World, Writing, Wealth discussion
All Things Writing & Publishing
>
Tips in tightening up our writing
Talking about tightening - we ended up cutting about 45 k words and they weren't only 'that'-:)Evan cut most of his novel and came it with a goodseller
King says adverbs are the bane of good writing.
@Mr Tim: What is an eh-junt? (kidding)@Mr Nik: Who is "we"? (not kidding)
Hugs,
Ann
#Agentless #QueenOfAdverbs #Doomed #FeelingGoodAboutIt
Strunk & White's Elements of Style is prominently placed on my bookshelf.
Mark Twain says take out every instance of "very" :)
A more proactive approach rather than avoiding adverbs is to use strong and exact verbs.
We? Probably seeing double -:)I had a co-author on the first novel
Strunk & White forever!The word 'very' usually makes me cringe.
Stein On Writing is excellent.
Oh, geez, you guys...I literally word vomit onto my keyboard and call it a day LMAO!!
*takes a seat**pulls out notepad**scribbles down wisdom*
Alex G wrote: "Strunk & White's Elements of Style is prominently placed on my bookshelf."Prominently placed on my shelf as well!! An excellent resource :)
I also own a copy of Elements of Style. It's my second copy. Don't ask me how I lost the first.
Annie wrote: "Oh, geez, you guys...I literally word vomit onto my keyboard and call it a day LMAO!!
*takes a seat**pulls out notepad**scribbles down wisdom*"
Haha Annie, same here :) I vaguely remember a few "writing rules" from high school, but when people start talking about official author stuff like climax and hook and outline, I pretty much just stare blankly. I'm afraid that if I start reading about "how to write" now, I'll mess up my books. I just write until I think the story should end, fix typos, publish, hope for the best :).
It was a month or two ago that I read the thing about adverbs and the word "very". Then I was like, dang. I'm too scared to back through my books and see what carnage may lie within...
I appreciate the tips and tricks of the trade, though. I do want to be a good writer!
Can someone answer me this...why is everyone so afraid of using adverbs just because Stephen King hates them??
Eldon wrote: "Can someone answer me this...why is everyone so afraid of using adverbs just because Stephen King hates them??"I love your question :) I don't know a great answer, though! There are probably 5 million things I can be worried about with my writing, which I can dwell on, or keep doing my best with writing.
I think it improves my writing to be conscious of adverbs now even though I still use them plenty.
Tim wrote: "I thought the help section was the best place for this thread. Has anyone good tips on how to tighten up writing? I'll go first. When my current agent first took me on the first thing he asked me..."
This is really interesting! I find that on my first read-through of my rough draft, I add more of the word "that" to make the dialogue flow. I use hardly any on my rough draft for some reason.
@Miss Marie: Oh, thank goodness! *hugs* I thought I was all by my lonesome!!Yeeeah, I'm definitely not a "technical" writer. At all. No outline. No gameplan. No nothing. Just let the characters do whatever the heck they feel like. I mean, they ARE alive, after all. Right? Riiiight??? Then again, I'm known for scrapping entire chapters because they lead smack dab into a brick wall. Soooo *crazy laugh*
Confession time: I heard about adverbs and the word "very"...errr...right here. Like, in this thread. Oh, man, I need help hahaha...haha...ha...
I really appreciate y'all sharing your expertise! Thank you!!!
Oh! And I find myself both adding and subtracting "that"s. Totally depends on how well it rolls off my tongue. Again, NOT a "technical" writer, eh?
Hugs,
Ann
P.S. - @Mr Eldon: Pfft! I ain't scurred!!
#Fearless #OrJustIgnorant
If tightening is the purpose, emoticons and emojis may replace many words and convey even more precisely the required feelings -:)50 years from now (pretty much when Tim needs to live under Sharia laws-:)), I can imagine books (hey, and maybe even contracts) written in this language:
ಠ_ಠ, ^_^, ^_~, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The above is the first five chapters of my new thriller for the generations to come -:)
Eldon wrote: "Can someone answer me this...why is everyone so afraid of using adverbs just because Stephen King hates them??"Especially as the guy that uses a jogger getting hit by a guy in a van playing with his dog almost as much as most people uses adverbs...maybe King should stop rewriting the same book over and over...
Tim wrote: "You guys have me paranoid about "very" now... I'm off to do a search... :D"Aw, sorry Tim! :)
J.J. wrote: "Eldon wrote: "Can someone answer me this...why is everyone so afraid of using adverbs just because Stephen King hates them??"Especially as the guy that uses a jogger getting hit by a guy in a van..."
Thanks J.J. :) Nothing like a good laugh to start the day!!
Nik wrote: "ಠ_ಠ, ^_^, ^_~, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯"This the first time I've understood anything you've said...
@Mr Tim: Just checked. I have 57 instances of "very" in my book.
I'm afraid of what you might find. VERY afraid. Get it? No? *sigh*
@Mr JJ: You make me giggle.
Hugs,
Ann
Eldon wrote: "Can someone answer me this...why is everyone so afraid of using adverbs just because Stephen King hates them??"I don't know, but I've heard that a number of times from other than Stephen King, no "ly" adverbs. But, who used tons of them? JK Rowling! I thought, my goodness, she said "scathingly"! I would not be surprised if she set that 'rule' back some, and that could be why it's been re-emphasized.
It's funny, some rules matter some of the time, but not all of the time. :-)
I think rules matter all the time...bad grammar is always going to be bad writing. The thing about adverbs or words ending in "ly" though is...that was never a rule but more a style choice. Style varies from writer to writer and book to book but the rules remain the same wherever good writing is found.
For an actual tip, hmm . . . be careful of head hopping, especially in the same scene, especially too early. It can work and work well, or put the reader out of the story.
I think it means changing the narrative voice??
Yeppers. Multiple POVs. It can be a bit tricky. But then again, lots of Rom and Erotica is told this way. Typically with a clear indication with who's head we're hopping to. For example:
Dude:
I couldn't look at her. Because I knew I'd be done for. Blah, blah, blah...
Chick:
He wouldn't even look at me. But I knew he was dying to. Blah, blah, blah...
Depends on the genre, maybe? I'm not sure...
Hugs, I'm sure about hugs,
Ann
EDIT: Miss ML, what do you think might help it work and work well?
@Mr Tim: LMAO!!! Why would you have the jitters??? Pretty sure I'm the only one here who was reckless (read: dumb) enough to vomit a book into the public lap and not bother wiping up the mess ^_~
That's the most dangerous skullduggery there is ^_~As for an actual tip, I pull repeat words that are too close to one another. Don't think this "tightens" anything, though. I was just trying to contribute LOL
Love Nik's shorthand, BUT is not comprehension desirable for good writing?And while King dislikes adverbs, allegedly with no option of when to use them, he is hardly a great expert on grammar. My challenge: write that sentence with no adverbs.
Ian wrote: "Love Nik's shorthand, BUT is not comprehension desirable for good writing?And while King dislikes adverbs, allegedly with no option of when to use them, he is hardly a great expert on grammar. My..."
lol
Ian wrote: "Love Nik's shorthand, BUT is not comprehension desirable for good writing?..."Thanks, Ian! Unfortunately - it's all plagiarism -:)
Comprehension? For good writing? Since when?
M.L. wrote: "For an actual tip, hmm . . . be careful of head hopping, especially in the same scene, especially too early. It can work and work well, or put the reader out of the story."On a similar note, I see people repeatedly complain about an author switching from first to third POV, and I always think to myself that Charles Dickens did it in Bleak House. Then I saw Nik did the same thing effectively with his first Oligarch book. I tend to think there isn't any one technique by itself that puts a reader off, it's when these unconventional techniques are employed ineffectively that puts readers off. I think the lesson I'm trying to get across is that you should never avoid trying something because it's a hated trope - instead you should embrace experimentation and work to make it seamless in your narrative.
J.J. wrote: "I think the lesson I'm trying to get across is that you should never avoid trying something because it's a hated trope - instead you should embrace experimentation and work to make it seamless in your narrative. "*nods enthusiastically*
J.J. wrote: "you should embrace experimentation and work to make it seamless in your narrative.."Very well said, indeed. Should be a daily quote here on GR
Sounds great, J.J. :)I have not switched from 1st to 3rd POV, but in all of my stories, the POV alternates between a dozen or so characters.
I'm a screenwriter trapped in an author's body, I tell ya! Seriously though, I love mixing things up!
Head hopping is not just changing points of view - it is doing it so suddenly it feels like static break up - and does just that - breaks the reader's connection to the character/story. It isn't a technique either, it's usually in place of a technique. Big difference. If your reader is ok with it though then, well--then it's okay for them. :-)
A great example of how to change points of view and have powerful writing: George Martin's Game of Thrones, it's fantastic. Most of the books I've read lately change points of view and they are all great, but none of them do it in a way that would be described as 'head hopping.'
For me, a change of POV should come with a change of section or preferably chapter. The main reason to avoid it is that when a reader comes across it, he may not recognise that it has happened, and come to a wrong conclusion, until suddenly be brought back to reality, and that is a bad experience. It is imperative you don't force the reader to have to go back to try to work out what has happened.
Eldon wrote: "Can someone answer me this...why is everyone so afraid of using adverbs just because Stephen King hates them??"For me, if an adverb works - I'll use it.
My writing style is quite lean, focused on verbs and not flowery.
Elie Wiesel's once said to "not prostitute language". It has to do with the distinction of trying to force an emotional response from the reader vs. being simultaneously thoughtful and intentional with language. The later will carry emotion along with it, and flow better (feel tighter). (I apologize for not being able to provide more clarity to Wiesel's advice, but I'm still in the process of understanding it myself.)An example of this is a book I just read for my library's book club, Edith Wharton's The House of Mirth. The vocabulary in that book is MASSIVE, but it flows uninterrupted, never seems bloated, and the emotion feels natural. I'm rereading it just to get a better sense of how Wharton pulled this off.
Many good writers warn about adverbs, not just Stephen King. They often violate the basic "Show, don't tell" rule of writing, which is one of the most important ones ever thought up. Here's an article:
http://www.writersdigest.com/writing-...
just joining the party . . . not sure how useful this is but did you know that there's a formula to writing? Well for romance there is, according to Harlequin's so you think you can write.Going by that formula, I think I am doomed as a romance author . . . thankfully, kids don't care
Do you guys follow any formulas? eg by 50% the H and H should have kissed, by 75% they should have done the do, at 100% HEA/HFN (feeling kool that I know what HEA/HFN means, took me forever to figure it out)
Writing formulas kill imagination and inspiration, in my opinion. As for Harlequin books, they are the epitome of rehashed, regurgitated, uninspiring stories.
I can't personally write by formulas, to attempt to fit creativity into the rigidity of a formula is to stifle it. Worse still, it results in a story that is little different than anyone elses...
Agreeing with previous posts here... Formulas kill me. I tend to think/write outside the box, otherwise I figure there's no point - why would I come with the exact same storyline that someone else wrote, only with different names and slightly different ideas?
No, I don't follow any formulas. I create strategies for my works. Those old formulas or anything formulaic never agrees with me. I create my own concepts, strategies (forms of action) to produce my works. Let someone else stick with the overdone, overrated stuff (formulas, ha, I'm on a permanent diet from those kinds of things.) I don't like to be stifled.
phewwwww that's good to know . . . I thought formulas were the key to success (I tried not to laugh at that)
Kiss at 50% is too late with current expectation of instant gratification. I'd suggest around 17-18 percent and then you still have lots to do for the rest of the book-:)
There is a distinction to be made between formulas and genre conventions.For example in a maturation plot, the mentor must go off scene to allow the hero to mature through independent choice.
How the convention is implemented is where the problem arises as there is a necessity to avoid cliche.
[1] In Star Wars, Obi-Wan Kenobi is killed by Darth Vader, forcing Luke to act independently of his mentor.
The mentor going off scene is a genre requirement
[2] Frodo and Gandalf are separated by the Balrog - then Frodo operates independently to the end of the LOTR.
[3] Neo and Morpheus are separated by the Agents when they capture Morpheus - Neo then takes responsibility for rescuing his Mentor.
In all cases, the mentor is removed from the narrative to allow the hero to act independently and take responsibility - to mature, hence the Maturation Plot.
There is a storyline where the Mentor stays on scene, and blocks the maturation of the hero - turning them to the dark side.
Anakin Skywalker and the Senator Palpatine/The Emperor.
Reverse the convention and reverse the result - but the convention is still present in a mirrored form.
Formula? Or genre convention that you fail to work with at your peril?
Thanks, Mr Tim!!