The Pecman

I don't drink, but I plan to start very soon.

Good point, but there are a few things that really drive me batty. I've seen quite a few authors who are guilty of run-on sentences, and those bother me even more than the use of a semi-colon. One properly-placed comma (plus the word "and") would generally solve the run-on sentence problem, but there are authors who foolishly believe their individual style overrules proper grammar. To me, you gotta enforce rules like that just for clarity and to help ove the mechanics of the words out of the reader's way. There are quite a few authors and teachers who say "the road to hell is paved with semi-colons," but I'm a never-say-never kinda guy. I'll use a semi-colon once in a blue moon; more than that, and I get in trouble. [see?] I once sent what I thought was a very complimentary email to an author who posted a complete novel. I praised him very highly, but just gave him two minor criticisms: one was that he set the story in an unidentified California town, and I told him I thought the story would benefit from being in a real place (or at least giving the area a name); the second was that in a December scene, two characters referred to "Father Christmas" for the holiday, and I felt that no American would say anything except "Santa Clause" or "Santa" or maybe "St. Nick." The guy was on me like a mad dog, ripping my throat out in email, convinced I had just insulted his mother or something. I was genuinely surprised, because 92% of my email was completely positive, and the two points I raised could have been easily fixed. I pointed out that he had ended each chapter by saying, "hey, send me comments!" and his email address, and you gotta take the good with the bad. He did not take this well. There's nothing wrong with a writer shrugging and saying, "hey, I see your point, but I'm going to live with what I've got for reasons X, Y, and Z." Me personally, I'm big on knowing the location and time of all the events within a story, and when this is vague, I think it detracts from the story's reality. If he had given the town a fictitious name, like "Tierra Verde" or "San Fransokyo," I would've been fine with it... but Father Christmas is right out.

I think if you put your story out on the net for the world to see, you have to be aware that some people may criticize it. I'm honestly not offended if somebody points out a very real mistake or a valid character issue that just slipped past me and my various friends who proofread the story. On the rare occasions I've emailed an author about a story problem, I generally say, "hey, loved the story, thought it was terrific, congratulations... but there was this one little thing that bothered me." If they get offended, there's not much I can do, and I often stress it's just a matter of opinion. On the other hand, I've sometimes seen writers make huge factual errors that just make no sense, and there's no excuse for that. It's either right or it's wrong -- there's no interpretation if it's a historical date, if it's a scientific fact, if it's the spelling of a famous name, or a geographical location. I think there's a way to be critical but also tactful and respectful. I also recognize that authors on the net are writing for free, so they don't really owe us anything. I think it's different if you spend $20 on a hardback novel and it's a piece of crap; if you read a short story or novel on the net for free, be glad you got something. No matter what my comments are, I always try to encourage the author and say, "hey, your story stuck with me for quite some time after I finished reading it, which is rare these days, and please keep writing." Writers need all the encouragement they can get.

I have occasionally run into a picture of a celebrity or even a nobody, and thought, "ah! That's sorta/kinda in the direction of one of my characters." So sometimes it helps. I always write up a list (which no one ever sees but me) where I write a paragraph or so about each major character -- their age, their height, hair color, birthdate, a physical description, personality traits, a little background. At least this way, if I say in chapter 3 that Character Y's birthday is March 19th, I can look that up when I get to chapter 13 when March rolls around in the story. But I don't think you necessarily need a photo or a drawing to make them come alive.

Adam is very wise. I agree: I've gotten more useful feedback from people who criticize my work rather than those who compliment me. If they're confused by a story point or if they question a character's motivation, there may well be something wrong that I can't see because I'm too close to the story. It's very valuable to have somebody point this out and have them say "WTF?", and since the story is online, there's no reason why you can't submit a revised version that solves the problem. At least we don't have the problem of the publisher having to recall 50,000 printed books.

Bah. It breaks my concentration. I know of some writers -- George R.R. Martin is one of them -- who still writes in WordStar for DOS (!!!), because there's almost nothing else on the screen except what he writes, plus there's no way to be distracted by other programs in the background. I find I learn more if I make the mistakes and then manually fix them later, rather than using the crutch of the word-processor fixing it for me. But I'm also the guy who says it's better to edit on paper rather than on the screen. I get out a big red pen and slash out all kinds of stuff when I rewrite. If I can't take a 30-page chapter and knock it down to at least 25 pages, I'm doing something wrong. Somehow, it works better for me on paper... plus, now I have a paper copy in case the computer blows up or the drive melts down. (Which is rare, but it happens.)

Go into the prefs and turn off Check Grammar. Grammar interferes too much with style, and I find it's often just plain wrong. I don't mind the spell-check, but I prefer to do that manually after I've finished a chapter.

Man, ain't that the truth. I really hate it when I start relying on a handful of phrases as a crutch. I generally write novels in chapters, but I have an additional document that has all the chapters as a single file in case I need to search through the entire document to detect any really stupid repetitions. If I used "mewl," it damn well only better be there once. I agree that even Mr. King (who is often a superb writer) falls into bad habits on occasion.

I try not to tell other writers how to write, but I would tend to agree that many best-selling novelists are not using add-ons to analyze their style, their grammar, or anything else. Stylistically, I think you can learn the basic techniques of writing just by reading great novels, determining what you like and what you don't like, and then experiencing life. Once you've done some of that, I think you can sit down and write with very basic tools... up to and including just a pen and paper. No fancy software needed. Note that all the Harry Potter books as well as many other major best sellers started out life being written in longhand. It can be done. But nothing can take the place of a good editor looking over your shoulder and saying, "whoops, I think you meant to say XYZ in this paragraph." No software can do that, nor can it tell when you accidentally use the name of Character B when you meant Character A.

Dictionary.com can be your friend. They imply that gray is the preferred spelling in English: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gray?s=t

Many prolific writers fall into predictable patterns and wind up reusing old bits. As great as Stephen King is, he's used the trick of ending a chapter by saying, "and that's the last time either of them ever saw <this character> alive again." Fun the first few times, but once he's done it 5 or 6 times, you say, "c'mon! Enough already!" Still a great writer, but eh... you write 20 million words, and occasionally you'll repeat the same snappy phrase. The one I see too often on the net is when characters sigh. I particularly dislike it when they combine it with dialogue. "Oh, please," he sighed. Naaaa, I don't buy that. You speak, and then you sigh. You can't sigh a word. "Whined" I would buy. But I see this used as a crutch all the time.

As difficult as it may be to do, read the entire thing out loud and see how it sounds in the room. I find if you run into hackneyed dialogue, there's definitely a very real problem there. It does help to get a second opinion on occasion, but all you can do is use gut instinct on how much of their advice to use.

The huge smash hit Netflix series House of Cards had an episode where the Vice-President's secret service agent stays late at the VP's house and has a couple of drinks with the man's wife. Minutes later, the VP comes in... and all three of them begin kissing each other! It was kind of a jaw-dropping moment where you figure, "the VP is such a manipulative, power-mad guy, he'll just grab anything he can get... men and women." Quite a stunning moment, even more so when you consider Kevin Spacey is the lead. Great show.

A better link for Gee's story, which I agree is very good: http://www.awesomedude.com/gee_whillickers/change/index.htm

That could also be a very good movie title.

I personally have pushed for an optimistic ending, but not happily ever after, particularly if the characters are younger. Who's to say you're going to be in love with the same person at 20 as you are at 30, 40, or 50? With divorce on the upswing, I think it's unrealistic to expect for people to stay together forever. In my own personal case, I've been in the same relationship with my partner for 32 years (how we haven't killed each other yet is a miracle in itself), but I think we're the exception. I know of many, many other gay couples who've split during that time, some due to illness, death, or just meeting new people. So I am firmly on the side of avoiding a downbeat, tragic ending. I think that would create kind of a hybrid, a romantic drama/tragedy, as opposed to a standard romantic novel. In truth, sometimes the tragic elements are the most memorable parts of the story, whether or not the characters are able to overcome the obstacles.

Almost entirely. But not really -- the point of view is detached and is third-person. I'd call it third-person limited, but it's done well in the book and clearly worked.

And as an update: Stephen King has some very good tips for new writers in this recent interview in The Atlantic... http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/09/how-stephen-king-teaches-writing/379870/ I think he has some good observations on what can be taught, what can't be taught, what basic skills are necessary, and how writers have to observe life. Some very thoughtful comments in the piece.

You can make a good case that some of the best novels ever written were based on or at least inspired by real events. My only caution is that real life very rarely makes a good story. Often, you need to dramatize certain events or amp it up in order to make it interesting as a story, and also to give the events a satisfying conclusion. The annoying thing about real life is that not only are there sometimes no happy endings, but sometimes friendships just slowly evaporate over time, you lose track of people, events don't get resolved for weeks or months at a time... none of which is very interesting to read. I've occasionally read an interesting story online and commented to the author, "hey, loved the story, but I thought such-and-such was kind of a weird moment." And their answer is, "oh, it happened in real life just that way." They seem unable to comprehend that there are no rules that say you have to steadfastly adhere to the exact facts that happened in life. When it comes to storytelling, you can shift the events and characters in any direction you want, as long as it moves the story forward and makes it more interesting to the reader.

I had quite a few email conversations with Dom over the years, and he was a good guy -- perfectly willing to discuss his writing decisions, open and honest when it was clear he might have made the wrong choice, and very much interested in the writing process. The last email I got from him was in 2007, and he gave me the impression he was having some trouble with his current project. I always tried to encourage him and told him several times he should consider making his work available to mainstream publishers. Nowadays, I bet he could do very well as an eBook author. But inspiration is a tricky, delicate thing. It strikes or it doesn't, and sometimes the realities of life crash down upon you and get in the way of writing. I hope whatever challenges he has are something he can overcome, and Dom can find his way back to the keyboard sometime soon.

I think it depends. One of the first authors I know of who specifically mentioned brand names in fiction was Ian Fleming with his classic 1950s and 1960s James Bond novels, and I had no problem with it. Was Bond driving a generic high-speed race car, or was it an Astin-Martin? Did he have a generic expensive watch, or was it a Rolex Submariner? Was he shooting a generic gun, or was it a Walther PPK? So sometimes, the occasional mentions of brand names are interesting and lend credibility to the story. I don't have a problem with it if some nuggets like this are tossed in from time to time. One can make a good argument that any method used to push verisimilitude into the story is worthwhile, provided it pushes the plot forward and doesn't become intrusive. Me, I've got characters listening to Apple iPods and wearing Nike T-shirts, and I don't have a problem with it. It's just there, it's mentioned, and we move on. I think brand names are just one of a thousand facets of storytelling, and far from the most important. Music and movies are more problematic, simply because (as I said before) it dates the story. If somebody's listening to a 98 Degrees song rather than a One Direction song, we're clearly not in the present... for most people.

One thing I'll warn is that the danger of featuring a song done by a singer-of-the-moment or a hip group-of-the-moment is that they might not be so hip and trendy 5 years from now or 10 years from now. So many forms of pop culture -- TV shows, movies, music, even best-selling fiction -- could seem very dated after a while. As long as you know that going in and don't have a problem with it, it's not a problem.

I can think of quite a few exceptions in the Harry Potter novels -- for example, the scene where Voldemort kills the guy at the cottage, or the scene where the Minister of Magic appears in the office of the Prime Minister of England, or the meeting with Voldemort's followers around the table. Those are not prologue chapters in the sense that they happen before the story -- not to me, anyway. They're merely part of the long tale. I agree that the point of view is not fully omniscient, and it's rare that we get inside anybody else's head other than Harry. But the point of view certainly goes far beyond just what Harry can see or hear. We do occasionally tap into the anger and feelings of Voldemort, but I guess you can make a good argument that we know about it because Harry is tied into him. I think the movies make a greater attempt to show scenes beyond what Harry can directly see or experience, and we do glimpse conversations and story points far outside of Harry there. Harry is still the main focus, and all of this is done pretty subtly and skillfully. One of the tricks of both the film and the novels is that they make it clear there's a lot happening outside of Harry's life, and I think this is a key for making stories bigger in a lot of situations: giving them a sense of time and space beyond what we're seeing at the moment. The flashback scenes reinforce that, particularly in understanding Voldemort's background and his point of view. Though Voldemort himself is a cypher; we never really understand why he does everything he does, aside from being selfish and crazy.

Through email and correspondence, through working at a dozen newsstand magazines in the 1980s and 1990s, and being active on groups like these. Heck, I think just my old cronies in the magazine business probably number in the dozens, including freelance writers, staff writers, and editors. I've been around the block a few times. Many of them are very bright, well-rounded people who know art, history, music, and a lot beyond just the world of writing, through writing is their main line of work. I've been writing for more than 35 years, so you figure if I only met one person a year, that'd be about three dozen right there. Two of the brightest LA authors I know personally, David Gerrold and Harlan Ellison, are amazing in their wealth of knowledge and their love of words and imagery. Both have taught writing at the professional level, conducting workshops, and have written scores of books (fiction and non-fiction). They also are far more knowledgeable than me about art, philosophy, history, and politics, four areas in which I have only the vaguest experience. They come to me when they need technical expertise in certain areas, so we all have knowledge in different areas, some of which overlap. And we share a love for great books and great writing. My thanks to Graeme above, who knows my work. He and I have rubbed elbows for years on other forums, and I think he has a similar understanding on what it takes to be a writer. I agree 100% with him that my dispute with your comment lies in making a broad, superficial statement. I promise you, if I had turned in a college paper (or, god forbid, a paid piece) where I said something like that, my teacher or editor would whack me upside the head with a 2x4. But if I had said the magic words in my opinion, then everything is different. There's a huge difference between a statement of opinion and a statement of fact. If you had said, "in my opinion, a lot of writers I see online have very poor skills in spelling, grammar, and punctuation," I wouldn't have said a word, but in fact might have sadly nodded my head in agreement. I've written a couple of essays online where I said, "just because you aren't being paid for your writing doesn't mean you can't at least act like a professional and conduct yourself on that level." And that includes knowing all the rules about grammar, spelling, sentence construction, and so on. As a friend of mine pointed out the other day to me, there's only six strings on a guitar but there's millions of possible chords and songs that can come out of them. The same is true of writing: you really have to know the rules before you can break them, and I think great writers do know those rules, both on an instinctual and an intellectual level.

I would say I know about two dozen published authors here in LA, and probably another two dozen authors around the country. All of them are tops in terms of having a good grasp in English; several have actually been employed as English teachers or even writing teachers. I think your mistake is in making a hasty generalization and a very superficial observation without having any real evidence. Back up and look at what I say objectively, and I think you'll see that my point is a reasonable one. Don't ever assume another author knows less than you do; you can wind up being very disappointed or worse. The mechanics of understanding basic English, spelling, grammar, and punctuation, are trivial. Anybody halfway competent can figure that out in a few years of study, unless English is not their first language. I agree with this 100%. Very well-said. But at the same time, if the writer's basic English skills are so poor as to get in the way of telling the story, it can put off the reader to the point where they won't want to continue reading it. Good editing can help to a point, but there've been times people have sent me stories to edit, and I've taken one glance at the manuscript, thrown up my hands and said, "this thing's a mess! You gotta learn the basics before you dive into real story-telling." An English teacher I am not, though I majored in English for a while in college. It's sad for me when I glance at any online fiction and I think, wow, this is a great idea for a story, but it's executed so poorly, all it's gonna do is turn off readers. And sometimes you see the opposite: somebody with obvious skill who knows how to craft a sentence, but has a trivial plot with thin characters, and there's just no guts to the story. You need both halves of the whole to pull it off, and neither is easy. But I agree with the central point that the story is the thing. I can overlook the occasional typo or a run-on sentence if the plot and characters really hook me in.