from my brain, not when it needs stimulation.

[J m HofMarN]

Also, being nutty as, or nuttier than a fruit cake tends to help.

[Slade]

It's true. Fnord?

[Rhubarb]

What are everyone else's methods, anyway? As I said, I'm very character-based, and usually centre the story around them rather than plot. I have a whole score of characters stored away in my head whom I tend to think of as actors, each one encompassing a different personality type, and whenever I think up a cool storyline, I slide the characters into place, occasionally changing their personalities slightly and giving them different names if I'm already using them in another story (although I have enough characters so that they rarely get used more than once).

In the rare event that I have a role no existing character can fill, I'll quickly think up a 'filler' character, a one-dimensional personality that's just there as a sort of literary cardboard cutout, until I come up with one who does fit. Occasionally the cutouts develop into solid characters, but it generally takes several months to do this. And they're never my favourites. My range of solid characters currently numbers about twelve or thirteen. The most recent came to me last night in a dream, as several others also have done before. Quite a lot of ideas come to me in dreams.

Anyway, my process usually goes like this:

I first think of an awesome character, usually unbidden. They just pop into my head one day as a vague idea, and flesh themselves out over the next few days. I fall utterly in love with them, and think about them obsessively for the next few weeks or so, getting to know them inside out, turning them about various ways to see how they react in certain situations, and drawing them over and over.

Then I try to come up with various stories and plotlines that might incorporate them. When I think I have one that works, I start to write about it. Invariably, once I've written a couple of thousand words, I'll suddenly think of a much better way of doing it, realise that what I've written is awful, and rewrite. Repeat about six times. My problem can either be with the weak setting (I'm really not good with settings), or a weak plot.

The way I develop plots is rather interesting, I think. Each time I rewrite, I'll come up with an idea that was better than the one before. It will be more exciting, will introduce the characters in a more dynamic way, and will generally add depth to the overall fictional world. Then I scrub it all, start again, and it's somehow even better. In the meantime, I'm thinking of the rest of the story ahead. Because remember, I've only written the beginning over and over at this point. But I have the rest of the story, approximately the first half, already planned out in fairly minute detail. The details change slightly each time I rewrite, but the overall idea stays the same. While many new characters may turn up and take key roles, the central idea always revolves around one character. It's their story.

Sadly, and perhaps unsurprisingly, I always get bored of writing, and go through periods of writer's block for several months at a time. I never forget the characters or story. I still think about it quite a lot... but it's in a vague, wistful way. My brain produces ideas faster than I could ever write them down, and by the time I commit them to paper, I'm bored with the process.

This is where the story pesses the real test.

There will always come a time, usually a year (or more) later, when I decide I want to take up that old idea. Does it still work? Are the characters still real to me? Is the whole idea interesting enough to want to continue or expand upon? If so, it's passed, and the story will join the ranks of Ongoing Novels, and probably stay with me until I die. I have about three of these going on at the moment. One was invented when I was 15, another when I was 17, and the most recent of them about two years ago (at age 20).

And no, I've never actually finished writing anything.