“These are my rules. I make 'em up.”—George Carlin.
Nothing beats good
writing. If you write something and it works, it
works. End of discussion.
Doesn't matter whose rules you break along the way. And there are
plenty of dumb rules writers regularly kick down like rotting fences
in the path of their creative wanderings.
Never
start a sentence with a conjunction. Clearly
hyperbolic. But start too many this way, and the reader will wonder
if you forgot there was any such thing as a comma. Do
not write sentence fragments, use exclamation points, or modify
dialogue with adverbs. “Ha!
As if!” he whispered contemptuously, scrawling his seditions with
a broken pen.
Some writers in their early development cannot see the arbitrary
nature of these barricades and go through all the painful contortions
of avoiding them at every turn. Rest assured, no one owns these
rules, and you will not be fined for breaking them. In fact, break
down the right ones in the right way, and you might be celebrated for
your originality. Then again, some of these obstructions are more
like guardrails along a cliff. Indiscriminately leap over every one,
and you can find yourself falling a long way.
I
admit these grammatic examples seem trifling, or at least they should. More substantive rules
have become so ingrained we hardly think about them. We consider
them conventions. If you spend the first third of your book
following a specific character, the reader assumes the story will
follow them for its duration. Hitchcock famously breaks this rule in
Psycho,
killing Janet Leigh's character off soon after the movie's plot seems
to have been established. From there the film jolts in an
unpredictable and fascinating direction. But then no one remembers
that cinematic flop.
Intrepid writers
in search of some structure on which to hang their story frequently
seek out new rules, however arbitrary or absurd, and add them to
their sacrosanct vault. They don't just pick them up as they stumble
along; they mine for them. Each clanging of the pick and scraping of
the shovel sounds out the same. “What's the right . . . ” clang.
“What's the best . . .” scrape. Book length, chapter
length, narrative perspective, balance between narration and
dialogue, number of characters? Can I divide a book in two? What
about three? Should the sections be the same length? If I have a
prologue, do I also have to have an epilogue?
The labor grinds
right along. Back breaking, anxious effort that avoids the only rule
that ever mattered: the story only exists if you write it. No
answer ever satisfied like the thing itself. What is right and best
is a matter of the story at your fingertips, not what everyone else
has done. Many books may be eighty-thousand words, but that doesn't
mean yours has to be—or even can be. Their hearts are in the right
place though. They simply want to get it right, and not do anything
that might rule them out of the running for publication.
There is no one
right way for a story to be. You have to decide. Good writing is
undeniable, whether it charts an unheard of course or tracks along a
premise that has been stamped into the ground. Don't let your work
be clubbed into dank submission.
Write well enough,
and you make your own rules.
"There is no one right way for a story to be," sums it up nicely.
ReplyDelete