“Always”
and “never” are usually red flags in front of a rapid bull for discussion
topics. Don’t/Do
/Should/Shouldn’t lead
directly to the list of exceptions where an author not only did/didn’t, but was
fabulously spectacular and now sleeps on large piles of cash surrounded by
scantily clad women.
Why do I feel a song coming on? |
What? It’s my blog.
The
bloggers and free-advice-givers aren’t operating in a vacuum. They’re offering lists of generally accepted
wisdom that, while an exception can always be found (writing is an art,
after all), that exception often proves the rule. Those that “dared” (translation: were
ignorant of their mistakes) had a list of other things they did correctly. Beautiful prose, wonderful plots, living and
breathing characters.
Or
an agent and publisher who knew how to market!
Check
out Jane Austen and her repeated use of double-negatives. William Faulkner liked to start sentences
with a conjunction-junction. Dickens was
verbose to the point of excess, in part because he was paid by the installment
of roughly 32-pages of text. Let’s not
even get started on the crazy that is
Shakespeare, who violates both literary and theatrical rules—all to great effect.
You really can buy style! |
Listing
out these rule-breakers makes it seem like everything is up for grabs. It should be strongly noted and reinforced
that these authors broke their particular rules selectively. They didn’t burn their copy of Strunk & White to make s’mores. They carefully selected which rules they felt
didn’t serve their purpose, or how breaking the rule would serve. Or, as my editor likes to tell me, “You get a
couple vetoes. You’d better make them
good.”
The
truth is that there are exceptions to every rule, and there are authors who violate
rules either accidentally or deliberately.
In the case of the latter, the rule was first known by the author and
then bent or broken for effect. Much
like when an architect knows to follow the customary tried-and-true, and when,
like Frank Lloyd Wright, to throw it out a geometrically divided window and
create genius.
That
doesn’t give carte blanche to all writers everywhere to break any rule at any
time. Understanding the rule, why it
exists and how it’s meant to help communicate understanding, is still a
necessity. I certainly haven’t mastered
the English language such that I feel comfortable rejecting the basic
foundations on which I lay my stories.
The
rules also change over time. Dickens,
for example, built his tried-and-true process of installments so that he could
create for himself a steady income. His
method, which became a much-used formula for years after, was wholly new when
he developed it. So what worked 50, 100
or 200 years ago may no longer be readable, useable or publishable.
Dickens
was also a master storyteller. Good
writing, a good story, does trump a broken rule or a borrowed cliché.
No comments:
Post a Comment