— Mark Paxson
We spend a lot of time around here bashing the idea of rules for writing. Particularly in our video chats. But …
The local writers’ group is hosting a conference in September. I was looking at the speakers. One of them teaches creative writing at a local community college and will be teaching writers how to write a dynamic scene that moves the story along.
Just the idea of teaching a creative writing class made me wonder and ask the question in the title of this post. Are we wrong about our ridiculing of the rules of writing?
The reality is that all writers are guided by conventions or rules or structures or something similar in their writing. Whether writing to the conventions of a particular genre or following the three act structure or paying attention to voice or countless other things, we all do some of this. Some more consciously than others.
I know that if I do it, it is in my subconscious. I just come up with an idea and start writing and go from here to there and to over there and eventually wind my way to an ending. Without regard to genre needs or three acts or needing a conflict here or a dramatic scene there. I just … write.
But I do know that there are things that I’ve learned in decades of reading books voraciously. That had to do something to me that impacts how I tell a story when I sit down to write. All of the books I’ve read over the years taught me something. They must have. And so, maybe the “rules” have been embedded in my subconscious and I follow them, or at least some of them, without even thinking about it.
But back to that speaker who teaches creative writing. I shudder at the idea of taking a creative writing class. I shudder at the idea of an MFA program. I just feel like those are environments that demand … rules!!
A couple of months ago I participated in a book fair at a local book store. they had an author speak about her writing and publishing process. Throughout her presentation she kept on saying things with the lead in “okay, you have to do x.” I wanted to run up there and tell her to stop. To knock it off.
But maybe there is a point to some of this for some writers. Maybe a lot of writers. Maybe the “rules” need to be stated for some instead of being processed below the surface by others. Maybe there’s something to be said for providing the guidelines and structures for writers and not being so dismissive of the “rules” of writing.
I don’t know. I still think that a lot of what passes for the “rules” is nonsense, but if it helps some writers do their thing, I’ll let it go. Even if I occasionally ridicule those “rules” here and elsewhere.
Writers Supporting Writers 
I’m a product of the university creative writing machine, for both the BA and the MA. The undergraduate program worked well for me, the graduate program not so much. The undergraduate program gave me the basic tenets of the craft of fiction, but they were presented as conventions and tools for the writer’s toolbox, rather than “rules.” The profs and classmates in the graduate program gave feedback that could be boiled down to, “Write the story the way I would have written it.” When I finished the degree, I swore off fiction workshops for good.
What seems to be missing on the stone tablets of creative writing “rules” that litter the internet is that any kind of writing is a series of decisions over which the the writer has complete control. Should this event be narrated or dramatized in a scene? Should I include backstory for this secondary character or is it irrelevant? What kind of syntax and word choice would best align with my goals for the story? And so on. What creative writing courses can give beginning writers is knowledge of the decisions that need be be made and the options available.
To answer the question you’ve posed, no, you’re not wrong to bash the idea of rules for creative writing. What you’re bashing is an approach to teaching and learning creative writing that usually doesn’t work and often does more harm than good.
Time for me to climb down from the very high horse I seem to be sitting on. How did I get up here, anyway?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Tools in the toolbox is a much better way of putting it. Maybe I don’t need a screwdriver today. Maybe I’ll never need a screwdriver.
Your description of the graduate program is similar to an experience I had at a conference years ago. For three mornings, I sat with a dozen writers as we commented on and critiqued writing samples we each submitted. Several of them couldn’t resist the “write it the way I would” type of commentary. I just ignore those people.
What I feel the strict proponents of the “rules” is that they ignore that writing is creation. If you’re just rigidly following rules, are you really creating?
Stay on that high horse!!
Thank you for your comment.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You’re welcome!
LikeLiked by 1 person
When I first started writing fiction, the idea of an MFA intrigued me. Now? I’m pretty sure it would drive me to the crazy house.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think there are approaches to writing something that work better than others. Like you, Mark, I think I’ve absorbed them unconsciously from reading, and apply them without conscious thought when reading. There are a few “rules” I actually follow when I’m working over a piece after the first draft. And I adhere to basic rules of grammar, which were drummed into me in grade school.
What bugs me are self-proclaimed experts (often freelance editors looking for work) who trot out the “rules” in a way intended to induce anxiety and therefore generate clients. Maybe not all of the “how to write” bloggers out there fall into this category, but many do. Notice the books, courses, and services offered in the sidebars or in those irritating popups.
As for MFAs and pricey writing workshops offered by trad-pubbed writers and academics, I suspect part of their appeal is to make connections that may be helpful in the trad-pub hopes of the participants. OK, I’m an old self-pubbed cynic who no longer submits.
So yes, there are ways of putting words together that produce better results than others, but beyond basic grammar, there are few neat and tidy rules. It’s all about finding one’s way to whatever intention one has for the writing. And often the work itself makes certain demands that the writer must figure out. That’s why it’s an Art.
This topic always gets me going! 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hi, Audrey. I couldn’t agree more about the manipulative tactics of some self-proclaimed experts’ “rules” that require the forking over of cash to follow. The dirty little secret about online MFA programs is that many of them are cash cows to support the institutions’ traditional residential programs. (And you think you’re cynical!!)
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree with you. It’s one thing to be a random writer on Twitter saying you have to do this or that. It’s the charlatans who sell a “formula” to aspiring writers who are desperate for the secret erecipe who are the worst. There seem to be endless examples of the charlatans out there.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think I follow the ‘rules’ subconsciously as well. It I try to do it consciously, the story goes dry.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Totally agree. I struggle enough with writing. If i had to worry about following the “rules,” it would be that much more difficult.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The only absolute rule I would make is READ, a LOT, from an early age. That way, you can’t help absorbing the ‘rules’.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Totally agree.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rules are critical, although I’d call them heuristics — rules of thumb.
Additionally, good writing always falls along a spectrum. However, writing doesn’t fall on the spectrum until it’s good. How does one learn to write well? Follow the rules.
Early on, the set of rules would be broadly defined:
• Active vs Passive — until you know why one or the other.
• Limited dialog tags — any other tag that “said” implies “telling”.
• Favor action tags instead.
• One POV per passage — maybe so far as per chapter or even work.
• Reduced use of adverbs — adverbs “tell”.
• Avoid clichés.
• …
I found, until I could consistently follow those rules, my writing was unreadable. If it’s unreadable, you’ll never get the critique you need to get better. Chicken/egg situation, yeah, but hopefully some kind editor takes the time to point out your early failures.
Only then, after you’ve subsumed these most basic of readable writing rules, can you flaunt them. And that subsuming part? That internalization? That is the crux of the matter. I had to write down the rules I needed to follow, sticky-noted them to my wall. In time, I swapped out those I’d drilled into muscle memory for new, more nuanced heuristics.
And I still have my list of rules with which I’m trying to brand my brain.
LikeLiked by 2 people
But the problem with your “rules” is that there are plenty of writers who would disagree with them. For instance. You suggest limiting POVs, including potentially only one POV per story. There are many stories and books being published that contradict this. And many of those are excellent stories.
In other words, your rules are rules for thee. That doesn’t necessarily make them rules for all.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I disagree. There’s a threshold in quality one must achieve in order to be considered, or even read. A story that head-hops would be intolerable. Just as a story with phonetic spelling, variable punctuation, run-on sentences, or narration bleeding into dialog would be a curious novelty to try and read, it would be considered trendy only in niche circles.
If you’re going for nouveau prose, sure, there are no rules. Otherwise, there are certain levels of readability, dictated by such rules, that until you master them, will mark your work as amateur.
LikeLiked by 2 people
These are benchmarks of readability for you. That doesn’t mean they are universal benchmarks. For instance, from my perspective, a story that is told from different POVs is more dynamic and more complete. I wrote a novel told primarily in three different POVs, with an occasional chapter told from the POV of a side character. Nobody I know who read it complained about the multiple POVs.
In addition, I occasionally write in very short, choppy sentences for a rhythmic effect. Some of those may be even incomplete sentences.
Both of these things — multiple POVs and short sentences for rhythm are things readers have positively commented on.
You have a particular writing style and objective. It appears to work for you. That doesn’t mean it will for other writers and readers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
By the way … I appreciate you offering a different perspective.
LikeLiked by 1 person
When I mentioned POV it was in reference to poor transitions (or, in my case, none at all). It took me a while to even understand I was switching voice from character A to B and not knowing it.
Multiple POVs, in a story, are indeed encouraged. Maybe even in this day and age, preferred.
It’s the writing poorly and not knowing it is the purpose of using rules. Writing that’s rough, ill conceived, inside-out, violating the basic rules and the fact that the author doesn’t even know it — that’s the situation I found myself in. Now I know the rules and know when I break them.
When I started out I thought, “I’ve read thousands of stories, I’m sure I could write one comparable.” Nope. Sure, the story was good, but the writing? I had no idea that what I’d been writing fell so far below the barest of standards. “I” read my efforts glazing over the scars and blemishes — hearing only the story in my head. Others couldn’t hear the story as the writing confounded the telling.
Yeah, fun stuff. And we are all different that way. I just think, anyone starting out, needs serious guidelines otherwise they won’t ever be taken seriously.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Writing a story is about having someone read the story. Mostly, the rules are there to help that transmission – if it’s confusing to read, it won’t be read.
Good grammar does not make a good story, but bad grammar can kill even a good story. Using grammar to make every story sound ‘middle-ground normalised’ can also kill a good story, because there’s no connection through voice. No connection, no reader – which is why we have genres or categories that enable a reader to choose what to read.
The ‘rules’ are about how to get the message across, and once the writer understands how to make the writing ‘understood’ by the reader, they no longer need the rules.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I’ve had to think long and hard about this question. I now realized why. It doesn’t matter. How you approach creative writing is likely a reflection of your personality, just as being a plotter or pantser is. The only thing that really matters is how prodigious the talent for creative writing you were born with, since you are always going to be limited by that inborn talent. I’ll even venture further; no matter how you “learn” to write, it is really the exercise of your talent by writing, writing, writing, alone that develops the potential of your talent. Being taught to write creatively formally in college, less formally by seminars, reading how-to-do books and articles, or simply absorbing the art by reading several thousand books all “work” by either forcing you, or inspiring you, to write. By writing we learn writing. So take the high road or the low road as they suit you, it is the walking of the road of your choice, i.e. writing the way that works for you, that will bring you to your full potential. It’s the journey, not the destination, that creates art.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree with you that the best way to learn how to write is rather simple … write. A lot. And also … trust yourself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think it depends on the rules in question as to whether they can be broken successfully. Stories need structure, a beginning, middle and end, if you don’t have that, your reader will be frustrated. Other rules, like whether or not to use adverts are, in my opinion, flexible and a question of personal style and preference. The problem with self publishing is there are no quality standards and the poor quality of many books taints all self published books.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That is the downside of self publishing. It turns the reader into the gatekeeper, but I prefer that to the mostly closed gates of traditional publishing.
LikeLiked by 2 people
💕
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting discussion. I do think voracious readers absorb rules without consciously doing so. I figure you have to learn the rules to know when to break them.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m chiming in very late to this conversation.
Short story time. When I was in high school, I had an English teacher who forced us to write essays in this format:
Introduction
Argument #1. Then we were to write three sentences that supported that argument.
Argument #2. Then we were to write three sentences that supported that argument.
Argument #3. Then we were to write three sentences that supported that argument.
Short conclusory sentence. Then we were to write three sentences that supported the conclusion.
It was and still is the most mind-numbingly boring sort of writing I’ve ever written or read. She made me hate English class that year, and it was normally my favourite subject.
As an adult, I can see how this format could be helpful for students who are struggling to write an essay and need clear-cut guidance on how to organize their thoughts.
But I still think it was utterly ridiculous to insist that it was “good” writing or that everyone should write that way.
I was very, very glad that she retired after that year. (And as an adult I wonder if this sort of writing style was common when she was young and if she didn’t realize how badly it had aged?)
I think a lot of writing rules are like this. Some kind of structure is needed for any sort of writing, and rules can be good guideposts for people who need clearcut rules….but there are other folks who can write amazing things while “breaking” the rules because they understand what the rules were meant to reinforce.
So I use the writing rules that work for me but don’t feel bad about the ones that don’t.
Lydia Schoch
LikeLiked by 3 people
You’ve just described one of the reasons I hated high school English. So … unless you went to Sacramento High School in the early 80s, it wasn’t just your teacher who did that.
I hated writing back then. And if writing today was a formula based on “rules” I wouldn’t bother.
LikeLike
I guess that teacher wanted to use a formula for teaching kids how to write. Formulas don’t work for everyone, though, as you’ve observed. I have my own theories about some of those writing “rules,” and agree with your approach to see them as guidelines but not worry about adhering to them if they don’t work.
LikeLiked by 1 person