World, Writing, Wealth discussion

Have you studied writing? Taken the classes, read the books, listened to your stuff read out loud? And learned about scene structure, story structure, reveals, turning points, brevity, insightful reveals, subtext, interactive settings, etc? While reading, do you ever get the urge to critique stories that don't hit on all eight cylinders (according to what's taught by teachers of composition)? Would you rather review the work of others who've invested the time and tried to incorporate what was taught? Are there enough of such "learned" writers to form a group to review each other's work?

A nice thread title -:)

Thanks, Nik. You in?

Not sure I can commit at the moment, but good luck to all who'll participate!

Yes. But less so since I have started writing my own novels. I believe that it is almost impossible to write a good story without throwing in some strange or even bizarre stuff. Sometimes when I am inclined to criticize the way an author handled a situation, I find that the author did what was necessary to make the story work.
I will point out that is not always the case. Comparing two best sellers that I have recently read. I gave one of them a good grade even though I found some of the plot twists outrageous. I gave the other one a thumbs down for two reasons. The back cover text promised some things that were not delivered and even worse the heroine was a door mat at the beginning of the book and in the end she passed on opportunities to find a new more interesting life in order to go back to her post as door mat. I really wanted to re-write the ending on that one.
When I needed a preposterous outcome in my first novel, I comforted myself that what I was proposing was no more outrageous than what my favorite best-selling author were putting in their books.
OOOPS - misread the question. I think that you can overthink a novel. If you consciously put in all the little gadgets you will probably ruin the story. Homer certainly did not study composition before he came up with the Iliad. The Old Testament writers didn't have study guides to tell them how to write. I have read that Charlotte Bronte and her sisters wrote because they had nothing better to do and Charlotte wrote Jane Eyre on a bet that she could produce a novel with a female protagonist. I think it's best to have a writer with a good story and some mastery of technique.

What will interest more the readers? A novel written in perfect English and with no grammatical errors, but with a story stuck in a straight-jacket? Or a story that may not follow all the official rules of English but that tells something new and interesting in an entertaining way?

I frankly don't believe that you can use your full imagination while writing a novel if you are constantly obsessed with grammatical perfection. All the time you spend asking yourself how to turn your sentences to follow grammar to the 'T' is less time you spend thinking about new plots and twists for your novel. Also, you may consider that not all authors are native English speakers, or use UK English.

Well, writers do like to talk. But ... any out there who agree with the great writers who call it craft that took them much effort to learn? And who'd like to form a group for reviewing?

Jeffery wrote: "Well, writers do like to talk. But ... any out there who agree with the great writers who call it craft that took them much effort to learn? And who'd like to form a group for reviewing?"

Hey Jeffery!

I have done a lot of learning about craft. I took several classes and have read through hundreds of articles. And I think review groups are the place you learn the most. 1 hour reviewing someone else's work is like 10 hours of reviewing your own. It's easier to see the mistakes of other people's writing, and you walk away with a lot of insightful commentary when people read your own work and give you detailed feedback, not just a passing "it was okay" or "I didn't like it."

That being said, I'm already part of three critique groups. I think they're that helpful, I really do.

If you have a hard time finding a group to get into, send me a message and I'll talk to the groups I'm a part of. However, you might want to check your local area for crit groups to see if you can meet people in person. It also helps with deadlines (at least in my experience). :3

Thanks, SA. Good point about reading the work of others. That said, while fresh feedback could spur me to make fresh changes, what I really had in mind was receiving reviews of published work to post here, Amazon, etc. Do any of your groups write that kind of review?

I remember taking a creative writing course in college. On a group project we came up with a story about a creature kept chained up in the basement, and it was quietly suggested we scrap it because the professor had a special needs child and it may have hit a little too close to home...

Michel wrote: I frankly don't believe that you can use your full imagination while writing a novel if you are constantly obsessed with grammatical perfection.

While I don’t disagree with this statement, I’m not sure I find it practical.

The statement suggests that English grammar is so complex that it requires “obsession” before a writer can master it. I don’t believe this is true. Some aspects of English grammar are difficult to grasp at first, but there’s nothing so complex that it can’t be mastered with a bit of time and practice. Plus, as a reader, I can usually distinguish between a writer who purposefully breaks grammatical rules to enrich a story — which can only be accomplished if that writer fully understands the rules — versus a writer who breaks the rules because they don’t know the rules.

Grammar isn't the most fascinating part of language, but knowing grammatical rules only improves a writer’s abilities; grammar allows writers to express more complex ideas and minute meanings, or to break those rules in interesting and effective ways.

I concede that imagination will suffer if grammar is the main focus. I’m just not sure grammar is as difficult to comprehend as people imply.

It may be so for native English speakers, Daniel, but not all authors have English as first language. Try write a novel in French and tell me how easy it is to catch all the subtleties of another language's grammar. The problem is that I don't have a second lifetime available to 'master' English grammar. I do my best by reading a lot in English and practicing, but I just don't have the money or time to return to formal studies. Again, native English speakers are not the majority in the World, far from it.

Michel wrote: "It may be so for native English speakers, Daniel, but not all authors have English as first language. Try write a novel in French and tell me how easy it is to catch all the subtleties"

Alongside English, I also write in German (grammatically more difficult for a native English speaker than French)*. You're right; it isn't easy catching all the subtleties. When writing in German, I must pay more attention to the grammar than I would like, but when I focus on and get comfortable with a grammatical rule, I can eventually stop thinking about it. The grammar becomes second nature.

I didn't realize you weren't a native English speaker, which likely indicates that your English grammar is pretty good. My only point was that grammar in general doesn't require obsession or a lifetime to master. If people stop thinking of grammar as something difficult, they might see that it doesn't need to be something difficult.

*This is according to the Foreign Service Institute (FSI)