There are hundreds of self-help writing manuals on the book market, prescribing how writers should write. I’ve read my share of them, I even publish my own tips for writers on my website from time to time, because I want to save those writers further behind me on their writing journey some time and anguish.
Is it dangerous to ignore our writing instincts?
But earlier this month, my short story A Dragon’s Back was published in Parenting Express. A very personal story, it was difficult to write, even more difficult to put ‘out there’. Thankfully, it immediately received much praise and support for – fans said – the honesty and bravery it recounts. More pertinent to this discussion, however, the story also speaks about the importance of trusting your gut and the dangers of ignoring your instincts. In one particular aspect of my personal life, I listened for far too long to what I was prescribed.
So what of my writing life – what of prescribing writing advice to others and being prescribed it? Is that dangerous also and, if so, what dangers lurk within the practice?
In my writers’ group, the Northern Beaches Writers’ Group, I have writer-members who study the art of writing at University, professional writers with years of publishing experience, and those who write without any prior training or study – they write from their gut. When I read through their various manuscripts, can I tell which manuscripts belong to which writer? No way! So who is to say that it is better to stick with any prescribed rules of writing, rather than to write instinctively?
Last year, I attended a series of talks at Shearer’s Bookshop in Leichhardt, Sydney, where various amazing Australian authors discussed genre labelling – genre labelling itself being an exercise in fitting different types of writing within prescribed sets of rules (read about the talks here and here). Now, while most writers know which genre they write in, some aren’t so certain. Given the multitude of fiction sub-genres around today (there’s a useful list on “The Other Side of the Story”), who can blame them?
So I asked literary agent Sophie Hamley during one of these genre talks last year: how should writers who are unsure of their genre present their work to publishers? She said that writers should focus on writing the story they want to tell, and leave the genre-labelling to agents and publishers. Freelance editors such as Bothersome Words agree:
I do read a lot of unpublished manuscripts where I’ve been told up-front the author has deliberately written to genre because they read somewhere that their original cross-genre idea mightn’t sell. They rework the story to fit perceived requirements and usually the result is a story that feels a bit hollow; writing that feels a little off.
So editors can tell if a writer has written to prescribed genre rules because it feels forced, and agents and publishers don’t necessarily want something that sticks to prescribed rules – they just want a good story.
And yet the book market continues to be flooded with self-help writing books, and authors (including me) continue to recommend those books, as well as their own tips (by the way, mine are totally awesome, of course!). So which is it? Trust our instincts and be unique, or stick to the rules? Am I a hypocrite for encouraging people to trust their instincts and at the same time recommend writers abide by my recommended techniques?
Is it the exception or the rule that matters most?
I’ve heard it said that it’s okay to break writing rules, so long as you know them first. But then what of the excellent instinctive writing by those untrained talents in my writers’ group?
Tell me – which writing self-help books have you read, if any, and did you then abide by the rules they prescribed?
Should we all simply be encouraging each other to write instinctively, or is there at least some basic level of writing skill with which rules and tips can assist?
I think both writing from the gut and writing to rules have a place. I tend to write very much from the gut, and always have done – but my favourite part of writing is editing: looking at the mess I’ve made, figuring out what I was trying to say, and saying it better. Writing tips and how-to books are an important part of that process, for me; often I instinctively know what works, but I don’t know why…and then I’ll come across something in my reading about writing that nails it for me.
I definitely think understanding the rules helps. Sometimes these rules come instinctively from a lifetime of being a bookworm – but it’s also helpful to know why those rules exist.
Stephen King’s On Writing was very helpful a few years ago in convincing me to just write some damn words. OTOH, I was disappointed in Anne Lamott’s Bird By Bird at the same time because of the lack of specifics. Rereading Bird By Bird recently, I loved it for being so reassuring about writers and the things we do and think to ourselves!
I’ve recently been dipping into Noah Lukeman’s The First Five Pages, which is a really interesting take on breaking down and remaking prose – something I like to think I do myself, but not nearly well enough, if this book is anything to go by!
Also, just a thought (sorry, I could talk for hours about this!): IMO writing and reading are also excellent ways of learning the rules and when to break them. You need to learn to read critically, of course, but I think to some extent that comes as a natural extension of looking critically at your own writing.
Thanks, Liz 🙂
My first thought after reading your comment was that I’d have to ask to borrow Anne Lamott and Noah Lukeman from you at some point (I’ve read Stephen King)…
My second thought was: why?
But the answer is in your comment too – when you referred to Bird by Bird as being reassuring… We writers like to strive for perfection, or at least that feeling of ‘ahhh, that’s that story done’. Reading writing tips and advice reassures us that we’re doing all the right things, that we’re not forgetting or missing something important.
So… can I borrow them?
The Anne Lamott is great! I remember when the first Bridget Jones film came out, and I found it so very comforting, in an “even if I am messed up, I never get this bad” kind of way. This is more or less how I felt about Bird By Bird from a writerly standpoint. 🙂
Will email you re lending them.
I think the thing about writing is: it requires you to be brave.
It’s inherently risky. You create something, which is always going to be deeply personal since even the most fictional of stories reveals a bit of the writer, and you put it out in the world for other people to judge. Sometimes – if not always – that means risking rejection.
Often, in a risky situation, it’s trusting your instincts rather than giving in to your nerves that will keep you safest. But sometimes you need to learn a bit to hone those instincts.
There’s a lot to be said for raw, natural, instinctive writing talent. But that doesn’t mean that there’s nothing to the advice that’s out there, either. Sure, it’s easy to get overwhelmed by the amount of hints and tips – which can sometimes conflict. And yes, it is easy to get stuck on the rules, even if you have learned to break some of them – but there’s always something helpful to learn from them.
Would you ever have written the piece you did, as powerfully as you did, if you hadn’t first learned the “rules”? I think it takes a lot more bravery when you know which rules you’re breaking – because at that point you *know* you’re just relying on your instinct.
I think I know what you mean. Confidence can be hard to find as a writer. You doubt your abilities, you doubt whether you’re ever going to ‘make it’ (whatever your individual perception of ‘making it’ is), and at its worst you doubt your–entire–self (oh yes!). But once you know the “rules”, you can afford to be that little bit more confident that it’s not your abilities at stake – it’s more about waiting for the right fit. And if you don’t doubt your abilities anymore… you can risk writing more from the heart.
Like you Zena, I have read many how to write books. I’m reading three now. King’s, Rand’s and another which I can’t remember the authors name. The more I read the more disillusioned I become. Yes I become more informed. More informed of how others do it. There is no reason that I can find that another’s writers formula will work for me. So why do I do it?
I am told by many people that if you want to succeed this is what I have to do. I have found they almost everything I have been told does not work for me. Someone else’s formula will never work for me. I’d suggest that it’s the same for others too.
I have to think and write like me. I should have known this years ago. My work is better if I use my own rules and guidelines. I can feel what’s right in my gut. Of course I use grammar and punctuations books to get the small stuff right.
That said the best book I’ve read on writing is, Thanks, But This Isn’t for Us: A (Sort of) Compassionate Guide to Why Your Writing is Being Rejected. By Jessica Page Morrell.
Cheers
Rob
You’re so right, Rob. Every writer needs to find their own writing formula. I’m sure it’s no consolation, but at least you’re highly informed now! What was it that you found so rewarding in the Jessica Page Morrell book?
The Jessica Page Morrell book really spoke to me. It was clearly laid out and gave real life scenarios. It was told with a heap of honesty and straight forward advise.
I highly recommend it.
I haven’t really read any writing books but I have read a lot o online articles. One thing that always comes to mind when I read “break the rules – but only after you learn them” is ‘how will people know that I’ve learned the rules?’ For new or emerging writers there is probably a desire to stick with conventions just so that editors who don’t know them won’t think they don’t know the rules… even if they actually do. Also, some editors have unwritten preferences for certain stylistic conventions. So without writing a disclaimer at the beginning of each story, there is a decision you have to make. Toe the line or risk criticism that directs you back to conventions?
Personally I know I don’t know all the rules, however there are certain areas where I will definitely take some artistic licence, knowing full well that’s what I’m doing. Whether readers (or editors) take issue with that is something I have to risk!
I hear you! But, as Bothersome Words says… be brave!
Think about when you’re reading something written by a fellow writer… after reading only a few paragraphs, you can usually tell if they know what they’re doing (whether that’s inside or outside convention). It will be the same with your work – no need for a disclaimer, LOL!
Risk away – if that’s what your gut is telling you 🙂
I think publishers and agents can be a bit conservative in how they perceive manuscripts. They may read the first 80 pages and then pigeonhole the writer pretty quickly into a certain genre. Or if you’re first published as, say, a YA author, you’re forever seen that way, as if there’s no other way to market you (not that you would necessarily want to change!). In terms of rules, I agree that both knowing the rules and bending them is a good thing. I always write from the gut, even though I have an MA in creative writing and have studied literature. It still comes down to what feels right, what rhythms are created on the page. At the third or fourth draft then my editor hat comes on my head firmly and I try to stand back and look at the bigger picture in terms of structure and characterisation.
Sounds like the perfect blend of the two, Kirsten. I especially like: “It comes down to what feels right, what rhythms are created on the page.” Do you have any favourite self-help writing books, ones you often recommend to fellow writers?
I return to Stephen King’s On Writing, and Making Stories by Kate Grenville and Sue Woolfe. I’m not sure if they fit in the ‘self help’ category entirely, but they have been brilliant for me. More about the process …
Your 10 tips are great, and I agree with them all. I also think that writing by ‘gut feeling’ is great too. So a mixture of both approaches seems a sensible attitude. By the way, I don’t just enjoy your blog, I hugely enjoy your blog.
Shucks – thanks, Rondel! It’s always good to have some support on here, and I think you’re right about a mix of both being sensible!
The problem I have is that ‘the rules’ are subject to change, aesthetically, culturally, socially. Rereading some of the classics probably wouldn’t get a chance to be published today because the rules have changed. Perhaps ‘rules’ have become synonymous with ‘taste.’ No lengthy descriptions of landscape or person, no adverbs etc. Salt to taste.
Adam B @revhappiness
Great point, Adam – and not just the classics. I think that our taste in writing has changed a lot in the last 20-30 years. I started reading Larsson’s “The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo” recently and found its style very difficult to read. Too much backstory, not enough action. Friends who have read it say to persevere, because it gets good. But my reader-mind has been spoiled by the fast-pace of modern-day literature!
There has to be a balance between the ‘reader-mind’ and the ‘entertainment-mind.’ Both are valid. Consider films. I call some of them, like Battleship or Transformers ‘popcorn’ films. No brains required, simply enjoy the cacophony of explosions.
But there are times when I want a cerebral film. And I believe you can combine both artistically and aesthetically, not compromising on either. For example, the action film, “Heat” – Robert de Niro, Al Pacino, Val Kilmer. Great action, beautifully shot, but the characters are what drive the narrative of the film.
And the same applies to books. I would make a caveat that books and films have proponents that are so cerebral its practically narcissistic onanism.
Adam B @revhappiness
That’s the hive mind speaking to you, Adam – communicating with you on a subconscious level that you cannot realise yet constantly acknowledge inadvertently through caveats such as this one.
😉