• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

Elmore Leonard's 10 "Rules" of Writing

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
1. Never open a book with the weather.
2. Avoid prologues.
3. Never use a verb other than “said” to carry dialogue.
4. Never use an adverb to modify the verb “said.”
5. Keep your exclamation points under control!
6. Never use the words “suddenly” or “all hell broke loose.”
7. Use regional dialect, patois, sparingly.
8.Avoid detailed descriptions of characters.
9.Same for places and things.
10. Leave out the parts readers tend to skip.

You can find him expanding on them a bit more, here: WRITERS ON WRITING; Easy on the Adverbs, Exclamation Points and Especially Hooptedoodle - New York Times

I can't say I disagree with any of these. If you're going for a more artistic style, along the lines of a Peake or Nabokov, these don't work of course. But in general I think these are good guidelines (there are no rules).
 

JonSnow

Troubadour
#2 and #6 caught my eye... first I think a prologue is SOMETIMES necessary. For instance, if you are setting a backdrop for the story using an event that happened many years in the past, a Prologue is a more fitting way to include that history, rather than using it as chapter 1, where those characters and/or places may never be heard from again. It would seem really out of place. The reader expects the prologue to be something different from the main body of the story. That being said, the prologue shouldn't be 25 pages long, either.

In regards to #6, I think the "all hell broke loose" is a good example of what a lot of writers do by accident (myself included, though I catch myself more often through experience). These cliches or sayings like "all hell broke loose", "hot summer night", "two peas in a pod", "smelled like roses", "crystal clear", or "plain as day" should be avoided all together. If you want to use quips or cliches, make up your own. You don't want the reader to snap out of their reading world by hearing some saying their mother used the other day.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
I agree with you regarding #6, JonSnow. An exception would be first person POV, I suppose, where maybe the viewpoint character is prone to using cliches.

I don't agree regarding #2, however. I don't think a prologue is ever necessary. Sometimes they are used effectively, many time they are not, but I can't think of a situation where you absolutely have to have one. But people who know me around here know I don't like prologues. I'll put a book with a prologue back on the shelf a good portion of the time; or maybe I'll skip the prologue and go straight to the story in chapter 1. If it is really well done, I'll read it. If it is merely a vehicle for providing background to the reader, I'm not interested.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
"Necessary" to me indicates that the author had no choice but to include one, because there is no other way to impart the information from the prologue to the reader. I can't think of a situation in which that would be the case.

I'll read a prologue in some circumstances, but it certainly counts as a strike against any book I pick up. My experience is that I tend not to like them, so all other things being equal I'd rather read something that doesn't have one. As I noted above, though, I have actually bought books with prologues and just skipped the whole prologue and started right in with chapter 1.
 
So, is it the fact that they're called 'prologues' that you object to? Would calling it 'Chapter 1' change your opinion? Or is it that they (generally) take place a certain amount of time before the next chapter?
 

T.Allen.Smith

Staff
Moderator
I think the point concerning prologues can be stated another way.

A really good story with spine-tingling tension and anxiety causing conflict is immediate and urgent in how it is felt & experienced by the reader. A prologue offers information from the past or from distant locales, both far removed from the current action & intrigue.

If you're writing a prologue I think you should ask yourself two questions.

Can I relay this information in the main body of the story where it will have more immediate impact or am I just being lazy in my efforts to get the information out there?

Will there be increased tension as my characters discover this information as the story moves along?

If you can answer those questions honestly and still feel a prologue is the only way to dole out this part of the tale then I'd say you have grounds to write a prologue. Otherwise, it's probably better to get it across in another way.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
So, is it the fact that they're called 'prologues' that you object to? Would calling it 'Chapter 1' change your opinion? Or is it that they (generally) take place a certain amount of time before the next chapter?

It's the fact that they're generally a bunch of boring backstory that I don't want or need to know yet, because I want to get straight into the story. I don't care if the author called it a prologue, chapter 1, or a ham sandwich. It's what the author tends to do with it that I don't like. The word "prologue" is just a convenient way for the author to tell me "OK, now I'm going to tell you a bunch of stuff that happened before the story." As a rule, I'd just rather get to the story.

It's a generalization. Not all prologues are like that, but I seem to come across many that are.
 
Maybe we're just reading different things? I don't remember most of the prologues I read having that quality to them.

When I think of them, I think of the first chapter of 'Game of Thrones'. It's not called a prologue, but that's essentially what it is, and it's an action-filled hint of the story to come that gives the flavor of the world without boring you.

Perhaps this is less an argument between 'prologues' and 'no prologues' than it is an argument between 'good prologues' and 'bad prologues'.
 

T.Allen.Smith

Staff
Moderator
ProfessorBrainfever said:
Maybe we're just reading different things? I don't remember most of the prologues I read having that quality to them.

When I think of them, I think of the first chapter of 'Game of Thrones'. It's not called a prologue, but that's essentially what it is, and it's an action-filled hint of the story to come that gives the flavor of the world without boring you.

Perhaps this is less an argument between 'prologues' and 'no prologues' than it is an argument between 'good prologues' and 'bad prologues'.

I agree that this chapter in GoT was good..... Why would he choose to do that?

First reason I thought of was because it enabled him to accomplish 2 different things. One, show that there was something sinister looming but more importantly, lead into the scene where Bran witnesses his father beheading the deserter.

Also, we're not talking about a massive span of time or distance here either. We're talking about 2 bordering realms and a deserter that is captured not long after the action scene your referencing. That being the case, it is still immediate the the story.

I wouldn't place that in the category of prologues that show me something "relevant" a hundred years earlier.
 

Devor

Fiery Keeper of the Hat
Moderator
2. Avoid prologues.
3. Never use a verb other than “said” to carry dialogue.
4. Never use an adverb to modify the verb “said.”

8.Avoid detailed descriptions of characters.
9.Same for places and things.
10. Leave out the parts readers tend to skip.

I completely disagree with these rules. I think they're an excuse for people who can't write well to leave out the parts of their writing which make that obvious. Nothing beats a good character description, in my opinion.
 
Last edited:

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
I completely disagree with these rules. I think they're an excuse for people who can't write well to leave out the parts of their writing which make that obvious. Nothing beats a good character description, in my opinion.

Defensive much? I think you can accuse Elmore Leonard of a number of things, but not being able to write is not among them. I agree with most of these, including the bit about character description. It is just possible that people with a view differing from yours can still write.
 

J. S. Elliot

Inkling
I would be inclined to agree with you, Devor. Most of those "rules" apply only to vanilla writing styles. And most of those, like with many classics, fail to draw me in. However, there are still some that can manage ... it's just not as easy as it is with books that actually make an effort at painting the world.
 

Black Dragon

Staff
Administrator
While I'm not a fan of writing "rules," I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss anything that Elmore Leonard has to say. He's one of the most exceptional authors of our era.

Have you seen the FX series Justified? It's based on Elmore Leonard's books, and he produces it and writes some of the episodes. It's fascinating and entertaining. He manages to create over-the-top characters who are also believable and sympathetic.
 
In defense of prologues, another "rule" is to open the story with the widest viewpoint you'll ever use. It's not always possible to do that with the elements you use to begin the story, especially with a first-person narrator. To follow that rule, then, you almost have to have a prologue.

And another thing. A good prologue will draw in the reader, just as the main story should. If the reader doesn't like your prologue, chances are s/he won't like the story. The exception is when the writer tosses off the prologue as an afterthought or as an infodump for everything s/he couldn't shoehorn into the narrative. That may be the reason some people don't like prologues.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
While I'm not a fan of writing "rules," I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss anything that Elmore Leonard has to say. He's one of the most exceptional authors of our era.

Yeah, I don't think I've ever heard a writing rule that wasn't more of a guideline or suggestion, and depended on the style of writing desired. Maybe "don't bore the reader" is a good "rule."
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
I would be inclined to agree with you, Devor. Most of those "rules" apply only to vanilla writing styles. And most of those, like with many classics, fail to draw me in. However, there are still some that can manage ... it's just not as easy as it is with books that actually make an effort at painting the world.

I don't care much about whether it is easy or not. I don't mind doing some of the work as a reader; in fact, I would rather use my imagination to fill in the details of the world and the characters. I like a few choice descriptions from the writer, as a general rule, particularly when it comes to characters. I tend to develop an image of a character in my head very early on, and if the writer keeps throwing layers of detail at me it conflicts with the picture I already have in my head and I just disregard it.

There are exceptions, of course. My handle on these forums comes from books by Mervyn Peake. It would be hard to find a more densely descriptive fantasy work than his Gormenghast books. But Peake's skill with language is rare. If you have that kind of skill, then by all means describe away. If the descriptions are artful, poetic, or enthralling in their way, I'll read them all night long. Most of the books you find on the shelf aren't written by writers who have that kind of skill with description. They're more or less stale recitations. In those cases I'd rather see less of it than more.
 

Devor

Fiery Keeper of the Hat
Moderator
Defensive much? I think you can accuse Elmore Leonard of a number of things, but not being able to write is not among them.

I didn't mean to comment about the writing quality of Elmore Leonard, whom I've never read. But skipping prologues, not using dialogue tags, and cutting out descriptions are not good advice to give to all writers. Taken together, they create a particular kind of writing style, which is prone to its own often ignored flaws, like an over-reliance on dialogue and a narration that's often shallow. In particular, "said" can be as much a hindrance in an action scene, where dialogue tags help to bridge the momentum between dialogue and action.


I agree with most of these, including the bit about character description. It is just possible that people with a view differing from yours can still write.

The same could be said to anyone giving this kind of advice.
 
Top