Ten Writing Rules

The Guardian, a UK publication, published, "Ten rules for writing" in February, and writers around the web are still talking about it. Elmore Leonard, Jonathan Franzen, and PD James are just a few of the writers who weighed in with their insights about writing. Read the article, and you might find a few good tips. For instance, Leonard believes that using adverbs is a mortal sin--a piece of advice that makes me worried.
_______________
Photo courtesy of Peter Dutton

Comedy and Tragedy

Do you feel a story must be dark to be serious, or does humor have a home in your deeper stories? William Skidelsky's article in the Guardian.co.uk/TheObserver ("Women authors can lighten up and still be taken seriously: When Daisy Goodwin complained of too much 'grimness' in this year's list, she was lambasted. She should have been applauded") makes some points about the lighter points in life--and thus, in writing. Here's an excerpt:

...As a form, the novel has always worked best when, like life itself, it contains both joy and sorrow. Most great novelists have been brilliant at comedy as well as tragedy. And this is no less true of Jane Austen and George Eliot than it is of Tolstoy and Dickens.

Recently, however, there does seem to have been a movement away from comedy in fiction, a growing feeling that, in order to be serious", novels have to be dark in tone....

I admit that I'm biased on this point; I was raised by parents who believed that if you'd lost your sense of humor, you'd lost it all. I've had to suppress laughter at a funeral, and in the midst of every crisis I've had a moment during which I laughed to avoid crying. What do you think? Does comedy, however dark, find its way into your writing? Must a piece be devoid of humor to be "serious"?
_____________
Photo courtesy of Julie Elliott-Abshire at http://www.sxc.hu/photo/306215

Writers, Don't Be Boring

MovieLine recently published an article by Seth Abramovitch about a memo written by the well-known screenwriter (and director, among other things), David Mamet. "David Mamet's Master Class Memo to the Writers of The Unit" reproduces the entire memo, which is worth a read both because it's full of good writing points (regardless of the genre or medium in which you write) and beause it's funny. Abramovitch describes it this way: "Besides the fact that it’s written in all-caps, there’s nothing particularly ranty, pejorative or potty-mouthed about it. Rather, Mamet lays down an extremely sensible case for what makes good television, imploring them to avoid expository writing for what he characterizes as authentic 'drama.'"

Although writing for television or the screen is a very specialized form of writing, the basics of good writing remain the same. One of those basic points is that we must not bore our readers (or viewers, in this case). Mamet's memo to this a group of TV writers is very clear on this point:

"IF THE SCENE BORES YOU WHEN YOU READ IT, REST ASSURED IT WILL BORE THE ACTORS, AND WILL, THEN, BORE THE AUDIENCE, AND WE’RE ALL GOING TO BE BACK IN THE BREADLINE."

How can you tell if you're boring your readers? If your mind starts to wander when you're reading your work, that's a clear sign you need to re-think what you've written. If you can't hold your own interest, you probably aren't captivating your readers, either.
________________
Photo courtesy of Michael Lorenzo at http://www.sxc.hu/photo/1094329

A Question for Murder Mystery Writers

An interesting question was posted on the "Sisters in Crime" blog by Ellen Hart:

I remember the first time I was asked this questions: Does it bother you that you're writing about murder as entertainment?

What about you? Are you bothered by the homicide(s) in your stories?

Read the rest of the post and comments for some thoughts about that question.
_____________
Photo courtesy of Deepak Malhotra at http://www.sxc.hu/photo/891948

Writing Around the Web: Dialogue

Are you pleased with the way you handle dialogue? Are you considering what is going unsaid in a scene?

Here are some thoughts from Midge Raymond, in a post, "Advice for Fiction Writers," on her blog, The Writer's Block: Living a Writer's Life, at SeattlePI.com. She is writing about what writers can learn from plays, and she's using two that she saw, Harold Pinter’s A Kind of Alaska and Ashes to Ashes, to illustrate her points:

As I'll often mention in class, when it comes to dialogue, what's not being said in a scene can be just as important as what is. During the post-production conversation, Suzanne Bouchard, who plays Rebecca in Ashes, pointed out that the play's tension was heightened by the fact that so many questions go unanswered,remarking on how this resembles real conversations, in which people often talk over and around a subject. (I love that she added she'd taken the bus to the theater that night -- an exercise I often to give to students. Eavesdropping is one of the best ways to get a feel for real dialogue, on public transportation in particular.)

As a fiction writer, going to the theater reminds me ofwhat is possible to achieve through dialogue alone; it's something I tend to forget when I get caught up in description or interior monologue. In these two short plays, Pinter creates fully human characters not only though their words but through the spaces around them.
______________________
Photo courtesy of Sanja Gjenero at http://www.sxc.hu/photo/1066564