# Anyone else hate "how to do ___" writing advice?



## Mythopoet (Jan 11, 2018)

Maybe it's just me, but it really annoys me. Sometimes it even makes me feel angry. (shock!) Not at anyone in particular. Not even at the person who wrote the article. Such articles usually list at best a handful of methods that are  approved by the article writer based on what their personal taste is. I read such articles and they just seem so limited to me. And it's not even that the advice contained therein is terrible advice. Often enough, the methods listed are good, reliable methods. And I'm sure they are helpful to new writers who feel uncertain about how to tell their story.

But I feel as though such articles suggest a false idea about storytelling: that if you want to accomplish a specific effect within your story, there are certain particular ways of doing it. This idea seems so pervasive around the writing communities I have frequented, including here. How many threads do we get here asking some variation on the theme "I want to do this thing in my story, please tell me how to do it". And many of the wonderful, friendly posters here do their best to give the person an answer. But every time I see such a question, and not just here, I can't help thinking that these aspiring writers are missing the essential nature of being a storyteller. 

Being a storyteller means that you have to decide the best way to tell your story. The way it is expressed needs to come from you. Not a formula or a method or the advice of other people. Because there are an infinite amount of ways to tell stories. There aren't just a handful of ways to make a character sympathetic or create a plot or convey important information or any of the things that the story needs to do. Every writer is unique, every story is unique, every character is unique. It all the depends on your choices, as the storyteller. If you have someone else give you the answers or even just use generalized writing advice to form your story... I just feel like you're missing out on the whole point. 

But then, not having finished any stories of my own to speak of, I'm probably not one to talk. Maybe if I was capable of writing to formula or at least proven method I'd have actually accomplished something by now.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 11, 2018)

Mythopoet said:


> "I want to do this thing in my story, please tell me how to do it". And many of the wonderful, friendly posters here do their best to give the person an answer. But every time I see such a question, and not just here, I can't help thinking that these aspiring writers are missing the essential nature of being a storyteller.



What, exactly, would be the point of the forums then? Or the articles. Or the blog? 

I can't imagine this site would last very long if every time a writer hoping for advice or looking to learn a new strategy got the response, "Follow your heart. It will tell you everything you need to know." 



Mythopoet said:


> Being a storyteller means that you have to decide the best way to tell your story. The way it is expressed needs to come from you. Not a formula or a method or the advice of other people. Because there are an infinite amount of ways to tell stories. There aren't just a handful of ways to make a character sympathetic or create a plot or convey important information or any of the things that the story needs to do. Every writer is unique, every story is unique, every character is unique. It all the depends on your choices, as the storyteller. If you have someone else give you the answers or even just use generalized writing advice to form your story... I just feel like you're missing out on the whole point.



The advice out there are tools. Not rules. Having a full tool box is a good idea in any profession. Knowing when to use a hammer vs. a screwdriver is important. 

But what is even more important is knowing _what tools exist and when to use them. _ I'm not going to be an effective carpenter if I don't even know what a hammer is. This is why educating oneself is so important.


----------



## Devor (Jan 11, 2018)

So, when I give how-to advice on the forums, I know that my opinion is only a part of a conversation.  Even if, taken in isolation, I might sound like I'm saying, "Do this if you want to succeed," there are always other people here to add more context, or qualifications, or disagreements, or questions.  I don't have to have all the answers, and nobody thinks I or anyone else here does.

In an article, the rest of the conversation is cut off, and the "do this" goes on so much longer.  Especially when you read a few posts sharing the same simple "fad" advice. I agree it gets irritating.


----------



## pmmg (Jan 11, 2018)

I think these bits of advice we throw around serve only to assist another in building their toolbox. But until the work with and learn the tools, it nothing more than words. There is truth on both sides of this. I can do your writing for you, but you also limit yourself to learning new tools if you never go out and seek what others are doing and how they are doing it. Asking around is just a way of trying to build a toolbox a little faster.

For myself, I don't really know what has helped me over time. Certainly, if one does not write, they will not get better at it and asking others for tools wont help them, so actually doing is the best teacher. But all the stuff and effort I have spent reading what other have done has all become part of the mix for me. Its like slowly building a more perfect writing engine with smaller and smaller upgrades. I don't know everything I have retained from this site so far, or everything I have retained from many of the places I have been, but I know I have learned a little. It was here I first encountered the term 'Way point' writer.

I think it has been Chessie who has been hitting home the idea that the words matter less than the story. As one who works very hard on the prose, I found that I cannot disagree with some of what she said and I may approach my own writing with a newer type of liberation to see if it plays out well.

Nimue also made a point in one of these threads about traditional fantasy, something along the lines Traditional fantasy does not get a lot of attention as it is kind of already well tread upon ground and does not require as much investigation. It did get my wheels turning on some things, and it probably would not have otherwise.

For writing advice though, and for myself, I tend to go with say if fast and get to the point. I've read thick books on it, and thinner books on it, and IMO, the thinner books do it better. Quick lists of do's and dont's I always find interested. I may not agree with them, but I can obtain and work on the information better in those forms.


----------



## Mythopoet (Jan 11, 2018)

Heliotrope said:


> What, exactly, would be the point of the forums then? Or the articles. Or the blog?
> 
> I can't imagine this site would last very long if every time a writer hoping for advice or looking to learn a new strategy got the response, "Follow your heart. It will tell you everything you need to know."



I've always thought the purpose of a good forum was community and conversation. 



Heliotrope said:


> The advice out there are tools. Not rules. Having a full tool box is a good idea in any profession. Knowing when to use a hammer vs. a screwdriver is important.
> 
> But what is even more important is knowing _what tools exist and when to use them. _ I'm not going to be an effective carpenter if I don't even know what a hammer is. This is why educating oneself is so important.



A carpenter can have a toolbox which contains all the tools he needs to do his job. When it comes to writing and storytelling, I don't think there are a quantifiable number of tools that one can have to make a full writing toolbox. Stories are infinite. This is my entire point. When one reads writing advice and then thinks "ok, now I've got all my tools", they are probably limiting themselves unintentionally.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 11, 2018)

I think I'm confused about the post.

Are you suggesting that one should not ever bother studying craft because it is limiting? Or just that some advice is irritating to you, personally? 

I feel like I'm missing something here.


----------



## Devor (Jan 11, 2018)

Heliotrope said:


> I think I'm confused about the post.
> 
> Are you suggesting that one should not ever bother studying craft because it is limiting? Or just that some advice is irritating to you, personally?
> 
> I feel like I'm missing something here.



I think it's more about getting annoyed because there is definitely a "cliche" writing advice that has simple absolutist content and / or a condescending tone towards disagreement.


----------



## pmmg (Jan 11, 2018)

Mythopoet said:


> When it comes to writing and storytelling, I don't think there are a quantifiable number of tools that one can have to make a full writing toolbox. Stories are infinite.



Tools are also infinite. Growing and learning is always a journey and not a destination.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 11, 2018)

Mythopoet said:


> I've always thought the purpose of a good forum was community and conversation.



Right. So for you that might mean friendly conversations about manga. For me that means in depth analysis of craft. I love talking craft. I love learning about craft. I love taking what I've learned and applying it to my craft. Writing for me is not a magical thing that happens through some sort of divinity. So what I'm seeking here is community and conversation about craft. Is that wrong?


----------



## Mythopoet (Jan 11, 2018)

Heliotrope said:


> Right. So for you that might mean friendly conversations about manga. For me that means in depth analysis of craft. I love talking craft. I love learning about craft. I love taking what I've learned and applying it to my craft. Writing for me is not a magical thing that happens through some sort of divinity. So what I'm seeking here is community and conversation about craft. Is that wrong?



Sigh. I'm sorry Helio. I think you really just don't get me. 

A conversation, even a debate, is a different thing from an advice blog/article/post by someone who sets themselves up as someone who "knows how to write". Remember that I am not directing this thread at anyone in particular or even at this website. I spend time in a lot of writing communities and sites. And I've seen all too often the self-appointed person who "knows how to do ____". Even when frequently that person has never even published. Personally, I love a good in depth conversation about writing and story theory. Love it. But it's very difficult to have a good one because there are just so many writers who think either their taste is objective or once they've figured out how to do a thing in their own story that means they know how to do it in general and need to tell everyone.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 11, 2018)

Mythopoet said:


> Sigh. I'm sorry Helio. I think you really just don't get me.
> 
> A conversation, even a debate, is a different thing from an advice blog/article/post by someone who sets themselves up as someone who "knows how to write". Remember that I am not directing this thread at anyone in particular or even at this website. I spend time in a lot of writing communities and sites. And I've seen all too often the self-appointed person who "knows how to do ____". Even when frequently that person has never even published. Personally, I love a good in depth conversation about writing and story theory. Love it. But it's very difficult to have a good one because there are just so many writers who think either their taste is objective or once they've figured out how to do a thing in their own story that means they know how to do it in general and need to tell everyone.



Ahhhhhh. see this makes sense. This is why I said above that I think I was confused about the OP.

I think a lot of that just has to do with personalities, IMO, and the nature of Internet forums. If we were all sitting around at a coffee shop I think we would be more inclined to niceties. When people are frantically posting on their phones or iPads with kids running around or at work or whatever the niceties get dropped for a more concise response. Concise is good, but it can come across as curt and overly direct. I think that is the failure of forums like this.

And Devor's point about the articles is bang on. In an article there is no "conversation". No "debate" so they can often come across as a bit "do it my way."


----------



## Mythopoet (Jan 11, 2018)

pmmg said:


> Tools are also infinite. Growing and learning is always a journey and not a destination.



Certainly. But there are so many people who approach writing with the mindset of "These are the tools of writing. These are the right tools because they are the tools I used and they worked for me". And then they pass that view on to any newbie they can find to listen to them. But I tend to think writing and storytelling is something for which you are always discovering or inventing your own tools. But general advice blogs/articles/posts necessarily rest on the premise that they can tell you what tools to use even though they are addressed to a diverse audience who are all going to need different things for their unique story. 

Am I being clear?


----------



## Mythopoet (Jan 11, 2018)

Heliotrope said:


> Ahhhhhh. see this makes sense. This is why I said above that I think I was confused about the OP.
> 
> I think a lot of that just has to do with personalities, IMO, and the nature of Internet forums. If we were all sitting around at a coffee shop I think we would be more inclined to niceties. When people are frantically posting on their phones or iPads with kids running around or at work or whatever the niceties get dropped for a more concise response. Concise is good, but it can come across as curt and overly direct. I think that is the failure of forums like this.
> 
> And Devor's point about the articles is bang on. In an article there is no "conversation". No "debate" so they can often come across as a bit "do it my way."



I think forums are mostly. When you can have an actual conversation between two people who can give and take information in an attempt to help each other, that's a good way to seek help. But there tend to be a lot of thread just inviting anyone to write the story instead of the author and I feel like those people are missing the point. But I was attempting to say that I think it is the articles/blog posts/general advice posts that come with that "this is the way to do it" attitude that make people think they just need to find someone to tell them the right way to write their story. And then once those people successfully write a story (even if it isn't published) they think they can now be the ones to dispense advice on "how it is done". So it's a problem that is constantly feeding itself. And I tend to think it would be better if writers took a step back and realized that you mostly have to learn to write yourself by opening yourself up to experimentation and practicing until you get it right.


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 11, 2018)

I agree that a forum is more conducive to digging into nuances than a typical article or even a blog post. Even on forums you'll see, from time to time, people who seem to think they've hit on some objectively "right" way (or, worse, _the_ objectively right way) of doing something. I don't think that type of advice is useful to writers. It's more counter-productive than anything. I've said before, and still believe, that this type of advice is also geared toward pushing prose toward the generic and stifling voice. 

Advice with respect to the craft of writing can and should be debated. Anyone who tells you they have the One True Way*® *to write fiction should be eyed with great skepticism.


----------



## pmmg (Jan 11, 2018)

Well, this kind of goes along with wisdom. No one really knows what they think they know, and when they become wise, they will realize they don't know anything at all. Many people learn something and think this has become most important, but in time that will prove not to be true. But it does not hurt to hear them. We all must use our best judgment on what is useful to us and what is not.

One thing, I think may come into play here is also the point of diminishing returns. The amount of knowledge and energy obtained or spent to get to 80% competence with something is way less the amount of energy and knowledge needed to go the remaining 20%. And it gets more and more costly as we move closer to 100%. So, if we participate in forums and obtain writing tools, over time, they will seem less and less useful to us, cause more and more of them will not be showing us stuff we did not already know. Maybe we will even get to a point where we say, I have forgotten more than this guy knows.

But the quest for making oneself better is never ending, and sometimes we do pick up a new tool. Sometimes we just become aware of some of our older ones. Our bread and butter ones, though, they always get the most use.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 11, 2018)

pmmg said:


> Well, this kind of goes along with wisdom. No one really knows what they think they know, and when they become wise, they will realize they don't know anything at all.










The Dunning Kruger effect. People with least experience are always the most confident they have it "right". As you get more experiences you start to lose confidence in your "rightness" because you start to learn how much you don't know.

But I agree with pmmg that all voices have value.


----------



## pmmg (Jan 11, 2018)

Also, for those who have come a good distance and feel they have something to say about the craft, sharing their knowledge and wisdom is a way of paying back. Cause those on front edge of Helio's graph, they need the most learnin'


----------



## Penpilot (Jan 11, 2018)

pmmg said:


> Well, this kind of goes along with wisdom. No one really knows what they think they know, and when they become wise, they will realize they don't know anything at all.



This is a very good point. I think if we shift this slightly into other more formal fields of study, things in writing are similar to them.

For example, say a person is studying to become an engineer, a doctor, a programmer etc. There are foundational skills and knowledge that must be acquired before one can graduate with a degree. While taking courses to acquire those skills and knowledge, things will be simplified within those courses for the sake of making things easier to learn. Parameters will be absolute and things will be black and white so as to avoid confusing the student.

IMHO, In the learning situation, its more important that the student understand the basic theories/knowledge/tools and gets comfortable applying them than it is to have them be in a 100% realistic environment. As the student advances, the problems they'll face will become more realistic.

I've read a lot on writing and for me, this is what all those How-To articles are doing. They are distilling knowledge and offering up tools for someone else to take and learn how to use. In this situation, it's up to the student to figure out that these aren't absolutes. This happens by exposure to more knowledge, by actually using the knowledge and tools in practical situations, and by discussing these things with others.

When a student graduates with a degree, that degree means they have acquired a certain level of knowledge and worked with a certain set of skills. This doesn't mean a student has learned everything they need to know for the rest of their career. It's a starting point for them to begin the real schooling, real life, real life problems.

IMHO, every student goes through the I-know-everything-now phase. Those who can't, won't, or are unable to move pass this point get left behind.

Some things may seem like they're limiting or trying to box things in, and maybe they are. BUT in everything, there are limitations. Within even the most stringent limitations there are still infinite possibilities. To me, it's like being asked to find all the numbers between 2.1 and 2.2.

Everything has bounds, even the universe, but does anyone think of it as limiting. It all depends on how you look at it.

my 2 cents.


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 11, 2018)

Penpilot said:


> For example, say a person is studying to become an engineer, a doctor, a programmer etc. There are foundational skills and knowledge that must be acquired before one can graduate with a degree.



Of course, in areas like engineering, medicine, programming, and the like, there are objective facts that people can agree on. How you calculate the ability of a structure to bear a load; what happens when a certain protein binds to another protein in a cell membrane; what happens when a snippet of code is executed. Art forms like writing are much more subjective overall, though subjective factors may also come into play in more scientific arenas.


----------



## Michael K. Eidson (Jan 11, 2018)

I understand the sentiment expressed by the OP. The same sentiment has been expressed by others. I don't begrudge anyone feeling annoyed by whatever annoys them and owning the emotion. I hope the expression of the annoyance does not make others feel unwelcome to express opinions in whatever manner they are most capable of expressing them, even if it comes off as prescriptive and authoritative. I'm able to weigh what others say and apply it to my situation, and trust that others can do the same or will eventually learn to do so.

There are many things that annoy me and yet don't annoy others, so is it on me to tolerate what annoys me, or on others to take care not to annoy me? I want the answer to be the latter, but think it is probably the former. That doesn't stop me from trying to find kindred spirits, those annoyed by the same things that annoy me, with whom I can commiserate. Maybe that's what the OP was hoping for here.


----------



## Hallen (Jan 11, 2018)

Mythopoet said:


> Certainly. But there are so many people who approach writing with the mindset of "These are the tools of writing. These are the right tools because they are the tools I used and they worked for me". And then they pass that view on to any newbie they can find to listen to them. But I tend to think writing and storytelling is something for which you are always discovering or inventing your own tools. But general advice blogs/articles/posts necessarily rest on the premise that they can tell you what tools to use even though they are addressed to a diverse audience who are all going to need different things for their unique story.
> 
> Am I being clear?



I think that the learning process is important and most people don't know where to start. Sure, most of us can sit down and rip out a story, or part of one, without any learning because we are storytellers. That raw intent should be something that we encourage all new writers to nurture. 

But, once you go back and read that story, and realize that it's awful, and you realize you have no idea how to fix it, then you realize you could use some help. 

Forums like this will always -- ALWAYS -- be rife with basic, introductory questions. Often, the best answer is the basic craft answers. Why? Because most of them do apply, in some way, and there is no way of knowing what will or will not work for a particular person. 

I think that saying 'so many people who approach writing with the mindset of "These are the tools of writing. These are the right tools because they are the tools I used and they worked for me" ' is a bit of a straw man. I think there may be a few people like this, but the vast majority are like us in that we see the various craft methods as a way to potentially learn more, or when talking to a new writer, may be something that will trigger a step forward. 

If you are not always discovering or inventing, then you have probably stagnated. These types of discussions can spark ideas even if the tool in question doesn't really work for you.

However, for those of us who have spent many years on various writing forums, it does get repetitive and it does start to seem like everybody wants a magic bullet when the real solution is the heart and imagination of a true storyteller which is something that cannot really be taught.


----------



## Chessie2 (Jan 11, 2018)

I love reading other people's blogs and articles on writing, even if they're bullshit. It's fascinating. Sometimes a controversial piece will entertain me. It's all good.

Toss me in the 'I Love Writing Articles' bag.


----------



## Penpilot (Jan 11, 2018)

Steerpike said:


> Art forms like writing are much more subjective overall, though subjective factors may also come into play in more scientific arenas.



Most definitely, writing is more subjective . But there are certain elements of writing that I'd say aren't subjective, grammar, story structure, showing vs. telling, POV, etc. To me, they form a foundation of understanding that can help a person become a better writer. It's not the tools that make a good writer. It's how they use those tools. 

For example, it doesn't matter if a person shows or tells, because its neither right or wrong to do. What matters is a person understands what it is in all its forms and what the pros and cons are to using each.

Part of the artistry comes when a writer makes choices of when to apply showing or telling, or to use this tool vs that tool. 

I think this goes back to the OP in that a when I look at a How-To-Do-X book, article, etc, I look at it as only showing how one particular tool or set of tools works. It's up to me if I want to use that tool or tools or set them aside, and also, it's up to me to find out what other tools are out there that enable me to do the same thing.

As an aside, subjectivity and artistry come into say programming by way of making choices in the way a piece of software is implemented, from language, design structure, all the way down to how elegantly the code is written. Code writing can be very much like prose writing, it can be clunky and ugly and very difficult to read, or it can be elegant and be a pleasure to read. It all depends on the desire and skill of the programmer.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Jan 11, 2018)

Mythopoet said:


> Being a storyteller means that you have to decide the best way to tell your story. The way it is expressed needs to come from you. Not a formula or a method or the advice of other people.



Ironically, this is a "needs to be ___" absolute, so you're doing what you're complaining about.


----------



## pmmg (Jan 11, 2018)

Well, that's the thing with 'all things are subjective', such a statement cannot be subjectively true.

I agree with all of the above, except for adverbs. Adverbs are killers of prose and should never used


----------



## Michael K. Eidson (Jan 11, 2018)

To the OP's point, there were good storytellers and writers long before "writer's tools" were ever a point of discussion. Obviously, it must be _possible_ for people to be good storytellers without need for discussing any of the tools they employ, or even realizing they employ the tools. In my youth, I told stories to my siblings and kept them entertained for hours, with no training in storytelling. They could have walked away from me at any time, and being kids, they would have if they'd been bored. If someone back then had asked me _how_ I was able to tell entertaining stories, I could not have given a satisfactory answer.
_
But_, I've always read a lot, and through my reading, I learned techniques from examples, even if I could not put a name to the techniques. If _now--fifty years later--_I feel capable of discussing storytelling techniques, despite how many stories I have or have not published or even written, then why shouldn't I do so? How many other people have experiences like mine? Why shouldn't they engage in discussions too?

There's the issue of whether people take a prescriptive or authoritative tone when talking about how to tell stories effectively. I suspect such a tone is easy to take when recounting one's own beliefs. I've read writing advice saying not to point out how what you write is your opinion, because readers will assume it anyway. To my observation, those people who say they are annoyed by essays on the subject of writing are not the people who they are concerned will take the essays as prescriptive or authoritative. In essence, those who complain are concerned that _others_ will fall prey to the prescriptive or authoritative essays, taking them too literally. This is the same argument used by censors down the ages, that they know better what is good for others. I find it ironic that any writer would think it a good thing to censor other writers. If we find other writers _annoying_ (as opposed to _dangerous_, whatever that means, as has been discussed in other threads), I don't feel we should attempt to persuade them to stop writing whatever they want to write, in whatever manner they choose to write it.

That's not to say we have to stay quiet about being annoyed.  

In other words, I get the OP's point, but don't think there's anything to do about it other than to express the annoyance and move on.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 12, 2018)

Michael K. Eidson said:


> To the OP's point, there were good storytellers and writers long before "writer's tools" were ever a point of discussion. Obviously, it must be _possible_ for people to be good storytellers without need for discussing any of the tools they employ, or even realizing they employ the tools. In my youth, I told stories to my siblings and kept them entertained for hours, with no training in storytelling. They could have walked away from me at any time, and being kids, they would have if they'd been bored. If someone back then had asked me _how_ I was able to tell entertaining stories, I could not have given a satisfactory answer.



Very well said, Michael!

I would like to add that the arts and magic of Storytelling pre-dates not only the famous writing rules, but the books industry too and even written language itself. This does not mean that there is no value in the elements of the writing rules and the industry knowledge, just that the natural ability to tell stories exists and works in society even when separate of those things.

When I was in the equivalent of elementary school, in my class we had this professor that would simply tell stories to the entire classroom just for the fun of it. There he was, standing before everyone and just talking... and all of us were like hypnotized by his spoken narrative, grasping and enjoying every word of it sometimes for an hour or more.

The stories were short and simple, and yet that man told them in such a natural way that they were irresistible.

I still remember some of those supernatural horror and magical adventures that he told to my class. Sadly, the fun ended when one of my classmates (we never knew who exactly) started to suffer severe nightmares thanks to those stories! Well obviously the parents complained to the school, and the professor was not allowed to tell any other story to us.

We all begged for him to tell us more stories or to at least repeat the old ones, but the school would not allow it anymore.


----------



## bdcharles (Jan 12, 2018)

I wouldn't say I hate them but they leave me a little cold, mostly because I think someone is about to drop some fairly world-shattering knowledge on me, only to find it's the standard crop of tried-and-tested pointers that, even in my relative inexperience, I have already come across, such that after a few such articles I find myself craving the quiet voice of my muse. Having said that, I retweeted one of K.M.Weiland's earlier today ("The 5 Secrets of Good Storytelling") so I must like something in them. It had the word "baubles" in it so that is probably what snared me. I think it just reminded me of what I suspected or had forgotten. Of course, it's a bit of a clickbait misnomer calling then "Secrets" because they're all over the internet and in the public domain, but hey-ho. They might work for others but in general I agree that the whole business, for me, must be inspiration-driven.


----------



## Russ (Jan 12, 2018)

I am not the slightest bit annoyed when people publish "how to" story advice, rather I am grateful for most of it.  

Let me make myself clear on a couple of things before I tackle some of the thoughts expressed in this thread.   Industry knowledge has no impact on simply good storytelling, it may impact how you choose to tell your story but for the purposes of this discussion, I think it can be safely but aside.

But storytelling is a craft, and there are techniques that can be used to do it better or achieve certain goals.   Whether or not there are "infinite" techniques or ways of achieving story goals is I think debatable but not the point here.  Certainly the set of story telling techniques that can be used is very, very large, so large that it could never be covered by one blog or even one book or perhaps even many books.

But the suggestion that there was a mythical time, before the written word that there were no storytelling rules (as opposed to writing rules, I fully concede there were no writing rules before there was the written world) is probably untrue.

I have a good friend who has a masters in storytelling.  He spent years studying how pre-literate people tell stories and how that functioned in both ancient civilizations, (where we can tell) and modern non or pre-literate cultures.  The fact is those peoples had lots and lots of story telling rules and in fact they were probably more restrictive than our modern writing rules by a long shot.  The evidence is that stories were handed down orally, with remarkable accuracy, to be told in certain ways with certain gestures and certain intonations at certain times in a very defined and understood way.  Audiences would often be disappointed if the story was not delivered in the expected way.  And many of those stories were handed down quite precisely over multiple generations.  They were taught by mentors who taught story telling technique to their students the same way that someone doing a writers blog or writing a book is doing now.  The idea that we believe that sometime in history there was a time when people did not teach or help other people learn to be a good storyteller is a myth or perhaps more accurately a fantasy.

Even in the earliest literature cultures that we have a lot of material from show that they taught storytelling or communications technique.  Cicero, thousands of years ago gave advice on the use of voice and gestures etc on how to sway your audience.  Experienced people teaching less experienced people how to do something seems to be very much part of the human condition.  Getting annoyed about it is just plain odd.

Books on writing are simply larger, and more expensive, exercises in the same thing.  I wonder if the OP gets equally annoyed by books on how to write, such as King's, or Morrell's.  Even Tolkien gave writing advice, perhaps he should have simply shut up to allow others to properly access their own universal truth of storytelling unencumbered by his thoughts on the matter.

One of the things that makes humans successful is the ability to learn from previous generations, it seems remarkably unwise to  have to derive everything from first principles again.   Even talent (and that is a different discussion) can be coached by experienced people to achieve more, and that works for writing as well.  None of Usain Bolt's coaches were a faster runner than he was, but they  helped make him better nonetheless.  Why on earth would someone forgoe, eschew or even get annoyed at the chance to learn from someone who might actually be good at what they are doing or even just want to help you out?  It's not like these blog or book authors are dropping into your living room and yelling their advice into your ear against your will.  If you don't want to seek out and read articles that may help you, don't.

Even Sheilawiz's amazing storytelling professor had to learn to tell stories to some degree.  He learned the language, and it is likely over the years that he observed his audience reactions and adjusted his storytelling accordingly.  Whether he did this consciously or unconsciously is an open question, but use of language effectively is a learned skill.   Many in the arts like to ignore science but there is a ton of good science on the psychology of entertaining people, just ask Donald Maass.

The fact that it is not conversational is just a practical reality.   I would love to sit down with Moorcock, or Mieville or Iles, or many other great modern storey tellers and have long conversations with them about how to write effectively or how to strengthen my weakness, but that is just not practical (most of the time, I do have many friends who are professional writers who are very generous with their time and expertise and I am grateful to have access to them).   I have to be satisfied with blogs, articles and books and am grateful when they choose to share their hard won knowledge with me.

And the really amazing thing about it is that it saves me time and I can be quite specific in what guidance I seek.   So if I think my dialogue is strong, but am struggling with my pacing, I can look for good articles on pacing by people I respect.  I don't have to read articles on dialogue by people I don't respect if I don't want to.  I have access to the thoughts of writers on writing, that I will likely never get a chance to meet or talk to, and that is simply a gift.   How one could get annoyed about that trend is simply beyond me.


----------



## Mythopoet (Jan 12, 2018)

Michael K. Eidson said:


> I understand the sentiment expressed by the OP. The same sentiment has been expressed by others. I don't begrudge anyone feeling annoyed by whatever annoys them and owning the emotion. I hope the expression of the annoyance does not make others feel unwelcome to express opinions in whatever manner they are most capable of expressing them, even if it comes off as prescriptive and authoritative. I'm able to weigh what others say and apply it to my situation, and trust that others can do the same or will eventually learn to do so.
> 
> There are many things that annoy me and yet don't annoy others, so is it on me to tolerate what annoys me, or on others to take care not to annoy me? I want the answer to be the latter, but think it is probably the former. That doesn't stop me from trying to find kindred spirits, those annoyed by the same things that annoy me, with whom I can commiserate. Maybe that's what the OP was hoping for here.



Yeah pretty much. Certainly everyone is welcome to express their own thoughts and opinions. The OP merely expresses my personal beliefs and thoughts. I didn't write it to argue or even debate. More to hope someone out there understands my point of view and is sympathetic to it in a world where it seems like the vast majority don't.



Penpilot said:


> Most definitely, writing is more subjective . But there are certain elements of writing that I'd say aren't subjective, grammar, story structure, showing vs. telling, POV, etc.



I would argue that all these things are subjective or not objectively necessary. Even grammar. I don't particularly feel like arguing it here though. I already know how most people here feel about my "nothing is necessary in storytelling" theory.


----------



## Ban (Jan 12, 2018)

I agree with the general sentiment, but I do still place great value on advice. While some of my best ideas came about through simple, fun experimentation, it is often far easier and more immediately helpful to just ask for help and try out whatever advice you're given. Sometimes it works for me, sometimes it doesn't, but at the least it helps me move on with my actual writing which is always a great thing.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 12, 2018)

Russ said:


> But the suggestion that there was a mythical time, before the written word that there were no storytelling rules (as opposed to writing rules, I fully concede there were no writing rules before there was the written world) is probably untrue.
> 
> I have a good friend who has a masters in storytelling. He spent years studying how pre-literate people tell stories and how that functioned in both ancient civilizations, (where we can tell) and modern non or pre-literate cultures. The fact is those peoples had lots and lots of story telling rules and in fact they were probably more restrictive than our modern writing rules by a long shot. The evidence is that stories were handed down orally, with remarkable accuracy, to be told in certain ways with certain gestures and certain intonations at certain times in a very defined and understood way. Audiences would often be disappointed if the story was not delivered in the expected way. And many of those stories were handed down quite precisely over multiple generations. They were taught by mentors who taught story telling technique to their students the same way that someone doing a writers blog or writing a book is doing now. The idea that we believe that sometime in history there was a time when people did not teach or help other people learn to be a good storyteller is a myth or perhaps more accurately a fantasy.



Thanks Russ! Also a MA in Literature here, and I concede to this.

Sorry guys, but "storytelling rules" have been around as long as storytelling. There was no "time before storytelling rules" sadly. Each culture did indeed have their own, very strict story telling rules, even in oral tradition, that separated them from other cultures and other forms of storytelling.

Even later, in Roman theatre, the writers of the plays had to write to the audience. If a play was not well received their stage could be destroyed, or worse. Roman playwrights did not have the freedom to "tell a story any way they wanted." They had to impress the people, and the leader of the time, in order to be allowed to show their work. There was no "freedom of speech or expression." Everything was heavily censored.

This continued even into Shakespeare's time. He had to write plays that the people and Queen Elizabeth would approve of or he would be unemployed. These plays absolutely HAD to follow very struct structural rules. "As You Like It" is a title for the audience. It was Shakespeare's way of advertising that the play was exactly as the audience liked a play to be, with the style of characters they liked and the structure they liked.

Storytelling rules have been around since the beginning of storytelling. They have changed for each culture and each generation, but they have always been there.


----------



## bdcharles (Jan 12, 2018)

Russ said:


> The evidence is that stories were handed down orally, with remarkable accuracy, to be told in certain ways with certain gestures and certain intonations at certain times in a very defined and understood way.  Audiences would often be disappointed if the story was not delivered in the expected way.  And many of those stories were handed down quite precisely over multiple generations.  They were taught by mentors who taught story telling technique to their students the same way that someone doing a writers blog or writing a book is doing now.  The idea that we believe that sometime in history there was a time when people did not teach or help other people learn to be a good storyteller is a myth or perhaps more accurately a fantasy.
> 
> Even in the earliest literature cultures that we have a lot of material from show that they taught storytelling or communications technique.  Cicero, thousands of years ago gave advice on the use of voice and gestures etc on how to sway your audience.  Experienced people teaching less experienced people how to do something seems to be very much part of the human condition.  Getting annoyed about it is just plain odd.



I often wonder about the person who came up with the story first, as opposed to retelling it. They would presumably have had to get the feel for how best to make it come alive. Perhaps alot of the techniques would have been second nature to them? Imagine how many stories were lost simply because the early people that tried to pass them on were not good orators. I suppose it depends where in one's "communications journey" one is.


----------



## Ban (Jan 12, 2018)

bdcharles said:


> I often wonder about the person who came up with the story first, as opposed to retelling it. They would presumably have had to get the feel for how best to make it come alive. Perhaps alot of the techniques would have been second nature to them? Imagine how many stories were lost simply because the early people that tried to pass them on were not good orators. I suppose it depends where in one's "communications journey" one is.



Not a literature master here, but I doubt that there was a "first" person to tell stories. More than likely storytelling simply progressed from "This happened" to "This is what happened earlier" to "This is what someone did" gradually.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 12, 2018)

I really want to give a concrete example of this, so it doesn't sound so vague.

So my local First Nations group is called the Sto:Lo nation. They have a traditional oral storytelling method with specific rules. They come into classrooms and discuss with students their storytelling traditions. Here are two of those rules:

1) Know your audience. Stop:lo storytellers NEVER choose what story they are going to tell before they meet the audience. They want to gauge the audience first to see what sort of story the audience would appreciate. This is just good storytelling advice in general IMO. They do not tell stories purely for themselves. They understand their job is to entertain or teach an audience.

2) Don't tell them everything. Keep them wondering. Sto:Lo stories tend to be quite cryptic. They will never explicitly "Say" the moral of the story. This leaves the listener with a sort of curiosity by the end. A sort of itch that can't be scratched. They know the story was. meaningful. But how? It leaves you perplexed and unsettled on purpose. This is to also "create community" so people can engage and discuss the meaning of the story.

There are many more, but oral storytelling tradition is sacred to these people, and the storytelling rules are passed on from grandfather to grandchild in a very symbolic way. However, it is important to them that the storytelling rules DO NOT CHANGE. That they stay explicitly sto:Lo so you could know the difference between a sto:lo story and a Metis story. It would be considered disrespectful for a sto:lo person to begin telling their traditional stories in a non-traditional way.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 12, 2018)

bdcharles said:


> They would presumably have had to get the feel for how best to make it come alive. Perhaps alot of the techniques would have been second nature to them?



Yeah, so I think about this a lot too. What I've come up with is that the very first story telling "rules" were simply just typical social behaviours. 

As infants we learn from our parents and our community how to "communicate" within that community. 

We learn the sort of unspoken "rules" of communication. We may think there are no rules to communication, but that is not true. There are a billion unspoken rules that we follow every day. One example I love to give is the "smile and the nod". When we meet people on the street, even strangers, and we pass by them, polite communication is to make brief eye contact, smile, and nod. You may add in a "good morning" or a "hello" if you like. That is a very simple communication rule that we have learned.

When I look at kids tell stories (basic ones, like what they did at school that day) it always follows a common pattern. We can understand the gist of the story because they are learning the rules of communication and how to be understood.

My daughter has autism and so has not learned those "rules" of communication.

So I believe the first stories still followed basic rules of communication. Those who really had a firm grasp on those rules were simply "better" storytellers because they were better communicators.


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 12, 2018)

Penpilot:

Hate to post and run, but just a few quick sentences re: subjective versus objective. 

I think story structure, or at least whether a structure is good, can be subjective. The same with whether to show or tell, how much dialogue to use, whether a POV or tense is effective, etc. 

As for grammar always being objective in writing, don’t tell that to James Joyce or E. E. Cummings


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 12, 2018)

Steerpike said:


> As for grammar always being objective in writing, don’t tell that to James Joyce or E. E. Cummings



Penpilot was talking about how the "how to" advice is great for _early writers_. Not James Joyce of E.E. Cummings. He did say that eventually you learn what to use and when to use it and when to lose it. 

Most of us aren't James Joyce.


----------



## Devor (Jan 12, 2018)

I want to interject here because I think all of you are wrong.  

Did anyone here watch the show Smash several years ago?  It was about a production of a Broadway musical based on Marilyn Monroe.  That's not important. But in one episode, deciding between the two possibilities for playing Marilyn, one of the characters said the following line:

"She's spent too much time in the choir."

You see, in the choir you learn to hold back because you're not the center of attention on the stage.  Your dances, your vocals, your "presence" - the choir teaches you to be very good at a very many things, but it doesn't teach you to be a star.  It can hold you back.

I view about 60% of the writing advice that I've seen as being in that category. It's not that the advice is wrong, but that it's for the choir.  If you want to succeed you have to let it loose, whatever "it" you have.  Throw yourself into your prose and your story and don't hold back.

Don't get me wrong. Show, don't tell, or whatever else.  But first you need to find yourself in your writing, you need to find that "it" that you're trying to channel.  And then use the rules to chisel off the rough excess and highlight the big presence that your storytelling has.

Hold down the parts of your story that are the choir, but first find your star so that you can figure out how to help it shine.


----------



## Russ (Jan 12, 2018)

Steerpike said:


> Penpilot:
> 
> Hate to post and run, but just a few quick sentences re: subjective versus objective.
> 
> ...



It is interesting when people try to use the exceptions to disprove a rule.  It's like saying that because some people have driven safely way over the speed limit, that the speed limit does not exist.  Grammar, like speed limits, are a useful social construct, not a law of physics.

Some people are extremely unique or original and confident in their originality and that is awesome.  I suspect however that Joyce and Cummings know the rules of grammar are making a conscious choice to vary from them.  They took risks, hopefully in an informed and educated fashion.

However if you are very confident in your dialogue, or your grammar, even if it varies from the rules, than you really aren't going to go looking for articles on how to write better dialogue or grammar.   You are going to get on your horse and do your cool original thing.

But for the person who is struggling with an issue, or a technique, or lack confident or strong feelings in those areas, writing advise can be remarkably valuable and even avocation or career saving.  

In sports there are a ton of similar examples.  John McEnroe had this crazy ass almost contortionist service motion.  It was amazing and effective.   And it was unique.  Most pros who tried to do a serve that same way couldn't do it, let alone recreational players.   

But if a pro went to a coach and said, I have a problem with my serve help me fix it, no rational coach would ever say "Let's do it the way McEnroe did."  That would be destructive.  (as an aside his unique service motion led to significant back problems for John but that really is a terrible digression...)

So if someone was struggling with grammar you sure wouldn't say "let's teach you to do it the way Joyce did it."

The fact that successful writers who vary from normal grammar like Joyce or Cummings are so rare, proves that there is a significant, almost unanimous,  consensus on what proper and effective grammar is.  They really are the exceptions that prove the rule.


----------



## Russ (Jan 12, 2018)

Devor said:


> I view about 60% of the writing advice that I've seen as being in that category. It's not that the advice is wrong, but that it's for the choir.  If you want to succeed you have to let it loose, whatever "it" you have.  Throw yourself into your prose and your story and don't hold back.



I am not sure I have ever seen writing advice designed or intended to make your prose blend in with the crowd, or cause less emotion, or harmonize with other writers.  Can't recall it.  Hell, I think the claims for writing advice are usually "Make your work stand out" or "How to write a bestseller."

Is there an example of writing advice that you point to so I can better understand what you are talking about?

I would also suggest that before you take centre stage at Carnegie Hall to unleash your novel dance or discordant originality brilliance, that it would be prudent to learn the basics of movement and how to play your instrument.  Just like you should learn the basics of driving before you start left foot braking and using snow banks to scrub off speed like Hanu Mikkola.


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 12, 2018)

Heliotrope and Russ 

I think you two have both missed the point that was being made above. I and others in this thread are pointing out the problem with presenting writing advice as prescriptive, or pretending it represents some absolute truth. You may not like the use of exceptions to disprove that notion, but that's exactly what an exception does when someone is trying to present something as an absolute. The problem lies in the presentation of the advice itself, not the accurate statements made by others in pointing out the advice (contrary to how presented) does not always hold up. 

I also don't believe in misleading new writers.

Whether certain advice is apt to give good results to a substantial majority of writers, or is _generally_ good, etc., is an entirely separate discussion, and one that can be had once we dispense with the fiction that any such advice is universal and absolute. 

You can complain about acknowledging exceptions all you want, or point out whether we are or are not Joyce/Faulkner/Woolf/McCarthy or whoever, but the fact remains if you are presenting writing advice as prescriptive, must-follows rules for writers of any level of experience whatsoever, then a single exception demonstrates your error. If you're not in favor of presenting writing advice in that manner, then we are likely in agreement.


----------



## Chessie2 (Jan 12, 2018)

They're not so much rules as suggestions. A good author is one who engages their intended audience. And even then they can miss the mark. Is it safe to agree we've probably all read books that were written well but didn't sink in with us? What does 'written well' mean anyway? The only way to tell is if a book pleases its audience. Some can say that this is subjective but it really isn't. There are books that suck out there. 

Developing as an author just means you keep going. While I do agree with Mytho the writing articles are getting old maybe it's because we've reached a point where they don't matter anymore (for us). At some point we let go of the training wheels. Then occasionally we go back and read that beginner advice to get a different perspective. Maybe it hits maybe it doesn't. We shrug and move on. Talking about craft doesn't actually require us to *do* any *work*, which isn't healthy either. We only grow by actually *writing*. The actual writing should be the focus, and I wonder if this is what the OP is trying to say.


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 12, 2018)

Chessie2 said:


> They're not so much rules as suggestions.



Yes. And they're generally suggestions that assume the author is trying to write a certain type of book--more or less generic (in terms of voice and style) commercial fiction. For those types of works, such advice is more often than not pretty good.


----------



## Russ (Jan 12, 2018)

Steerpike said:


> Heliotrope and Russ
> 
> I think you two have both missed the point that was being made above. I and others in this thread are pointing out the problem with presenting writing advice as prescriptive, or pretending it represents some absolute truth. You may not like the use of exceptions to disprove that notion, but that's exactly what an exception does when someone is trying to present something as an absolute. The problem lies in the presentation of the advice itself, not the accurate statements made by others in pointing out the advice (contrary to how presented) does not always hold up.
> 
> ...



I don't think we missed the point, I think you are arguing a straw man.  Nobody here is suggesting that any particular writing advice represents an absolute truth.   No one is proposing the fiction that you feel needs to be dispensed with.

And surely you agree that there is an overwhelming consensus of what the rules of grammar are in English?


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 12, 2018)

Russ said:


> I don't think we missed the point, I think you are arguing a straw man.  Nobody here is suggesting that any particular writing advice represents an absolute truth.



If you look back through the thread, the point I and others have made is that writing advice is sometimes presented that way (not necessarily by anyone here), and my post was intended to address that approach to writing advice.


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 12, 2018)

Russ said:


> And surely you agree that there is an overwhelming consensus of what the rules of grammar are in English?



There is a consensus as to what they _are_. There appears to be a lack of consensus as to whether one can break them, which of course one can.


----------



## Russ (Jan 12, 2018)

Steerpike said:


> There is a consensus as to what they _are_. There appears to be a lack of consensus as to whether one can break them, which of course one can.



Not to be pedantic, but I think the question is *should* one break them, not *can.  *

If one is feeling repressed by or oppressed by, or really  just doesn't like structured writing advice, than one should not seek it out.  I don't like Justin Bieber's music so I don't buy it or listen to it,  but I don't suggest that he stop playing or others should not listen to him.  

But if the reaction to one's work is often negative because of issues related to that structured writing advice, maybe one should heed it.  Or make peace with negative reactions to one's work.

Breaking the rules of grammar should be a calculated risk, you can't make that calculation without knowing those rules.


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 12, 2018)

Russ said:


> Not to be pedantic, but I think the question is *should* one break them, not *can.  *
> 
> If one is feeling repressed by or oppressed by, or really  just doesn't like structured writing advice, than one should not seek it out.  I don't like Justin Bieber's music so I don't buy it or listen to it,  but I don't suggest that he stop playing or others should not listen to him.
> 
> ...



None of this is contrary to anything I said, so we may well be in agreement.


----------



## Hallen (Jan 12, 2018)

Devor said:


> ... But first you need to find yourself in your writing, you need to find that "it" that you're trying to channel.


In all the forums and books and well-meaning advice that we get and give, it is so very, very important to just write. One can easily lose themselves in all the suggestions and warnings and "rules" that are not rules but guidelines, format, and grammar and forget that the most important thing is to write. So I agree, find yourself in your writing. Don't lose yourself in the rules.

Having said that, I like to look at storytelling as an evolution. The most obvious example are the sciences. All that we do today is built on the knowledge that came before. We push it a bit further all the time. We learn more. Nobody goes back and retries leaching as a curative for the flu because we have this knowledge. 

In writing, we have learned a lot about what creates stories that people are entertained by. It's silly to utterly overlook that in order to maintain your way of writing. Maybe, just maybe, you are the next wonderful thing that changes the world. But, probably not. Chances are, if you learn what does and does not work, in general, you will enhance your inner genius and produce something even better. The key is not getting lost in the details and to keep writing your stories.


----------



## Michael K. Eidson (Jan 12, 2018)

Russ said:


> The idea that we believe that sometime in history there was a time when people did not teach or help other people learn to be a good storyteller is a myth or perhaps more accurately a fantasy.



Without debating the definition of "story," you cannot possibly _know_ there was never a time when someone told a story on their own merits, before the _first_ time someone taught or helped another person tell one. You have no _proof_ to back up your claim that the belief stated by myself and others _is a myth or a fantasy_. Unless you have an _exhaustive_ list of examples, it doesn't matter how _strongly_ you believe something or how many examples from history you can quote, the strength of your belief and a few examples does not make your belief _true_. Unless you're a god who existed before humanity and have all the knowledge of human existence, your quoted statement above is authoritative speech that cannot possibly be authoritative. _That_ type of statement is the very type of statement the OP expressed annoyance with.

Personally, I take the above quoted statement strictly as your opinion, and recognize you belief it very strongly based on trusted sources. I won't change my opinion even though you stated your opinion in an authoritative manner. I can be _annoyed_ at you, however.

For the record, I'm not annoyed at you. I enjoy these kinds of discussions. I trust you aren't annoyed by what I've said above. It's okay if we have a good laugh at each other though, yeah?


----------



## Mythopoet (Jan 12, 2018)

I just wonder if it's possible to start up a thread looking for like-minded people without attracting a ton of contrary people trying to argue and debate.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 12, 2018)

Russ said:


> But the suggestion that there was a mythical time, before the written word that there were no storytelling rules (as opposed to writing rules, I fully concede there were no writing rules before there was the written world) is probably untrue.



You are missing my point totally.

When I said that the arts of Storytelling pre-dates _The famous writing rules_ what I mean are the how-to-write rules (or tools, or suggestions or whatever that people want to call them) that are so prevalent in Writing sites today, Mythic Scribes and others. You know, the famous show don't tell and avoiding adverbs and that infodumps are bad and having perfect Grammar and the tension stuff and all that.

I mean the whole _writing-is-science_ atmosphere, which I consider as flawed.

Many very famous books from a long time ago do not follow such rules, they are way more natural and yet they were very successful and even became classics. Today however (and especially in the Internet), aspiring authors are bombarded with the _how to write_ system and it gets so repetitive that it becomes annoying, like Mythopoet expressed in the original post of this thread.



Russ said:


> Even in the earliest literature cultures that we have a lot of material from show that they taught storytelling or communications technique. Cicero, thousands of years ago gave advice on the use of voice and gestures etc on how to sway your audience. Experienced people teaching less experienced people how to do something seems to be very much part of the human condition. Getting annoyed about it is just plain odd.



That's what I call natural learning, or the natural tendencies (not rules) in storytelling that have changed from a time to another.

Many times in threads like this one various people have misunderstood me, thinking that I give no importance to the act of learning how to write stories. I give it importance indeed, but I favor the natural and instinctive methods of learning instead of the colder, classroom-style methods that are often discussed in this site and many others.

The professor that I talked about in my first post of this thread is a good example of that.

Just watching and listening to that man telling stories to my entire class definitely left something in me, a type of natural learning that cannot be taught in other ways. It's like having a natural instinct for something, but still you need to be exposed to the ability in question so you can awaken it in yourself and start to develop the skills in your own personal way.

He was the Music professor by the way, not even a Spanish professor.

In sharp contrast, I was exposed to a different professor in another school some years later. She confidently explained to the class that writing stories was a matter of learning a calculated and artificial structure and rules, like the three-act structure and others, and that was all. That stories were supposed to always follow those scientific methods, because otherwise they would not work.

I hated that professor a lot, but it was a good experience for me because it showed me that following my own natural style and my own imagination was a much better path. That in storytelling what really matters are the heart and imagination of a true storyteller, that it's a matter of inspiration because what makes the difference is what we have inside.

All the knowledge and training in the world are not going to help much if you do not have great stories to tell, if you do not have the natural ability to imagine and tell stories. Those with the highest education in writing are not necessarily good with storytelling, and at the same time many great works of literature have come from people that never received that type of education in the slightest.

I want to quote Michael again:



Michael K. Eidson said:


> To the OP's point, there were good storytellers and writers long before "writer's tools" were ever a point of discussion. Obviously, it must be _possible_ for people to be good storytellers without need for discussing any of the tools they employ, or even realizing they employ the tools. In my youth, I told stories to my siblings and kept them entertained for hours, with no training in storytelling. They could have walked away from me at any time, and being kids, they would have if they'd been bored. If someone back then had asked me _how_ I was able to tell entertaining stories, I could not have given a satisfactory answer.



Exactly the same happens to me.

When I see the repetitive _how-to-write_ discussions in some forum, I find them just as distant and strange as if they were something from a different planet. I start thinking: Do they actually think about all that stuff while working on a story?

If you ask me how I tell stories, the only answer that I can give is that stories are with me. It's like having a friend, like the story just shows itself in my mind and my heart with all details and I just have to write it down. It feels like exploring and reporting about things that really happened, not like I was inventing it. Others have described the feeling like the act of receiving a magical transmission from a different world.

I do not claim that's what actually happens, but it's exactly what it feels like.

And that's why I am so annoyed by the How to Write atmosphere: I fear that others like me out there might fall for the scientific and calculated methods at the very start of their journey, and ignore their natural style and personal abilities in favor of following the established patterns that most agents and publishers are looking for.

This is sometimes mocked, but I'll say it again: The best storytelling/writing advice is to follow your own imagination and heart.


----------



## Chessie2 (Jan 12, 2018)

Mythopoet said:


> I just wonder if it's possible to start up a thread looking for like-minded people without attracting a ton of contrary people trying to argue and debate.


Start it and see? I'd love to chat more about creativity without splitting hairs.


----------



## Mythopoet (Jan 12, 2018)

Chessie2 said:


> Start it and see? I'd love to chat more about creativity without splitting hairs.



Well, that was the purpose of this thread. Hence the title asking "anyone else" and not saying "what do you think about". But I suspect no force in the verse can stop people on this forum from arguing. I really didn't want to argue. I was just looking for like-minded people.


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 12, 2018)

Mythopoet said:


> Well, that was the purpose of this thread. Hence the title asking "anyone else" and not saying "what do you think about". But I suspect no force in the verse can stop people on this forum from arguing. I really didn't want to argue. I was just looking for like-minded people.



Post another thread if you like, and make clear that you want to discuss the issue with people who are in agreement. I'll follow up with a comment asking people to restrict the thread to a productive discussion of approaching the craft from that particular viewpoint, and asking people not to debate the viewpoint itself. Anyone wishing to create a new thread for the purpose of debating can do so quite easily with the simple click of a mouse, or can continue to debate in this thread.


----------



## Penpilot (Jan 12, 2018)

Steerpike said:


> I think story structure, or at least whether a structure is good, can be subjective. The same with whether to show or tell, how much dialogue to use, whether a POV or tense is effective, etc.
> 
> As for grammar always being objective in writing, don’t tell that to James Joyce or E. E. Cummings



The way I'm thinking of things is either someone is following a specific structure or they're not, either they're following the rules of grammar or they're not, either they're showing or they're not. That to me not subjective.

Whether these things are used effectively is subjective. Whether a person uses these things or not is up to them. It's not right or wrong to do so. But, I've always been on the side of know the rules before you break the rules.



Steerpike said:


> There is a consensus as to what they _are_. There appears to be a lack of consensus as to whether one can break them, which of course one can.



I don't think anyone in this thread, including me, has said you can't break the rules of grammar, or whatever other "rules" are out there.

In terms of the OP and How-To-Do-X stuff and the way they're presented. I'll say again, I see them as trying to teach something. In teaching environments, things get simplified for the sake of clarity and to allow students to absorb information more easily. They get stated in black and white absolute terms so as to not confuse the student or overload them with too much information.

There are always exceptions. But, to list them all or dive into a tangent explaining them isn't always practical or constructive, especially if it needs to be short.

I do understand the OP's frustration at the tone in some of these articles, books, etc. But if one can overlook the irritation, there can be lots of useful information to be gleaned.


----------



## Chessie2 (Jan 12, 2018)

Mythopoet said:


> Well, that was the purpose of this thread. Hence the title asking "anyone else" and not saying "what do you think about". But I suspect no force in the verse can stop people on this forum from arguing. I really didn't want to argue. I was just looking for like-minded people.


So what do you want to discuss? Anything in particular?


----------



## Mythopoet (Jan 12, 2018)

Chessie2 said:


> So what do you want to discuss? Anything in particular?



To be honest, nothing at the moment. Yesterday morning I did, but not anymore.


----------



## Devor (Jan 12, 2018)

Russ, I very much want to go without answering your question.  But I'm feeling sick today, so my judgement is impaired, and that's probably the only reason I'm doing this.

Let's start with the most basic concept, the course of a writer's career.  Google "stages of a writer's career," and you'll see it described something like this:

 - Amateur, you have a lot of garbage and not much to show yet.
 - Professional, some of what you have is good enough to sell.
 - Master, you can comfortably create work and expect it to sell.

The thing is, researchers have studied the lives of the creative masters, like Picasso and Shakespeare, and _this_ is how they describe the stages of their careers.

 - *Exploration*.  The artist tries a large variety of different techniques, and it all comes out as garbage. But despite the overall poor quality of the work, there are still hints of the creative style and techniques that will eventually become the hallmark of their career.  This is a phase of discovering one's talent.

 - *Refinement*.  The artist begins to focus on improving the quality of their skills, producing works designed to practice specific techniques and become better as an artist.  The artist's Magnum Opus, the piece that represents the height of their abilities and their contribution to the artists, is typically written in the back-half of this stage.

 - *Old Age* (I swear that's what I remember it being called....). Once the artist has become confident in their voice and their audience, they stop trying to impress everyone and focus more on exactly what they want to say.  Creativity goes down, and the use of themes goes up, because the artist is no longer trying to build an audience but speak to the audience.

The problem that I have with most writing advice is that it encourages people to skip the exploration step and focus directly on refinement. It's too early for most people, and that step is too important to overlook.  You have to take some time to focus on what you want to create, what you want to do with your skills, before you sit around thinking "Am I using too much passive voice?"  Yes, you probably are, but that's not the point.  "Does my character want something?"  He probably should, but that's still not the point.  It's a distraction.  The very first thing you should write for:

_What is it that I find I want to do most with my writing?
_
Nothing matters until you answer that question, either consciously or intuitively, and with a depth that's entirely your own.  And I don't mean answer it like an essay question.  I mean answering it by doing it, by discovering it in your work after pouring through tens or hundreds of thousands of words and more creative concepts than you can keep track of in your head.

If you start by focusing on the rules, you're starting with limits that will hold you back.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 12, 2018)

Devor said:


> The problem that I have with most writing advice is that it encourages people to skip the exploration step and focus directly on refinement



See, I just don't see this at all. I find that most of the writer advice is out there for people who are moving _past _the exploration phase and _into _the refinement phase. None of it, that I have ever seen, suggest skipping the exploration phase. It is almost always aimed at writers who are looking to take their writing to the next level.



Devor said:


> Nothing matters until you answer that question, either consciously or intuitively, and with a depth that's entirely your own. And I don't mean answer it like an essay question. I mean answering it by doing it, by discovering it in your work after pouring through tens or hundreds of thousands of words and more creative concepts than you can keep track of in your head.
> 
> If you start by focusing on the rules, you're starting with limits that will hold you back.



Right. But eventually you have to move on. And that is when you start googling "how do I avoid passive voice?" and you read articles. Eventually you get to the point where you are finding that your story might need a more effective structure so you go to Amazon and order some books on plotting.

I have never, ever seen a writer offering advice saying "here is a paint by numbers way of writing stories." It is always very specific advice aimed at one type of writing issue for people who are actively searching for a solution to that writing issue.

How long are people expected to stay in the exploration phase for?



Devor said:


> discovering it in your work after pouring through tens or hundreds of thousands of words and more creative concepts than you can keep track of in your head.



I don't agree with this. Move on when you are ready to move on. If you write only a thousand words and think "Wow, I don't know how to write dialogue." And you are motivated enough to go out and seek help on writing dialogue than DO IT. Don't just sit there writing another hundred thousand words of bad dialogue thinking "I'll learn how to do it properly, later."

How much later? When is that "later" going to happen? After you have written ten bad novels? After twenty?

I get the whole "You don't want to stunt writers who are not quite ready yet." But seriously, does that mean advice just shouldn't exist? When writers are ready they will seek out the advice they need. But that is up to them. Not anyone else. Early writers are not delicate little flowers that need to be protected from the big bad world of writing advice. 

Good grief. Some of you make it sound like they are children who shouldn't have their "interest in writing stifled". Okay, I get it if we are talking about eight year olds, but we are talking about adults here. Critically thinking human beings with the capacity to seek out advice and evaluate what they find, in their own time and at their own agenda.

I entered the 100 words story challenge and didn't win because my stories were not clear and concise enough for the word limit. Fair assessment. If I wanted to write flash fiction than I would need to go out and seek some advice on how other, successful flash writers have managed to do it. I don't just sit around banging a hammer at nails with a blindfold until I hit one.


----------



## Devor (Jan 12, 2018)

Heliotrope, I think you don't understand that exploration is real work.  It's not about writing aimlessly in a vain hope that something will materialize. It's an active search for figuring yourself out.

It's only recently that people have begun studying creativity in a real scientific fashion. And the findings are incredible - almost everything that most people believe about creativity is flat-out wrong.  Including this notion that it doesn't take real work.  Creativity demands work on focus on developing your creative skills.  They don't just happen.  You have to work on it.

And working on it requires a total disregard for limits.  It's based on one thing - making powerful connections between ideas that are farther and farther apart. If you want to develop your creativity in writing, you have to spend your time _thinking about something other than writing while you are writing._  If you read in your genre, if you look at the rules, if you think too much about story structure, you're limiting the distance of the ideas you're searching for.  *You're training your mind to find ideas that are nearest to the writing process instead of farther away.*

That's why it's important to focus on your own creative development before you focus on anything else.  You have to develop that creative core, that heart of what you want to do and contribute to your field, before you start focusing on technique.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 12, 2018)

Dude. That's amazing.

I'm talking about after all that work is done and you realize you need help. 

You can't stay in that stage forever and be successful.


----------



## Chessie2 (Jan 12, 2018)

Heliotrope said:


> How much later? When is that "later" going to happen? After you have written ten bad novels? After twenty?


You'll be a much better writer regardless (if you've made it to 20 written novels).



Heliotrope said:


> I get the whole "You don't want to stunt writers who are not quite ready yet." But seriously, does that mean advice just shouldn't exist? When writers are ready they will seek out the advice they need. But that is up to them. Not anyone else. Early writers are not delicate little flowers that need to be protected from the big bad world of writing advice.
> 
> Good grief. Some of you make it sound like they are children who shouldn't have their "interest in writing stifled". Okay, I get it if we are talking about eight year olds, but we are talking about adults here. Critically thinking human beings with the capacity to seek out advice and evaluate what they find, in their own time and at their own agenda.



Helio, with all due respect, I don't believe this was the OP's point. I understood the OP to be less cautionary and more venting.

Devor: Exploration IS real work. The only way to get through it is to get through it. I learn way more by actually writing and finishing my work vs reading articles but yeah, sometimes the articles are helpful, too.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 12, 2018)

I was directing that at Devor. Not the OP.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 12, 2018)

Actually, Chessie, you are the one who is always in the back of my mind while I'm arguing the value of education. You have soooooo much knowledge about navigating the self-pub industry. You know a lot about marketing, what venues to pursue, what your reader's are looking for, what type of characters they like, what level of 'sex' to add or not to add to your romances.... So much stuff! A lot of that _must _have come from going out and learning about what that market requires. It took a ton of hard work and determination. It wasn't just through exploratory writing. At some point you must have said "Hmmmmm, I really want to do this." And put yourself out there to learn how to do it?

At some point, of course, you must have come across an article or two that was just not relevant to you, but as a grown adult you knew what to take and what to leave behind.


----------



## Chessie2 (Jan 12, 2018)

Heliotrope said:


> Actually, Chessie, you are the one who is always in the back of my mind while I'm arguing the value of education. You have soooooo much knowledge about navigating the self-pub industry. You know a lot about marketing, what venues to pursue, what your reader's are looking for, what type of characters they like, what level of 'sex' to add or not to add to your romances.... So much stuff! A lot of that _must _have come from going out and learning about what that market requires. It took a ton of hard work and determination. It wasn't just through exploratory writing. At some point you must have said "Hmmmmm, I really want to do this." And put yourself out there to learn how to do it?
> 
> At some point, of course, you must have come across an article or two that was just not relevant to you, but as a grown adult you knew what to take and what to leave behind.



Well, yes. It's good to stay educated on the industry and continue growing in our craft. But what I'm saying is that I don't think the OP's point is to dispute the importance of education. She's merely venting at all the writing articles out there saying do it this way or that. I took it as venting. (and yes, I do work hard! Thank you! x)


----------



## psychotick (Jan 12, 2018)

Hi,

As I've said before I think the most important thing for a new writer to do is discover his or her voice. You've got to work out who you are and who you want to be before you start allowing other voices to change that. And the real danger is that for beginner writers is that they'll take the advice that's given as gospel - no matter how it's presented. And I know most people here and in other fora try to say that it's only advice they're giving. But it doesn't matter how many times you say that - some if not all fledgling writers are going to hear what is said as being right and they're wrong. That's the way you get formulaic writing and stories and stifle creativity and passion. That's why I think most writing advice is bad for fledgling writers. It may be good advice - but is it good for you?

I'd also like to say I loved Devor's post about the different stages of mastery in whatever field. For the initial "explorer" it's far more important that s/he learn the sort of writer they are / want to be than the so-called "rules".

The best way I can explain my view, is with my own experience. Like everyone else I started out writing alone in the dark!!! With just a computer etc. And I only wrote for me. And I was happy with that. I liked the stories I wrote. It wasn't until much later when I started thinking about getting to stage of writing a novel and publishing that I started looking at the craft. Joining fora, getting critiques of my work, listening to the various rules etc. And when I did, I took some of it on board, and left some of it on the table. Because I had spent all that time learning about who I was as a writer I was eventually able to say when I read advice or took criticism, yes I agree or no I don't. People who don't spend that time exploring their own writing voice, have a much harder time doing that in my view.

So my sentences are often too long (though not as long as they used to be), have too many clauses (again not as many as once), my punctuation is simplistic (as it always has been), and I use a lot more purple prose than I need to (because I like it). I also tend to over describe some things and use excess verbiage. But hey - those aren't faults. They aren't wrong and they aren't failures. Those are my voice. If they don't happen to fit perfectly with a particular style or certain rules, that's not my problem. I like my long, loopy sentences full of purple prose dammit!

And even having gone through that process, I still took all criticism, all advice I read when I read it, to heart for a long time. I questioned myself. I started initially accepting everyone elses opinions as gospel and mine as somehow wrong. It took me ages to get past that. To realise that it's my opinion that matters when it comes to my work.

My point though, isn't exactly that. It's more of a question. If I'd started out reading writing advice and writing according to it - who would I now be as a writer? Would I be me? Or would I just be another John Smith putting out formulaic work? I think my answer to that is that I'd rather be me. Call me brilliant or terrible - it doesn't matter. What matters is that I write my story my way. Some will like it, some won't. But at least I'm not writing someone elses story their way.

I think the thought that I would share with all new writers, is to stay as far away from critiques and advice as you can until you're ready in your own mind. And then when you finally think you're confident enough to go down that road while holding on to who you are as a writer, remember that everything you read and everything that you're told is only opinion. This isn't maths. There isn't only one right answer.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 12, 2018)

Thank you Greg, that was a most wonderful post!

I sometimes say that the first person that needs to be pleased with a story is the very author. If you are happy with your own work, if you genuinely love your own style and stories then that's going to be reflected in the finished work. Write for yourself in the first place, since this also means that other yous out there would also enjoy and probably love your stories and the way that you tell them.

Listening to advice and feedback from other people is important too and can sometimes be very helpful, but in the end you are the only person that really knows your stories and what is best to do with them.


----------



## Michael K. Eidson (Jan 13, 2018)

psychotick said:


> I think the thought that I would share with all new writers, is to stay as far away from critiques and advice as you can until you're ready in your own mind. And then when you finally think you're confident enough to go down that road while holding on to who you are as a writer, remember that everything you read and everything that you're told is only opinion. This isn't maths. There isn't only one right answer.



This resonates with me. When I was young and insecure, critiques only served to discourage me. Advice often went unheeded, because I wasn't able to apply it to my work at that time in my writing life--or, worse yet, I sometimes took it the wrong way, and it hindered my development rather than helped it.

I often wonder how things would be different for me now if I'd not received some of the critiques and well-intended advice that discouraged me in my youth. I believe I'd be much further along with my writing now.

I also believe there's been a good deal of advice given to me that has been more helpful than harmful, _once I was ready to receive it_.

At this stage of my writing life, I like hearing ideas, even those presented as rules, and allowing them to spark new ideas in my brain. I'm at the point where I'm ready to receive advice and criticism, to weigh it for its value and shape it to my needs. So at this point in my life, I don't share the OP's annoyance of others who sometimes come off as writing dictators. When I was younger, it wouldn't have been annoying as much as it could have been harmful.


----------



## Peat (Jan 13, 2018)

Just on this idea of Exploration vs Refining - and I may be misunderstanding - but I don't see it as having to be "First an author explores, then they refine". I think its quite possible for the two to exist in a never-ending cycle in which we Explore a bit, Refine a bit, Explore a bit off of that etc.etc. It is up to the author to recognise what part of the cycle they're in and what will help them.


----------



## skip.knox (Jan 13, 2018)

Mythopoet said:


> I just wonder if it's possible to start up a thread looking for like-minded people without attracting a ton of contrary people trying to argue and debate.



Sure. First find like-minded people, then ask them over for tea. But public forums are for a diversity of voices. I prefer that. Otherwise, it's too much like talking to oneself.


----------



## skip.knox (Jan 13, 2018)

Heliotrope's remarks about her First Nation story tellers really struck me. Traditional story tellers *always* knew their audience because they always told their stories face to face. That's how stories got told for a very long time.

Once you get writing, and especially once you get printing, the audience became unknown. Even then, most published books aimed at a particular sort of audience. It's not really until the 19thc that we get stories aimed at a generic "mass audience."  That must have changed a number of the basic storytelling paradigms. 

A bit OT, I know, but perhaps this is one reason why writing rules have become so much more, er, flexible since that time.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 13, 2018)

skip.knox said:


> writing rules have become so much more, er, flexible since that time.



Ha! Perhaps writing rules are at their most flexible right now than they have ever been. At least now we have Amazon where pretty much anyone can publish whatever they want without being beheaded. It may not necessarily get read... or get good reviews... but you won't be executed for it.


----------



## Chessie2 (Jan 13, 2018)

Heliotrope said:


> Ha! Perhaps writing rules are at their most flexible right now than they have ever been. At least now we have Amazon where pretty much anyone can publish whatever they want without being beheaded. It may not necessarily get read... or get good reviews... but you won't be executed for it.


And that's the point. We can welcome a variety of voices that don't all sound like Midwest radio announcers.


----------



## Devor (Jan 13, 2018)

Peat said:


> Just on this idea of Exploration vs Refining - and I may be misunderstanding - but I don't see it as having to be "First an author explores, then they refine". I think its quite possible for the two to exist in a never-ending cycle in which we Explore a bit, Refine a bit, Explore a bit off of that etc.etc. It is up to the author to recognise what part of the cycle they're in and what will help them.



Yeah, that's fair.  Again, that was me going by memory of an analysis of famous artistic careers, but the actual day to day is never that simple.  Nor would I tell anyone that it was somehow _too late_ to develop their creative skills because they've done too much literary studying - just maybe that they have to shift their thinking for a bit to get there.

((edit))

Also, writing advice is not all created equally.  I mentioned earlier in the thread that I saw about 60% of it as keeping one in the choir.  That's because about 60% of the writing advice I see is about _cutting back_.  Most writing advice - at least, most _common_ writing advice - is geared towards tightening up your writing, cutting back on the high-skills parts where an amateur writer usually just makes themselves look bad.  That advice I think holds you back - because it actively keeps you from exploring - if you haven't rooted your creative skills yet.

There is plenty of other writing advice that doesn't do that.


----------



## Peat (Jan 13, 2018)

Devor said:


> Also, writing advice is not all created equally.



This is god's ain truth.

Having thought about this one a little more - I feel I'm a bit in the middle.

I definitely think that the writing advice out there can do more harm than good. I think there's plenty that's too prescriptive, too narrow - but then how broad can someone be in one article - and I think its easy to stumble on a totality that doesn't address everything a reader needs to know. I think I agree with you there.

However - other advice is out there - and ultimately its on the would-be author to work out what's useful and what's not, when to listen and when to believe in themselves. And that part is often given in the advice! And - crucially - I think its a lot more on the author to do that work themselves to sift rather than on the advice giver to cover every single base. All the advice giver can do is give what they think is useful.

Maybe we need more people to take a bigger, more holistic, up to date stance on writing stories - but even then, there'll always be a place for questions of writing syle. And it'll always be on the writer to work out what's best for them. 

Btw, I'd *love* to read more of your thoughts on exploration/creativity and what not. Dunno if there's been a thread or blog post here that I've missed.

p.s. I feel like the most "do this or else" writing advice out there comes from Hollywood. But then, the people giving it are pretty clear about the aim of the advice - write screenplays that will sell in Hollywood, nothing less and nothing more. For a narrow goal dependent on gaining the approval of a narrow group of people, maybe that sort of "do this or else" attitude makes sense. I feel however that some people read Save the Cat and take that "Must do" attitude to a far wider set of goals without stopping to think whether it makes sense.


----------



## FifthView (Jan 14, 2018)

It wasn't until I came to these forums that I began to dislike the term _storytelling_.

It's in the way the word is used. Mana from heaven, inspiration of a personal daimōn, an entirely (or almost entirely) subjective process. I do believe that art accesses that. If everything could be...er, heh, plotted out according to a preexisting schematic, then we'd end up with mass produced copies that are very nearly identical, and what would be the purpose of art, then?

I think something important is often overlooked when the term _storytelling_ is used in this way. 

First and foremost, the communal aspect of language, the way language is acquired and utilized, means that you already are following a schematic when you use it.  The act of storytelling—telling the story to someone else rather than musing upon the story alone—requires following the schematic or at least being aware of the schematic. You can diverge, take unexpected routes, and be as quirky as you like, but I believe that each of these variations happens within the context of a preexisting schematic. For example, for a theoretical fantasy world, I could have a magic system based on _skematics_.  The fact that I've used a non-standard spelling for that word plays on the preexisting knowledge of the standard spelling. Even someone who doesn't consciously ponder this—she uses _skemmatics_ in a YouTube comment somewhere—is still following or attempting to follow a preexisting schema when approximating the sound and the meaning.

The telling of stories is similar. Not only the base language is utilized, but familiar structures are used as well—even if, subconsciously. 

Sometimes I like to think of complete sentences as stories although a single, standalone sentence is probably an incomplete story, heh. _Sometimes I like to think of...._is telling a story about myself. There's more behind that statement, a character and setting that aren't quite fleshed out yet in the single sentence; but those are present in the telling. 

I don't think it'll be worth my while to draw the line from the schematics of spelling, sound and word-meaning through the schematics of sentence structure and sentence-meaning to arrive at schematics of story structure—heh—so I'll jump to the point.  Just like the YouTube commenter, all of us have picked up an innate understanding of common story structures beginning with the moments when as babes we were first able to string words together to communicate to our parents and siblings. "How was your day at school?" prompts a story. "How did this get broken?!" Reading books, watching television and movies, telling stories to our family members, friends, and teachers, have shaped our innate sense of storytelling.  The YouTube commenter may not realize she's following a preexisting skemattic (!) but is following one regardless. Similarly, the _storyteller_ is already painting by numbers.

But. There are a lot of numbers and colors, heh.

So I like coming to forums like this and reading how-to books and articles because I want to discover all the numbers and colors.


----------



## Russ (Jan 14, 2018)

Mythopoet said:


> I just wonder if it's possible to start up a thread looking for like-minded people without attracting a ton of contrary people trying to argue and debate.



When you use strong words like "hate" and say that you get annoyed with things other people think have value, you should expect people to disagree.  Surely you are not surprised that some people vehemently disagree with you.  You have already conceded that many of your ideas are far from the norm, I cannot imagine that you are surprised by the disagreement.  

I understand this is a site to discuss and consider issues around writing, not a site for people who simply wish to agree with you.  I would not frequent such a site.


----------



## Russ (Jan 14, 2018)

Michael K. Eidson said:


> Without debating the definition of "story," you cannot possibly _know_ there was never a time when someone told a story on their own merits, before the _first_ time someone taught or helped another person tell one. You have no _proof_ to back up your claim that the belief stated by myself and others _is a myth or a fantasy_. Unless you have an _exhaustive_ list of examples, it doesn't matter how _strongly_ you believe something or how many examples from history you can quote, the strength of your belief and a few examples does not make your belief _true_. Unless you're a god who existed before humanity and have all the knowledge of human existence, your quoted statement above is authoritative speech that cannot possibly be authoritative. _That_ type of statement is the very type of statement the OP expressed annoyance with.



I will try to avoid political examples.  My understanding is that *all of the evidence we have* indicates that storytelling cultures and traditions had and have  rules or conventions they were expected to follows.  Coming to a conclusion based on all of the available evidence is not the same as pulling an opinion out of the air and being annoyed at people who disagree with it.  With logic like yours, one can never reach a conclusion and would live in a nihilistic self centred relativist world.  Your argument is like saying gravity doesn't really accelerate things at a certain rate because we have not measured the rate of fall of all objects ever dropped on earth.  

Now if we like reason and evidence, tell me what evidence there is for non-literate cultures that didn't have rules of story telling.  Your best argument is "Well there might of been such a culture but we haven't found it yet."  That makes it a myth or if it fulfills a need, more of a fantasy.



Michael K. Eidson said:


> Personally, I take the above quoted statement strictly as your opinion, and recognize you belief it very strongly based on trusted sources. I won't change my opinion even though you stated your opinion in an authoritative manner. I can be _annoyed_ at you, however.



IT would not be just my opinion, it would be the conclusion drawn by people who study the field and have reviewed the evidence.



Michael K. Eidson said:


> For the record, I'm not annoyed at you. I enjoy these kinds of discussions. I trust you aren't annoyed by what I've said above. It's okay if we have a good laugh at each other though, yeah?



I quiet enjoy this discussions and always get a good chuckle out of them.  In particular I enjoy with interactions with you ME, but while we are entitled to our own opinions, we are not entitled to our own facts and evidence.


----------



## Russ (Jan 14, 2018)

Sheilawisz said:


> And that's why I am so annoyed by the How to Write atmosphere: I fear that others like me out there might fall for the scientific and calculated methods at the very start of their journey, and ignore their natural style and personal abilities in favor of following the established patterns that most agents and publishers are looking for.
> 
> This is sometimes mocked, but I'll say it again: The best storytelling/writing advice is to follow your own imagination and heart.



Perhaps this is the real difference that lies between us.  I am not annoyed by the fact that you choose to  promote a story telling process that is very different from the norm.   I am grateful that people chose to share their hard won wisdom with me.  You seem to suggest they are in the process of perpetrating some sort of fraud or harm on beginning writers because their approach is different from yours.  I certainly don't view your descriptions of a different process as annoying or something I should hate.


----------



## Russ (Jan 14, 2018)

Devor said:


> Russ, I very much want to go without answering your question.  But I'm feeling sick today, so my judgement is impaired, and that's probably the only reason I'm doing this.
> 
> Let's start with the most basic concept, the course of a writer's career.  Google "stages of a writer's career," and you'll see it described something like this:
> 
> ...



Now this is very interesting stuff.  I never knew we had much early life Shakespeare material to compare.  Are there a couple of books on this approach you recommend? 

Anyways, let me try to understand your concern before I respond.  Your worry is that people giving standard advice might somehow be impairing the development of rare writing genius'?  Is there evidence that giving these genius' advice on standard conventions and techniques during the exploration stage hampers their development? 

For instance Picasso received a thoroughly traditional and classic artistic education that was both academic and conventional and later became more experimental and pushed the envelope?  Doesn't Picasso's experience actually undermine your argument?  I also understand Shakespeare likely received a traditional disciplined education in grammar etc which would have included story telling conventions.   If you can send me some references I am happy to look into it some more, but it seems to me based on the two examples you have used that getting a grounding in the standards of your discipline does not impede the exploration phase.

Don't the Amateur stage and Exploration stage have a great deal in common?

I am pleased you are impaired.  This is some intriguing material you have shared with us, and I, for one, am grateful.


----------



## Russ (Jan 14, 2018)

psychotick said:


> Hi,
> 
> 
> I think the thought that I would share with all new writers, is to stay as far away from critiques and advice as you can until you're ready in your own mind. And then when you finally think you're confident enough to go down that road while holding on to who you are as a writer, remember that everything you read and everything that you're told is only opinion. This isn't maths. There isn't only one right answer.
> ...



So if you were running this site, you would ban beginning writers from it because it harms them?


----------



## psychotick (Jan 14, 2018)

Hi,

No. Firstly I don't think that's possible. And second it would be a denial of their rights to read what they want. I don't approve of censorship in any but the most extreme cases. But if I was running this site I'd probably put up warnings and advisories everywhere advice or critiques are offered. I might also have a new member check box which says you've been writing seriously for more than a year or not - and those who tick less than a year can't put their work up for crits until they've been here for a year. I know, it's probably a pointless thing to do since people could simply tick a box anyway they want but at least it would be an attempt to do something.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## Devor (Jan 14, 2018)

Russ, it's been a long time since I looked at the source for that so I don't want to overstate myself. But it was based on what they did with their actual work, not on their education levels.




Russ said:


> Anyways, let me try to understand your concern before I respond.  Your worry is that people giving standard advice might somehow be impairing the development of rare writing genius'?





Hold on a second.  Let me catch my..... senses.  Okay, okay.  Here we go.  Here's my answer to that.

It's the rare genius who rises above the typical advice.  It's the rare advice that teaches you to become a genius.




> Don't the Amateur stage and Exploration stage have a great deal in common?



The difference is that the "amateur" stage typically misses the _purpose_ of the stage, which isn't just to learn but to explore.

Again, I want to repeat a few things from my last two posts.  There are two key ways that writing advice can hold back exploration.

1 - Creativity is about finding solutions and making connections between ideas that are _farther from_ each other.  Just by its nature, writing advice encourages you to find solutions that are _nearest to_ the field of writing.

2 - A lot of writing advice actively teaches you to _cut back_ on areas such as "purple prose" and "plot tumors" and "don't tell" in order to streamline your writing.  That's the 60% I was referring to earlier.  While it may be good advice, it's the exact opposite of what you need to do in an exploration stage.

This is important to understand because it means that you have to put your efforts in developing as a writer in some kind of context of where you are with your work.

Also, perhaps some of the language we've been using is misleading, as it's certainly possible to give advice on how to develop your creativity.  It's just that "writing advice" usually doesn't.


----------



## Devor (Jan 14, 2018)

Peat said:


> Btw, I'd *love* to read more of your thoughts on exploration/creativity and what not. Dunno if there's been a thread or blog post here that I've missed.



There have been other threads where I have said pretty much the same thing in less successful ways.  I don't believe they're worth going back to.

I wrote two articles on creativity for the home page here a few years ago.  They're starting to age.

How to Hack the Habit of Creativity

How to Balance Creativity with Story

You can also check out my Trope Reboots, which I designed in order to help people get into the creative process:

The Chosen One:  Trope Reboot

The Dark Lord:  Trope Reboot

The Medieval Kingdom:  Trope Reboot


----------



## Russ (Jan 14, 2018)

Your post so intrigued me Devor, I started looking at the examples you used and added one of my own, to see how it worked in the real world.

So I couldn't find much useful about Shakespeare's early work, so it didn't add much, except that he likely had a traditional disciplined grammar education (with all that meant at the time he got it).

Then I looked at Picasso, your other example.  I knew nothing about him.  But it turns out that his dad, was an art teacher who drilled all of the classic techniques and ideas into his son when he was quite young.  So in Picasso's case it is clear that being fully schooled in conventional technique before his "exploration phase" did not produce a poor outcome.

Then I went to look at one of my favs, Mozart.  A sheer musical genius.  His father wrote an influential text on playing the violin and was a music instructor who taught him all the basics and conventions of his time.  We know that he was made to work his way up through all of the musical exercise books of the time for the instruments he mastered.  By the time he wrote his first opera, I think he had been through daily music lessons in a structured and traditional format for something like nine years.  

So if we are trying to model this, or understand this approach to development of technique in relation to standard writing advice, don't these examples tell us that these individuals already had a solid mastery of the basics of their craft before the exploration phase?  These examples would seem to argue the reverse of PT's position, of "find yourself first" learn the basics after would they not?

I don't doubt the phase categories of these great artists careers as you describe them, but I what I am struggling with is whether that theory suggests that familiarity with the basics of the craft enhance or enable a fulsome exploration phase or detract from it.  These examples seem to suggest the former rather than the later.


----------



## FifthView (Jan 14, 2018)

So...following up on my earlier comment....

If we are all of us painting by numbers, regardless, then the question would be whether becoming conscious of this fact is more of an impediment to writing than remaining blissfully unaware.

The cons of either case:

Becoming conscious of this fact could lead to despair in at least two ways.  First, that feeling that we're only regurgitating the cliches, stories, structures, characters, etc., could lead the new writer to give up. "I can't write anything new!!!" Second, coming to believe that we _must_ paint by numbers, while also having the belief (or being told) that only a very small set of numbers and colors exist, could lead to the same result: "I'm just meant to be a cog in the factory producing the same stuff over and over!" the writer says before giving up.

Remaining blissfully unaware could lead to the same place after the reviews come in. Review A: "This is trite." Review B: "Having a giant wall of ice separating the backstabbing, violent warring nobles from undead legions....been done and done better." I.e., painting by numbers without realizing we are painting by numbers frees us to regurgitate without knowing we are! Until we are told. 

The pros:

If we become conscious of the fact that we are painting by numbers, we can then seek to discover all the variations possible—the numbers and colors—and even learn how to diverge from the schematics in quirky ways that audiences will appreciate.

If we remain blissfully unaware that we are painting by numbers, we won't suffer the despair/roadblocks of the "con" of becoming aware; and, quite possibly, we'll diverge from the typical schematics accidentally in interesting ways simply because we aren't consciously trying to fill in the colors everyone else would use.

I don't know. I'm just musing here. At some level, the two aren't entirely separate. None of us is entirely conscious of _all_ of our schema-following habits, and all of us are aware of _some_ of those habits. Most likely.

Also, I tend to view the question through the lens that Ralph Waldo Emerson used concerning what to do about the "Great Men" he described in a set of essays. The question is whether those great examples should be followed ; wouldn't their vast shadows overwhelm and hide our own? His answer was to follow their examples and not worry. Your own soul and spirit—your own genius is too strong and stubborn; you'll introduce variation regardless. That's the way it works.


----------



## Devor (Jan 14, 2018)

Russ said:


> So if we are trying to model this, or understand this approach to development of technique in relation to standard writing advice, don't these examples tell us that these individuals already had a solid mastery of the basics of their craft before the exploration phase?  These examples would seem to argue the reverse of PT's position, of "find yourself first" learn the basics after would they not?



I think it less disproves my point and instead suggests that what it is I'm trying to say still needs more development.  My thesis on creativity is apparently in the mid-refinement stage?


----------



## Russ (Jan 14, 2018)

Devor said:


> I think it less disproves my point and instead suggests that what it is I'm trying to say still needs more development.  My thesis on creativity is apparently in the mid-refinement stage?



Sorry if I wasn't clear, I didn't mean to suggest it disproved your point, rather they ran exactly contra to the way that psychotick thought young writers should develop.

Do let keep us in  the loop on you thoughts on creativity, I am curious to know where they take you.  And if you remember the cites for the research you mentioned earlier, please pass them along.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 14, 2018)

Russ said:


> You seem to suggest they are in the process of perpetrating some sort of fraud or harm on beginning writers because their approach is different from yours.



Again, you have misunderstood what I said. My words were: _I fear that others like me out there might fall for the scientific and calculated methods at the very start of their journey. _The key part is *others like me*, not beginning writers in general. I feel this way because of personal experience with various people that have tried to convince me that what I do with stories is somehow crazy or delusional.

The writing-is-science atmosphere is indeed harmful for writers like me, since we develop our craft much better in our own world.



Russ said:


> I am not annoyed by the fact that you choose to promote a story telling process that is very different from the norm.



The norm in places like Mythic Scribes, yeah. There are very few people of my kind here, but I have discovered that in other places the situation is quite different. There is a very famous writing site that is filled to the brim with people like me, I have met several really nice like-minded friends there and I love the atmosphere in that site.


----------



## Devor (Jan 14, 2018)

Russ said:


> Sorry if I wasn't clear, I didn't mean to suggest it disproved your point, rather they ran exactly contra to the way that psychotick thought young writers should develop.



If I wanted to talk about Psychotick's thoughts I would respond to him directly. It would seem discourteous to me to comment on them this way.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 14, 2018)

Different is not dangerous.

There is a very odd undercurrent of language happening in this thread that is raising red flags for me.

On one had we have the creatives, who believe that, for whatever reason, any sort of advice, critique, wisdom, knowledge, or idea outside of their own belief system is inherently "dangerous, damaging, stunting, etc.' It appears that these people are annoyed by this information (even though it is not directed at them). It appears that this information makes them feel fearful for other writers who may be damaged and stunted as a result of it.

A few of these people have gone as far as to suggest that in their perfect world, forums like these would censor new members to see if they were "ready" to be exposed to such damaging and dangerous information.

Guys, _that _attitude is the scary one.

When a mod agrees to support a member for starting a post that is basically "Only people who agree with me may post here"... on a public forum, that is a serious problem.

Is that the direction MS is headed?

Are the people who love to talk colours and numbers (as FifthView so eloquently put it, BTW FIFTHVIEW OMG!!! YAY!), relegated to the sidelines as a bunch of dangerous trolls who can't be allowed near the new members lest we destroy their creative little brains? Must we constantly be called out as "scientific," and "Sell outs," and lacking creativity because we chose a different way of pursuing our art? Must our voices be constantly pushed aside as damaging?

Seriously. Sheila, Devor, Psychotic, no one is saying your way is wrong. No one has said your way is damaging, or stunting. No one has said your way is dangerous. No one has said they are "annoyed by creatives who do things their own way."

So why is it okay for you to use this language for our way? For what we value as important? For how we choose to pursue our craft?


----------



## Michael K. Eidson (Jan 14, 2018)

Russ said:


> I will try to avoid political examples.  My understanding is that *all of the evidence we have* indicates that storytelling cultures and traditions had and have  rules or conventions they were expected to follows.  Coming to a conclusion based on all of the available evidence is not the same as pulling an opinion out of the air and being annoyed at people who disagree with it.  With logic like yours, one can never reach a conclusion and would live in a nihilistic self centred relativist world.  Your argument is like saying gravity doesn't really accelerate things at a certain rate because we have not measured the rate of fall of all objects ever dropped on earth.



For years, scientists believed Euclidean geometry described the universe. They have since debated whether non-Euclidean geometries may better describe some aspects of the universe, especially on large scales. When observations are made locally, they cannot be used to make broad statements about all of the universe. It is entirely possible that gravity does not work exactly as is taught in school.

You may claim that storytelling rules existed before the beginning of time, whenever you believe that to be, and this would be one way of looking at the matter. In scientific circles, however, proofs require the existence of non-empty sets of elements on which the proofs are made. I'm not making this up. I have a MS in Applied Mathematics, and have gone through a rigorous course of training which exercised my logical abilities. I was warned when it came to writing a thesis, to make sure the thesis hypothesis applies to something more than the empty set. The story went that a student came up with a wonderful theory, wrote a lengthy thesis on it, presented it, only to have it thrown out by a professor who showed very quickly that the theory applied only to the empty set -- that is, it applied to nothing. It was the mathematical equivalent of claiming that _all piglets hatched from boulders can fly_. In this vein, I submit that any storytelling rules you might claim existed before the world existed applied only to the empty set, and thus do not count.

To put it another way, without matter to act on, gravity doesn't matter, pun intended.

To my mathematical, scientific mind, there had to be a first storyteller, by whatever definition you give to that. Perhaps it was the first time someone told a lie, observed a spark of wonder in the eyes of the audience, and so told another lie. I use the verb _told_ loosely here--maybe it was hand gestures, head shaking, scratch marks on a cave wall, or some other means of primitive communication. Whenever the defining moment was, I submit there had to be one--no matter that we will never know when it was. Before that moment, storyteller rules had no meaning and so don't count, even if you say they must be innate truths of the universe and had to exist before time.

There is a religious argument to be made against what I've said, but I won't go there. I don't want to debate religion on the Mythic Scribes forums. If you wish to say your statements are religion-based, then we can leave it at that.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 14, 2018)

Actually, it's more like Mythopoet just wanted to talk about the subject with people of the same opinion and then people that love rules-based writing showed up to fight back her reasons and start the argument.



Heliotrope said:


> Seriously. Sheila, Devor, Psychotic, no one is saying your way is wrong. No one has said your way is damaging, or stunting. No one has said your way is dangerous. No one has said they are "annoyed by creatives who do things their own way."



Yes, over a long time some people have said such things to me in various chat and forum conversations.

We are two sides that are always going to be in disagreement, there's really no way to change that. Now, I find it strange that you disapprove of Mythopoet's idea to have a new thread only for like-minded people, and at the same time you seem to be offended by the disagreements in this thread. If you do not like the original post here, why join the conversation to start with?

If you want the debate, get ready to deal with points of view that are wildly different to yours.

We can either have threads exclusive for rules-based writing and others dedicated to my kind of writing, or we continue to participate all together in the same threads and learn to live with our differences.

I believe that Black Dragon wants a diverse community, but it gets complicated sometimes.



Heliotrope said:


> So why is it okay for you to use this language for our way? For what we value as important? For how we choose to pursue our craft?



The same has happened the other way around, when some people have mocked concepts that are important to my kind.

Two different planets of storytelling, as I have said before. If we have to share a site, then please let's try to keep more calm around here and avoid a scenario in which the situation starts to get personal.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 14, 2018)

Sheilawisz said:


> love rules-based writing showed up to fight back her reasons and start the argument.



Nobody showed up to "start an argument." We showed up to say "No, we don't get annoyed by writing articles, and here is why.... " Which then turned into a witch hunt on "rules based writing". 



Sheilawisz said:


> Now, I find it strange that you disapprove of Mythopoet's idea to have a new thread only for like-minded people, and at the same time you seem to be offended by the disagreements in this thread. If you do not like the original post here, why join the conversation to start with?



Yes. I do disapprove. I think that is totally wrong on a public forum. I am not offended by the disagreement on this thread. I have been involved in a lot of debates on this forum. It is my right be able to join in with my opinion. 



Sheilawisz said:


> We can either have threads exclusive for rules-based writing and others dedicated to my kind of writing, or we continue to participate all together in the same threads and learn to live with our differences.
> 
> I believe that Black Dragon wants a diverse community, but it gets complicated sometimes.



I do too. I never asked for them to be separated. A mod approved that sort of thread and I think it is wrong. Period. In any direction of argument. 



Sheilawisz said:


> please let's try to keep more calm around here and avoid a scenario in which the situation starts to get personal.



Then please stop telling people that our methods are "dangerous and stunting."


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 14, 2018)

Sheilawisz said:


> The same has happened the other way around, when some people have mocked concepts that are important to my kind.



Great. I'm glad that gives you the right to do it back


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 14, 2018)

Heliotrope said:


> Nobody showed up to "start an argument." We showed up to say "No, we don't get annoyed by writing articles, and here is why.... " Which then turned into a witch hunt on "rules based writing".



And what were you expecting in a thread called _Anyone else Hate How To Do Writing Advice_?

To me it was pretty obvious that the thread was going to attract people that share that opinion, and if the other side shows up to disagree with us then we disagree with them and the argument starts. Witch Hunt? Just because we do not like rules-based writing (the whole idea behind the thread), and we express our feelings about it?

Are you sure that you are not being too sensitive about all of this?



Heliotrope said:


> Yes. I do disapprove. I think that is totally wrong on a public forum. I am not offended by the disagreement on this thread. I have been involved in a lot of debates on this forum. It is my right be able to join in with my opinion.



Offended? Annoyed? Heated? Alarmed? I am not sure what are you feeling as a result of this thread, but I think that you need to calm down. Yes, you have your right to join with your opinion and we have the same right to counter with our opinion as well. Just get ready for the debate to get heated and to face strong opinions that you may disapprove.



Heliotrope said:


> Then please stop telling people that our methods are "dangerous and stunting."



We'll keep expressing our opinions just like you express yours, nobody is going to censor or ban the opinion of others.


----------



## Devor (Jan 14, 2018)

Heliotrope said:


> A few of these people have gone as far as to suggest that in their perfect world, forums like these would censor new members to see if they were "ready" to be exposed to such damaging and dangerous information.
> 
> Guys, _that _attitude is the scary one.



Every attitude is scary if you push it far enough.  But I wouldn't take psychotick's comments on that too.... literally, if I can be so bold as to speak for him.  For this conversation we've only been looking at one topic in isolation, and he even admitted that much of what he said wouldn't actually work because of censorship and similar issues.  If you took it literally and got scared, I think you might've missed the point.

I don't think anybody has jumped into an advice thread to say "Hey, don't give any advice or it'll stunt their growth!"  On the other hand, I can't count how many times I've seen people jump into a thread just to say, "Nobody will care about that," which is also quite hurtful to the purpose of these forums.




> When a mod agrees to support a member for starting a post that is basically "Only people who agree with me may post here"... on a public forum, that is a serious problem.
> 
> Is that the direction MS is headed?
> 
> Are the people who love to talk colours and numbers (as FifthView so eloquently put it, BTW FIFTHVIEW OMG!!! YAY!), relegated to the sidelines as a bunch of dangerous trolls who can't be allowed near the new members lest we destroy their creative little brains? Must we constantly be called out as "scientific," and "Sell outs," and lacking creativity because we chose a different way of pursuing our art? Must our voices be constantly pushed aside as damaging?



For the purpose of one thread, yeah, why not?  It's not like anybody is going to stop people from posting.  And I mean, you once posted a thread asking for opinions from just women - that's kind of the same, isn't it?  I don't think it's worth getting bent out of shape over.



> Seriously. Sheila, Devor, Psychotic, no one is saying your way is wrong. No one has said your way is damaging, or stunting. No one has said your way is dangerous. No one has said they are "annoyed by creatives who do things their own way."
> 
> So why is it okay for you to use this language for our way? For what we value as important? For how we choose to pursue our craft?



Honestly, people say that creatives are wrong _all the time_.  As a professor once told me, if you don't see the bias it probably means you agree with it.

But I'm by far a numbers and colors person - because again, the idea that people can't take a scientific approach to creativity is.....unscientific - and I really think people need to understand that more.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 14, 2018)

Devor said:


> For the purpose of one thread, yeah, why not? It's not like anybody is going to stop people from posting. And I mean, you once posted a thread asking for opinions from just women



 if you read the post you will see that I never disregarded the posts of men, and in fact welcomed their opinions. I was asking specifically about women perspectives, but I never asked any mods to not allow men to post. So no. It is not the same.


----------



## Devor (Jan 14, 2018)

Heliotrope said:


> if you read the post you will see that I never disregarded the posts of men, and in fact welcomed their opinions. I was asking specifically about women perspectives, but I never asked any mods to not allow men to post. So no. It is not the same.



I can let Steerpike speak for himself about how he intended the possible thread he mentioned to go, but I think Heliotrope that you're underestimating how much effort we put into making your thread didn't stray too far from the intentions of the OP because that's one of the things we do.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 14, 2018)

I get it. For sure I get it. And I appreciate it. But doing that is very different than limiting who is allowed to post all together.


----------



## skip.knox (Jan 14, 2018)

The subject line says "Anyone else hate how to do ____ writing advice?"
I reply, no I don't hate that, and so I'm pretty much done on the thread. I have to agree that those who disagree, given the subject line, are sort of crashing the party. They could come over to my party, tentatively entitled "what are your favorite pieces of writing advice?". There we can talk on the subject all we wish.

And, should someone come along to argue at length that writing advice is unwelcome and possibly damaging, we might well wonder who invited *that* person.  So, I make a suggestion. Note that it is a suggestion only, not a Moderator Edict.

My suggestion is that those of us who don't hate writing advice pile into my '34 Packard and drive away, and let those who are in sympathy with the topic have at it in peace. I would feel differently if the OP subject was something along the lines of "Do you think ____ writing advice is good and helpful?"  That would be an invitation to debate.

Now, it's the nature of public forums to be open to having everyone weigh in on everything, and this is a public forum. That's why I make a suggestion, not a ruling. But why not consider my suggestion. Besides, the conversation is wandering into other avenues and is getting a bit too personal. Too many uses of the second person singular.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jan 14, 2018)

*hopping into Packard, head down.


----------



## skip.knox (Jan 14, 2018)




----------



## Steerpike (Jan 14, 2018)

Devor said:


> I can let Steerpike speak for himself about how he intended the possible thread he mentioned to go, but I think Heliotrope that you're underestimating how much effort we put into making your thread didn't stray too far from the intentions of the OP because that's one of the things we do.



Just looking at it from a practical standpoint, if someone posted such a thread, it still doesn't prevent debate, as another person could easily post a separate thread to debate the very same subject. In theory, everyone is happy. And the restriction is specifically subject-matter oriented, not based on inherent characteristics of member (such as race, gender, and the like).


----------



## Michael K. Eidson (Jan 14, 2018)

Heliotrope said:


> When a mod agrees to support a member for starting a post that is basically "Only people who agree with me may post here"... on a public forum, that is a serious problem.
> 
> Is that the direction MS is headed?



[I see that others have said something similar already, but I wrote the below, and so I'm posting it.]

MS already defines different forums for different topics. If you post a thread to an inappropriate forum, it gets moved. It's not censorship, it's only a way to keep posters on topic. So it might be a good thing to have a thread supporting what a given person wants to discuss, and the mods to help keep it on topic. If you want to have a different view, you're not prevented from it, just asked to discuss it elsewhere.


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 14, 2018)

Michael K. Eidson said:


> [I see that others have said something similar already, but I wrote the below, and so I'm posting it.]
> 
> MS already defines different forums for different topics. If you post a thread to an inappropriate forum, it gets moved. It's not censorship, it's only a way to keep posters on topic. So it might be a good thing to have a thread supporting what a given person wants to discuss, and the mods to help keep it on topic. If you want to have a different view, you're not prevented from it, just asked to discuss it elsewhere.



Yes. If the forum as a whole were restricted to "agree with position X or else don't participate," that would be a censorship issue.  Keeping certain content in certain threads is not.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Jan 14, 2018)

I see pictures of cars like that and I just want to fill it full of holes with my tommy gun.

How’s that for on topic?


----------



## skip.knox (Jan 14, 2018)

Demesnedenoir said:


> I see pictures of cars like that and I just want to fill it full of holes with my tommy gun.
> 
> How’s that for on topic?


I think maybe ya need a little air.


----------



## Chessie2 (Jan 15, 2018)

skip.knox said:


>


Just give me a long cigarette and some shades. Be ready to go in five.


----------



## Russ (Jan 15, 2018)

Sheilawisz said:


> Actually, it's more like Mythopoet just wanted to talk about the subject with people of the same opinion and then people that love rules-based writing showed up to fight back her reasons and start the argument.
> 
> Two different planets of storytelling, as I have said before. If we have to share a site, then please let's try to keep more calm around here and avoid a scenario in which the situation starts to get personal.



If Mythopoet wants a site where people just agree with her she should start that.  If we are going to start creating ghettos here so people can just slander and insult other people's way of doing things, than this site will become a toilet in a hurry.  People could avoid such problems with a little foresight and giving a thought to the opinions and feelings of others, but that is not the signal you get when the post is about how you hate something that other people do, or how it annoys you that other people do something different than you.

Let me try to illustrate why I joined this thread to vehemently disagree with Mythopoet's post with an old Canadian joke.

Two travelling salesman are having lunch together and their conversation goes like this:

"I just got back from a long sales trip to Sudbury."

"That sucks man, there are only two things that ever come from Sudbury, hookers and hockey players."

"My wife is from Sudbury."

"What position does she play?"

The problem is that MP's original post expresses a hatred of what some people I actually know and respect do for a living, and do it will and with good intentions.  And rather than just flapping their gums they can point to concrete examples these people can often point to individuals whose writing career they have help developed.  The problem that the OP runs into is she forgets there are real people out in the real world feeding their kids and working hard that she is crapping on with her comments.  I don't dispute her right to do that, it might not be wise, but that is her right.  But for her to post an obvious hornet's nest poking post and then act disappointed when people disagree is ridiculous.  

If she, or you, expect me to stand by silently and what "friendly opinion only" threads  suggesting that people who do those things are missing the whole point of storytelling you don't understand much about human nature.  Personally I wouldn't want the kind of friends who just sat by and did nothing if someone started insulting say lawyers or fantasy writers.

Sheilawisz I totally believe that you have faced people mocking the way you write.  For you to support the same conduct here against another method, and even suggest that there should be threads where only people who agree to hate the other method have a special space to express their disdain for a method say, 80% of this site adopts is hypocritical at best and destructive at heart.  

Truthfully the whole problem could have been avoided if the OP had taken a positive approach to the issue.  A thread about creativity, or alternative ways of writing, or even "writing without rules" would not attract the same negative attention.  But the OP chose to start a thread attacking a methodology for learning to write better.  It "got personal" the minute she decided to express hatred for a methodology many people on this site follow.  She, and many other people, seem to forget there are real people out there who rely on this approach that she chose to express hatred for.


----------



## Michael K. Eidson (Jan 15, 2018)

Russ said:


> Truthfully the whole problem could have been avoided if the OP had taken a positive approach to the issue. A thread about creativity, or alternative ways of writing, or even "writing without rules" would not attract the same negative attention. But the OP chose to start a thread attacking a methodology for learning to write better. It "got personal" the minute she decided to express hatred for a methodology many people on this site follow. She, and many other people, seem to forget there are real people out there who rely on this approach that she chose to express hatred for.



The title of the OP unfortunately contains the word "hate." I agree we should avoid that trigger word, in both titles and posts. But we shouldn't argue only against titles, which are often written just to lure readers. Yes, hate is a strong word, but it doesn't appear once in the actual OP. The OP only expresses annoyance. And the annoyance is not even directed at all writing advice, only that of a prescriptive, authoritative nature that leaves no room for other ways of doing things. The OP's annoyance, from how I read it, is with prejudicial presentation of advice, written as the one and only true way. If not for the unfortunate use of the word "hate" in the title, I don't see how she deserved to be attacked for expressing her feelings, or for asking if anyone else feels the way she does.


----------



## Russ (Jan 15, 2018)

Michael K. Eidson said:


> The title of the OP unfortunately contains the word "hate." I agree we should avoid that trigger word, in both titles and posts. But we shouldn't argue only against titles, which are often written just to lure readers. Yes, hate is a strong word, but it doesn't appear once in the actual OP. The OP only expresses annoyance. And the annoyance is not even directed at all writing advice, only that of a prescriptive, authoritative nature that leaves no room for other ways of doing things. The OP's annoyance, from how I read it, is with prejudicial presentation of advice, written as the one and only true way. If not for the unfortunate use of the word "hate" in the title, I don't see how she deserved to be attacked for expressing her feelings, or for asking if anyone else feels the way she does.



First off I think she should post whatever she chooses to post, but then she cannot complain when people post contra opinions.  But if she wants to post material that clearly denigrates a route other people chose to walk then she has to be prepared for some push back.  I don't think she should be attacked for expressing her feelings at all, but she cannot criticize others and then ask for a thread where no one criticizes her idea!  

And you read her first post far too generously.  She made some statements that clearly denigrated other people's chosen approach to writing:

*But every time I see such a question, and not just here, I can't help thinking that these aspiring writers are missing the essential nature of being a storyteller

If you have someone else give you the answers or even just use generalized writing advice to form your story... I just feel like you're missing out on the whole point.

But I feel as though such articles suggest a false idea about storytelling: that if you want to accomplish a specific effect within your story, there are certain particular ways of doing it*

I don't know, call me crazy, I think someone telling a group of people that they are missing the essential nature of being a storyteller, or are missing the whole point,  is kind of insulting.  I think that saying another group of people are suggesting a false idea is not so flattering either.

I wonder how MP, or Sheilawisz would react if I had the bad form and lack of civility to make similar negative general statements about their approach to writing?  

We allwould have been far better off, and it would have had the potential to create a productive discussion,  if she had approached this topic in a positive way, promoting a positive alternative rather than attacking people's chosen path.


----------



## Devor (Jan 15, 2018)

It's too early for this.

I'm closing this thread. There may be some follow up later.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 15, 2018)

Thank you Devor for locking this thread, I just want to make a final announcement.

The member Russ continued the personal attacks despite very clear Moderator instructions from Skip and myself to stop that behavior. I have been forced to issue a 3-day cooling period to his account. This is just the result of his argumentative and hostile behavior, and nothing personal from my part.



Russ said:


> I wonder how MP, or Sheilawisz would react if I had the bad form and lack of civility to make similar negative general statements about their approach to writing?



I am very confident and happy with my approach to writing, so the fact that some people openly mock it does not affect me anymore.


----------



## Devor (Jan 15, 2018)

We've been hearing from members and there seems to be some confusion as to why this thread was locked and an infraction issued.  I apologize for creating confusion.

Russ has been warned in the past specifically against holding an ongoing feud with Mythopoet. The fact that he chose to target her strongly now, disproportionately to anything she said (I felt), long after she stopped posting, and even though others including myself have made far more aggressive comments about the value of writing advice, indicated to me that the feud was still ongoing.  He had been warned repeatedly that carrying on this feud would result in an infraction, and that is what happened.

At this time, I feel the thread has also run its course, and that most of us could use a breather.  If somebody wishes to pick up the conversation, we ask only that you wait just a couple of days before opening a new thread.

Finally, so long as it helps a member with their writing, it has _always_ been our prerogative as moderators to push _all discussions_ towards the intentions of the original post to the best of our abilities, even when we personally find the discussion discomforting.  Steerpike's expression of support for a proposed thread is an expression of standard, de facto policy on our part. As a mildly conservative Catholic, I have joined many discussions about writing to support communism, atheism, LGBT issues, and others - all putting aside "my own agenda" with the intent of supporting the request of the OP, even when I might be uncomfortable or in disagreement. If I can do it, I'm sure that all of us can tolerate a thread questioning the value of writing advice, with respect for our members and their individual writing needs.

Please understand all of this going forward.


----------

