I have to agree with you here. Formulas are for those who lack the self-confidence to do it their own way.Originally Posted by wat??
I have to agree with you here. Formulas are for those who lack the self-confidence to do it their own way.
In Misery (his best book in my opinion) the protagonist, who happens to be a novelist, says that he writes two kinds of books: the best sellers and the good ones. Though this isn't entirely true is King's case, it is a good way of putting his writing style. Some of the books he writes because HE likes them (ever read the Dark Tower series? <shudders> I feel dirty now), the others he writes because he knows what the people (or shaved cows trained to walk upright and read novels like people) like.
Cough*
"1. That a tale shall accomplish something and arrive somewhere. But the
Deerslayer tale accomplishes nothing and arrives in the air."
See J.D Salinger for frequent breaches of this "rule".
"They require that the episodes of a tale shall be necessary parts of
the tale, and shall help to develop it. But as the Deerslayer tale is
not a tale, and accomplishes nothing and arrives nowhere, the episodes
have no rightful place in the work, since there was nothing for them to
develop."
In this context what exactly does necessary mean? If necessary means getting from point A to point B in a story then what isn't unnecessary?
"They require that when the personages of a tale deal in conversation,
the talk shall sound like human talk, and be talk such as human
beings would be likely to talk in the given circumstances"
Maybe things were different in 19th Century Russia but as far as I can tell people do not speak in long uninterrupted monologues when conducting arguments. Turgenev, Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky are all guilty of breaking this "rule".
"They require that when the author describes the character of a
personage in his tale, the conduct and conversation of that personage
shall justify said description."
Anna Karenina anyone? Tolstoy breaks another one.
"12. Say what he is proposing to say, not merely come near it.
13. Use the right word, not its second cousin.
14. Eschew surplusage.
15. Not omit necessary details.
16. Avoid slovenliness of form.
17. Use good grammar.
18. Employ a simple and straightforward style."
These seem more of less like common sense for good, technical writing, not rules set in stone. It looks like James Joyce and many other celebrated authors may have ignored number 18.
I've only made up a few examples and they might not be very good ones; but the fact is that there's not a single one of those rules which hasn't been broken (besides maybe some of the minor rules at the end) by a great or celebrated author at one time or another. Telling me to "grow up and learn something" is childish.
On, your idea, WAT?, many authors through time have attempted to create guidelines to be followed when writing (Poe, Orwell, King and Twain, come to mind immediately). This usually stems from the inquiries that a successful writer, or any other type of professional for that matter, will receive; 'what's your secret?' or 'any advice for beginners?' They will then expound upon this idea in the form of an essay which is promptly gobbled up by aspiring professionals of that field.
Though usually the ones who attain the holy grail are those who have paid little to no heed to the advice of the greats and instead have analyzed the works that made them great, which was not the essay on how to write.
Anyone will naturally begin to dissect their own method of working, especially when it is their life's work their dealing with. It is also natural to wish to bestow this wisdom on others, thus multiplying one's influence by the number of pupils. And influence is, after all, one of the primary goals of the artist.
The same as most people still do: They suffered through bad writing.
So those old greats who weren't yet aware of Twain's rules (you can't blame them as he hadn't yet been born) were suffering through bad writing?
I'm confused... The rules are clearly broken fairly often, by very celebrated authors no less.
Hi8s endings are weak. Though not always. I loved the ending to The Dark Tower.
Do you people know anything about E.A. Poe? It would seem that you do not. Poe was to his time what King is to ours, although King has had more commercial success (note: I am a Poe fan). Poe is infamous for selling out. He would write about whatever was popular and selling at the time. And I don't blame the man one bit. He was poor and needed what little he did get. I am glad that Herman Melville and later on Nathaniel Hawthorne (those now known as his contemporaries) did not, in fact, sell out. Moby Dick was a commercial disaster in its time and broke Melville but is now considered to be a masterpiece (by myself included). With that said, Poe could write circles around most any writer; he was an artist.
King on the other hand writes whatever it is that he wants to write and makes no apologies for his doing so. I think that his The Shining, Roadwork, and The Green Mile (especially The Shining) could someday, scratch that, will some day be considered classics. King in my humble opinion is an artist but also is more of a story spinner/weaver than a novelist (much like Neil Gaiman, another of our day from the horror/fantasy genre that I believe will some day be recognized as great). King writes of real people for real people and, like Hemingway, writes in a simpler and more easily understood manner, but could write (and some of his short stories show this) as well as a classicist.
I will make note that I am a classics reader and 90% of the books on my shelves (some 300+) are the accepted classics. I just despise snobbery, especially ill-placed snobbery.
eric.bell makes a good point. Many authors we hold on pedestals today were writing commercial fiction. Dickens was mentioned earlier, and he was paid for each word he wrote. Not only was he writing to sell, but he was embellishing for the sake of money, not because it would enhance his writing. I'm not saying that Dickens was a bad writer or that King is a good one, but it's something to consider.
I have enjoyed a few King movies, because to me he is a good story teller, especially for the screen. But his writing style leaves a lot to be desired. Maybe he's just working with the wrong form?
About the debate on the rules of writing, I think both sides have a point. I don't you can give a set of rules and always follow them. If that were the case you could just write a computer program to follow these rules and randomly generate the details. But then we would lose the human element of literature, and that is what makes it touch our hearts and our minds.
That said, I looked over Twain's guidelines, and though I wouldn't sit down with a manuscript and check it to the list, I don't think I would find a reason to break any of those guidelines.
Frankly, I attempted to read a couple of Stephen Kings novels, and the bored me to tears.
I will say that Mark Twains List is extremely useful. Can you be a great writer and ignore that list? Yes. However, if you're not a "great" writer, and you can't use those flaws to your advantage in story-crafting, it is an excellent idea to read the list and check your writing against it.
So what are you saying? Is King one of these writers? Should he go and read this "end-all be-all" checklist of Twain's and try to apply it? If you think so, why is that? (I really would like to know. I am not being just being facetious with you) But if it is simply your finding him boring that is what qualifies this, then apparently (according to oh so many on this site) Dickens should have been finding himself a list as well; because lots (of people on this site, myself not included) find him boring--to the point of tears.
I've read the first 4 parts to The Dark Tower series, mainly because i enjoy epic stories.
book 2-3-4 are pretty freaking enjoyable.
I will clarify... King has his place, and although I personally don't enjoy him, it is evident that many people do. Certainly he is doing something right. The same goes to Cooper, whose books are considered a classic now (I haven't read them yet, so I can't personally judge). I agree that following the list as a FORMULA would stint the growth of the art of literature and is generally a bad idea.
However, if you're just STARTING to write, or if you're trying to be published but are unsuccessful, it would probably be a good idea to go down Twain's list and see if there is something he has listed that can improve your story/novel. Using his list as a GUIDE would be very effective, especially to aspiring authors.
I've read both The Shining and The Gunslinger by Stephen King. I found The Shining to be very enjoyable with great characters. I couldn't bring myself to finish The Gunslinger.
As to the ongoing writer's argument, I personally believe there is no set formula to writing. There are plenty of superior authors to Twain (Tolstoy, Joyce, et cetera) who disregard these rules in favor of fashioning their own. Like said above, writing doesn't follow a set foruma; that's the beauty of it.
travis, i had the HARDEST time getting through the gunslinger, especially the first half of it. it's terrible, like - beyond atrocious - however, as the book itself was written over a huge time period, you can actually tell, specifically, where king gets a hang of the story, and a feel for how to write it - and the last part of the book is completely on another level.
if you are in the mood for some good entertainment reading, i almost promise you - you will find the end of if, and all of book 2/3/4 way, way better.
also - frank muller narrated the first few books of it before, tragically, his accident and eventual death - but i would highly recommend finding a torrent and downloading the books as read by him if you can find them.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote