Five Common Problems

[A. E. Lowan]

This is a today's blog article from Chuck Wendig. I think he makes some excellent points about the first few pages of a story.

As usual, this is Wendig, so NSFW. Ever since that one article on spanking went viral he hasn't actually been all that bad in the profanity department, but, yeah, there's some.

Five Common Problems I See In Your Stories « terribleminds: chuck wendig

 

[Devora]

I do those points already, but it's good to know you're not the only one that does certain things when writing.

 

[Feo Takahari]

Heh. Terry Bisson would not be pleased with #3. (Actually, Robert Silverberg would argue the point even more strongly with him--I've seen him seriously argue that focusing unnecessarily on characterization is one of the biggest mistakes a sci-fi writer can make. Not that I particularly like the stories Silverberg writes under that philosophy . . .)

#4 is a good point, but I think it's an easy one to misunderstand. I've seen writers start their story in medias res when there was absolutely no good reason to do so, just so they could skip to something obviously recognizable as an "action sequence." Then they went back in time to a scene that wasn't "action" in that same sense, but that still had something going on, and that would have made a better beginning. (It's not unlike beginning with a prologue when chapter 1 would have worked just as well.)

To illustrate an alternate approach to #4, there's a fanfic called "Perchance to Dream" that begins with an actress-turned-housewife taking her children and her husband's relatives to an amusement park. The story slowly sets up that she knows more than she should about underworld types, that her favorite flower is oleander, that she has some distinctive burn scars on her arms . . . It's quiet and subtle, but it's not wasted time--it methodically builds a sense of unease, making it feel both shocking and inevitable when she returns home to find the whole house wrecked and scrawled with graffiti calling her a traitor.

#5 isn't really a thing I see a lot. I think the whole push towards "lean" writing has pretty much killed it.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

#4 is making me wonder. I have a 1000-word beginning, but I think I really am getting in my own way. Not because it's not action, but because it's too many words for a cute little scene that might make better "downtime between awesomeness," as Phil put it in his article. (Not an exact quote.) I have no qualms about scrapping my opener altogether, so for now I'm going to write on and I kept my "false start" in a separate file.

Feo, I agree with your take on #4, which helped me process whether my #4 case really was a problem or not. I think my opener is a problem because, while my scene (arguably) built characterization, it wasn't necessary as a lead to the next scene—which is an action sequence that pretty much reshapes the character's world.

(I'm assuming #4 is Get Out of Your Own Way. If it's Make Something @#$%ing Happen, then the above still applies.)

 

[A. E. Lowan]

Not because it's not action, but because it's too many words for a cute little scene that might make better "downtime between awesomeness," as Phil put it in his article. (Not an exact quote.)

It might not be an exact quote, but now I'm in love with "downtime between awesomeness" as both a phrase and a concept!

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

I quite like it. The point I agree with most strongly is number five - getting the f*** out of the way of your story. He's right on the money here. As a reader when I read a story I read a story. I'm not particularly interested in the literary merit of the prose. I don't read James Joyce as he says. I read a story. And if even the most brilliant prose gets in the way of me falling under the spell of the story, it's a failure.

I also like his view that character is everything. I'm not sure he's completely right. Certainly I think a lot of hard sci fi seems to try and do away with this element to an extent and you sometimes end up with something that reads almost like a fictionalised newspaper report. Witness descriptions, historical accounts but little in the way of actual human conection. Which is ironic in a way since one of the things historical scholars have been actively trying to do is bring historical figures to life.

The one I would take issue with is the totally overwriting. Sure it does happen. But it is a matter of style more than anything else. Some people want to do major descriptive narrative, and some people want to read it. This is especially true in the epic fantasy world. I mean would you take Stephen Donaldson's Thomas Covenant and pair back the word build and characterisation. And if you were brutal could probably strip the books down by half. But should you? Would what you were left with even be a book? And what about Moby Dick where the characterisation is everything? Or Tolkein?

Points to think about for certain. But as I've said before - there are no hard and fast rules to writing.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

My story has a much better start now that I scrapped my first scene, and yeah, it was Get Out of My Own Way and Make Something Happen that got me to rethink keeping a scene that I kinda liked. The one I have now is a scene I'm excited about.

 

[kayd_mon]

The trouble with all this advice that says to trim, trim, trim, ignores the fact that nothing that sells actually does that. If everyone did, books would max out at 100 pages, and that's for the complicated stuff. Many if these blog posts neglect to tell you that their own advice should be taken with reservations.

 

[BWFoster78]

Heh. Terry Bisson would not be pleased with #3.

Feo,

I would suspect that Terry Bisson would agree completely with Chuck's #3 as stated. A statement that a scifi short story should revolve around an idea does not mean that the story doesn't need to be filtered through a character.

Regarding #5, I see it all the time from newb writers.

 

[BWFoster78]

The trouble with all this advice that says to trim, trim, trim, ignores the fact that nothing that sells actually does that. If everyone did, books would max out at 100 pages, and that's for the complicated stuff. Many if these blog posts neglect to tell you that their own advice should be taken with reservations.

kayd_mon,

Did you read what he's advocating trimming?

You are using too many words to say too few things. And the words you’re using are too big, or poorly chosen, or feel awkward. You’re using exposition where you don’t need any. You’re invoking description that is redundant or unnecessary. You’re giving your characters a wealth of mechanical details and actions that go well-beyond a few gestures and into the territory of telegraphing every eyebrow arch, every lip twitch, every action beat of picking up a coffee mug, blowing on it, sipping from it, setting it back down, picking it back up, drinking from it, on and on.

These are things that I see in poorly written self published novels, not in most high quality works.

 

[kayd_mon]

I make no arguments for quality, but pick up a random bestseller, and see if it doesn't contain plenty of words that could be erased without compromising the plot or story.

There is only one rule: be entertaining. Your story can buck all the writing advice there is, but if it is entertaining, then it won't matter at all.

No one writes right to the point. Classic authors of beloved and studied literature? Never ever. Modern authors? Not really. There has to be a balance, of course. The best advice in this blog is to not be boring.

 

[Mythopoet]

As usual, all of these "problems" are a matter of taste.

 

[Steerpike]

As usual, all of these "problems" are a matter of taste.

Yes. But we humans often tend toward insecurity and feel a need to frame our tastes or preferences as objectively superior.

 

[BWFoster78]

I make no arguments for quality, but pick up a random bestseller, and see if it doesn't contain plenty of words that could be erased without compromising the plot or story.

Per the quote I posted, though, that is not what Chuck was referring to. If you're discussing a completely separate issue, fine, but I took your post to be a reference to the OP's link.

Regarding extra words in general:

I think it is a good idea for a new author to practice economy of words. That being said, some degree of extra words is unnoticeable to most readers. Enough extra words, and the issues that Chuck addressed, detract enough from a work, imo, to matter.

 

[BWFoster78]

Yes. But we humans often tend toward insecurity and feel a need to frame our tastes or preferences as objectively superior.

In the context of Chuck's post, he's saying, "These are the biggest problems I see from newb authors." Those are the types of issues that are causing him to reject stories.

If you want an accurate takeaway, how about this: If you're submitting to a market that will be judged by professionals for publication, avoid doing these things...

To me, that's exactly the context of what he said.

 

[Steerpike]

In the context of Chuck's post, he's saying, "These are the biggest problems I see from newb authors." Those are the types of issues that are causing him to reject stories.

If you want an accurate takeaway, how about this: If you're submitting to a market that will be judged by professionals for publication, avoid doing these things...

To me, that's exactly the context of what he said.

If you're submitting to a market for professional publication, you read the market and familiarize yourself with the sorts of things the editors accept, then decide whether it is right for your piece. Not all editors are going to have the same views as Wendig, so I'd approach markets on a case-by-case basis.

 

[BWFoster78]

If you're submitting to a market for professional publication, you read the market and familiarize yourself with the sorts of things the editors accept, then decide whether it is right for your piece. Not all editors are going to have the same views as Wendig, so I'd approach markets on a case-by-case basis.

Steerpike,

I understand that, for some reason, you don't want there to be any absolutes when it comes to writing. I can't find any professional editor or writer that advocates any of the things that Chuck pointed out in the paragraph that I quoted as being "okay" for any professional publication.

If you can find such an okay, I'll stand corrected.

Until then, no.

Are you seriously saying that you can find a professional market that finds it okay to do those things?

This isn't a taste thing or a subjective thing. Look at self published books that are written by people who've spent no time actually studying how to write fiction. You'll find those issues that Chuck pointed out. Look at anything put out that was passed by a professional editor. You won't find those issues in anything but, perhaps, the most nitpicky sense.

 

[Feo Takahari]

This isn't a taste thing or a subjective thing. Look at self published books that are written by people who've spent no time actually studying how to write fiction. You'll find those issues that Chuck pointed out. Look at anything put out that was passed by a professional editor. You won't find those issues in anything but, perhaps, the most nitpicky sense.

Does Terry Pratchett count? He certainly likes to show off with his wordplay to a point that would go against Wendig's #5. There are times when this becomes a fault (he can't just say that revolutions are unsuccessful, he has to say that they're called revolutions because they always come round again), but there are more times when this creates humor and interest in a scene that could otherwise have been boring.

(Then again, I would never advise a new writer to try to emulate Terry Pratchett. That style is hard.)

 

[BWFoster78]

Feo,

To be honest with you, I don't think you have any understanding of the issues that Chuck is actually addressing. I really think that you would do well to, instead of dismissing the advice, try to truly dig deeper and understand it.

 

[Steerpike]

@BWFoster:

First Page, Overwriting, Character Above All Else, Make Something Happen?

Yeah, I can find plenty of professionally-published that ignore one or more of those things. Maybe most of the constant disagreement on this subject boils down to your lack of exposure to various types of fiction. It sounds like you a read a very limited subset of fiction and then somehow come to believe that your experience is representative of the entire world of literature.

As I've stated before, one problem with "rules" in fiction is that any given rule is empirically false (in terms of being a rule) when I can go point to some professionally-published work that disregards it.

Lastly, "Get the **** Out of the Way of Your Story?" I just started a new book, which was very highly reviewed by a number of reviewers and also professionally published, and not only is the book very descriptive and quite slow to start in terms of any action, but the author inserts herself right into the middle of the story at least three of four times and I'm only 30 pages in. The movement of the story even stops for a bit of authorial intrusion. And it's not like the author is even supposed to be the narrator - it is purely artifice.

So all of this is crap to the extent that you want to call these things absolutes. If you want to view them as recommendations for writing a certain kind of story, then fine.

I think you need to read more if you really think all writing that gets past professional editors conforms to these rules (or any others).