Stephen King's On Writing

[Allyourbase]

I'm not a Stephen King aficionado, but I read all kinds of stuff, and when I heard he wrote a writer's guide, I decided to check it out. It's mostly a memoir, but there's some solid writing advice in there too. So I thought to share some things that were striking to me here, and see what you guys have to say.

Of course he says the things everyone says: read a lot, write a lot - which... I don't, unless you count the fact that I work with text for a living, then I do. Don't go for passives. Avoid clichés. Show, don't tell. Make dialogue sound realistic. And so on. But here's something else:

He's not a fan of plotting. He argues a strong enough situation renders the whole question of plot moot. He likens writing to uncovering a fossil. He starts with situation, characters follow, and then he writes the story wherever this takes him. ("Why be such a control freak? Sooner or later every story comes out somewhere."

I happen to agree here, but lately I've wondered if the lack of plotting was the reason I have a hard time writing story series.

Ironically, he urges writers to be brief... *glances at his novels the size of a fist* Apparently, when revising his pieces, he shortens them significantly. One of the things he has issues with... is using adverbs. Especially adverbs in dialogue attribution. And don't you try and cheat by "shooting the attribution verb full of steroids". He thinks it's silly, redundant (show, don't tell, right? and especially, don't show AND tell) and often cliché. He will usually edit them out - 'he said' and 'she said' are just fine.

I'm guilty of using adverbs and attribution verbs other than 'he said'. Too much, maybe, also.

So I'll ask you guys: what are your thoughts about this? Plotting? Adverbs? Attributions on steroids?

 

[JuneSummers]

I think there should be a general idea of what the plot is going to be, but I write mostly on a whim and find myself getting stuck if I need to write something just because the outline says this or that is going to happen. So I guess plots are useful, but if I find myself going in a different direction I just follow my nose and see where I end up.

As for -ly words, I tend to write them in the first draft and then filter them out later by rephrasing or replacing them with something else. I do try to avoid "purple prose." It annoys me to no end when I have to read it myself so I wouldn't want to put other people through it either.

I'm also guilty of using other words than "said," but I think it can be useful to add more flavor to dialogue without adding a lot of words so I think I'll keep doing it, even if it's considered to be a bad idea. I think as long as they are words that actually have to do with talking it should be alright, like told, answered, replied, argued, insisted, etc.

 

[BuckyDuckman]

Woohoo!

I wondered the same thing about adverbs after reading that book!

Plotting first: I just finished my half of co-authoring a story with a writer who wanted to meticioulously plot ever part of the story and create character bio's much more intricate and detailed than I believed necessary. I indulged him, part out of courtesy and part out of wanting to see if it helped. For me, it was hassle. My characters evolve as I wrte. I learn about them as I write. Sometimes, I'm surprised to realize, "Hey, this person used to ..." I didn't know that when I started writing, but I learned it as I learned the person. In a way, it's a bit like getting to know a new friend, a process of discovery.

As for Mr. King - who I used to enjoy as an author - I felt his unabridged version of "The Stand" was much better than the abridged version originally release and from what I understand, "The Stand" was the one book where he did the most plotting, outlining, etc. Otherwise, I think he's a divisive author/hack, depending on what you want from your writing.

For me, stories start with an idea in mind. What do I want to say? What's the story? Using stories I've posted, here were the starting points for them:

• 
  What would it take to convince to college coeds to visit a glory hole? Can I make that plausible?

• Story "Doing It for You" was based on a forum suggest, so I don't believe it's believable. (Fun, but not very believable.) Meanwhile, its follow-up, "Doing It for You, Aftermath" was much more fun to write. I knew the characters and what had happened to them. Much more fun and interesting.

• "The Girl with a Past" received some criticism about one of the main characters, Nick, as being too understanding of his girlfriend's past, but that's exactly what I wanted to explore. Could a genuinely "nice guy" date a former porn star? What would that be like?

Too often, my characters arrive to me right out of central casting. I'm light on body descriptions, giving people enough differences so the reader can tell them apart.

As for adverbs, Stephen King fucked me up with his advice to avoid "-ly" modifiers! As a former playwrite, I'm good with dialog. I've read enough sloppy dialog that I'm careful with identifying who is talking and when. And, I know not every phrase is just "said." Showing the differences in how something is being said without adding an -ly modifier is challenging to me. I avoid "swifties" such as, "Turn off the light," he said darkly. But that's about it.

 

[PennLady]

I always recommend "On Writing" when people ask me. It's been a long time since I read it, but I remember enjoying it on various levels and I should probably read it again.

I remember two things. First, he advocates only using "said" as a dialogue tag. I'm sure he violates his own rule on that sometimes, as we all do, but it's a good one to remember. Second, the adverbs. I almost never use them except in dialogue, although I will admit from time to time the only word that makes the sentence or situation what I want is an adverb. I don't think it's bad to use them once in a while, but people do go overboard.

I think it's easy in erotica to use words like "slowly," "quickly," "languidly," too often, especially in a sex scene. So when I write, I eliminate those words and a few others (really, finally, actually) except from dialogue.

The primary thing I've found is -- 99% of the time, you don't need them. You can tell how a character says something by the dialogue, or by the situation that the author has set up. If they are fighting, then it's likely that the person talking isn't laughing, for instance.

For dialogue tags, while I agree with King that "said" does the job almost all the time, I use fewer and fewer tags. My editor doesn't like them, especially in a two-person scenes. So I tend to use descriptive sentences after dialogue.

I.e., "I can't believe it." She shook her head as she looked at him.

I also agree that sometimes another speech word -- yelled, called, etc. -- can be used in place of said. It just depends on the author and the scene.

 

[Trinique_Fire]

I like Stephen King. A lot. I've never read his writer's guide, but I've read a lot of his other books, and one of my favorite things about his stories is how he stitches together bits and pieces from some of his books so that they cross over. For instance, in Misery, it's mentioned how the caretaker of the Overlook Hotel went crazy and died up at the hotel during the winter. Another example is the evil prevalent throughout "It" shows up in various other books as well, sometimes in different forms.

King's a cool guy, indeed.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

ON WRITING is a waste of time for learning how to write. I own all of the HOW TO WRITE books, and none of them advance your writing skills much.

What helps me is reading lotsa good writing. Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings comes to mind (SOUTH MOON UNDER) and Raymond Chandler (HE FOUND THE LITTLE PLACES INSIDE YOUR HEAD WHERE HE DIDNT BELONG) and Pete Dexter and David Morrell (HE NOTICED THE CURVE OF HER BOTTOM AS SHE CLIMBED THE STAIRS) and George V. Higgins. Higgins is reputed to be the best dialogue writer ever.

Read really good poetry. The very best writers construct prose thats almost poetic.

Watch good movies.

Plots make writing cohesive and coherent.

 

[sr71plt]

I enjoyed reading On Writing, but more for the memoir aspect. I love hearing/reading what is behind an author's stories and her/his writing in general. King's guidance (I think he'd blanch at hearing them called "rules") are all elements I keep in my head while I'm writing, which I think tempers my writing, but if I'm initially drawn to use an adverb or some other dialogue slug than "said," I'll do so. For nearly every "rule" in writing, there are eleventy-twelve exceptions that make the flow and rhythm more natural and elegant--and that preserve the author's voice and mood while writing.

I'm not sure I see a separation between "situation" and "plot." Situation is pretty much the standard creative writing term "dilemma" and plot is where it moves from there to change/resolution. To the extent it what is meant is mapping out a plot in detail before writing, I guess I too start with situation and, with an idea of what I want the change/resolution be. I let the plot unfold itself as I write. My subconcious has mostly done whatever plotting beforehand, although when it surfaces as a story idea, I might worry it a bit before I sit down to write it. But other than doing some background research on scene and character's names, when I sit down to write, it's to write the story itself.

Although I make some changes in a review, I don't hack out any word that ends in ly just because "death to adverbs" is some other person's idea of good writing. Rather than going into a review with the idea of cutting away everything but the chunk of gold, I go into it with the idea of doing as little as possible to destroy the voice and compulsion that went into the first draft.

 

[Allyourbase]

I think there should be a general idea of what the plot is going to be, but I write mostly on a whim and find myself getting stuck if I need to write something just because the outline says this or that is going to happen.

My characters evolve as I wrte. I learn about them as I write. Sometimes, I'm surprised to realize, "Hey, this person used to ..." I didn't know that when I started writing, but I learned it as I learned the person. In a way, it's a bit like getting to know a new friend, a process of discovery.

Yea, this. That happens to me. I start out with a general idea of where things will end, and halfway throught it doesn't feel right, and my characters just take on a life on it's own. It's interesting, and it makes the act of writing more enjoyable. Somehow, plotting just feels like it takes out the fun, or what?

- And tnx for the insight in how you started your stories, Bucky. It is somewhat similar to why I write: I often start out to explore particularly difficult emotions, not necessarily situations. For example: what would it feel like when your D/s-playpartner uses something too touchy for you to play with? (I write BDSM/nonconsent stories, those really ask for working with the hard questions, imo.)

I do try to avoid "purple prose." It annoys me to no end when I have to read it myself so I wouldn't want to put other people through it either.

I fear I'm more forgiving when it comes to my own writing than when it concerns others... it might be a lack of distance, though.

The adverbs. I almost never use them except in dialogue, although I will admit from time to time the only word that makes the sentence or situation what I want is an adverb. I don't think it's bad to use them once in a while, but people do go overboard. I think it's easy in erotica to use words like "slowly," "quickly," "languidly," too often, especially in a sex scene. So when I write, I eliminate those words and a few others (really, finally, actually) except from dialogue. The primary thing I've found is -- 99% of the time, you don't need them.

King indeed has made me more aware of the use of adverbs. But, it might just be me, the 'slowly', 'quickly' and the like still feel in place when writing erotica. Only now they feel like a guilty pleasure. Can it be I am ignoring rules/guidelines I do agree with, because I somehow still regard writing erotica as 'not really serious writing'? (For myself that is. Though, the amount of effort I put in stories should make me feel otherwise.)

I like Stephen King. A lot. I've never read his writer's guide, but I've read a lot of his other books, and one of my favorite things about his stories is how he stitches together bits and pieces from some of his books so that they cross over.

Oh yeah, that is admirable, very much so.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

That adverb dictum has to be taken with a big grain of salt. What he's really warning against, I think, is (1) the overuse of adverbs in attributives, a beginner's mistake lampooned in the form of humor known as "Tom Swifties" (i.e. "My hair's on fire!" he said heatedly. "My pencils too dull," he said bluntly...) And (2) using adverbs to tell, rather than showing the action and letting the reader draw his or her own conclusions.

"He walked away sadly" is bad. "He walked away slowly, shoulders slumped" is better, because it forces you to see the action and figure out for yourself what the character's feeling. Making readers infer and interpret what's going on is the best way to involve them in the story. It's the same technique used in movies.

I write from situations too. By situation, I mean that I start with an image of specific characters involved in some specific action in some specific setting with some specific mood. Then I start writing a way for them to get into that situation and see where it goes. I rarely know what's going to happen. Like King says, the story reveals itself as I write it and the characters and their motivations come alive.

Eudora Welty, a master of the short story, said the whole reason she wrote was "to see what happens" in a given situation

 

[Allyourbase]

My subconcious has mostly done whatever plotting beforehand, although when it surfaces as a story idea, I might worry it a bit before I sit down to write it. But other than doing some background research on scene and character's names, when I sit down to write, it's to write the story itself.

This is how I write poetry (and, maybe even how I write in general). I don't start writing until I have constructed something in my head. When it ends up on the page, it's already finished. For stories, I need a couple of sittings with some subconscious thinking-time in between.

For nearly every "rule" in writing, there are eleventy-twelve exceptions that make the flow and rhythm more natural and elegant--and that preserve the author's voice and mood while writing.

ON WRITING is a waste of time for learning how to write. I own all of the HOW TO WRITE books, and none of them advance your writing skills much. What helps me is reading lotsa good writing. (...)Read really good poetry. The very best writers construct prose thats almost poetic. Watch good movies. Plots make writing cohesive and coherent.

Hahahahah. Agreed, agreed! Never overestimate writing guides. I do, however, find it useful to pick up a way of looking at writing that helps me distinguish why I like or dislike certain books or poetry.

I once heard Terry Pratchett say that to write good fantasy, do not read fantasy.
Or you'll produce more of the same, but it will feel like cheap rip-offs. Read all kinds of other books. Fiction, but preferably non-fiction. I read a lot of non-fiction, just because I like it, and I have to say, the dude might be right; it gives one the most interesting ideas (well, me, at least).

 

[Allyourbase]

That adverb dictum has to be taken with a big grain of salt. What he's really warning against, I think, is (1) the overuse of adverbs in attributives. And (2) using adverbs to tell, rather than showing the action and letting the reader draw his or her own conclusions. "He walked away sadly" is bad. "He walked away slowly, shoulders slumped" is better

Exactly, maybe that is why the whole 'adverbs are ugly' thing struck me; it feels like it's pointing out a symptom. The 'problem' that adverbs point to, is a lack of 'show, don't tell' - which, as you show, can also be done while using adverbs...

Does an adverb irk more when it forces a judgement or conclusion upon the reader, and less when used in a neutral fashion? Show, don't tell is supposed to be relatively neutral, 'objective', right?

Hm. Insightful. Thanks.

Eudora Welty, a master of the short story, said the whole reason she wrote was "to see what happens" in a given situation

Yes, this.

ETA: looking at it this way, also a lack of 'show, don't tell' is a symptom, but ok, you probably get the point.

 

[Cruel2BKind]

I like Stephen King. A lot. I've never read his writer's guide, but I've read a lot of his other books, and one of my favorite things about his stories is how he stitches together bits and pieces from some of his books so that they cross over. For instance, in Misery, it's mentioned how the caretaker of the Overlook Hotel went crazy and died up at the hotel during the winter. Another example is the evil prevalent throughout "It" shows up in various other books as well, sometimes in different forms.

King's a cool guy, indeed.

If you haven't read under the dome yet, read it.

There is a connection to one of his other books that BLEW MY FUCKING MIND when I read it

 

[PennLady]

If you haven't read under the dome yet, read it.

There is a connection to one of his other books that BLEW MY FUCKING MIND when I read it

I have read it, but I have let others slide, so I'm not sure what the connection was -- could you PM me and tell me?

Back to adverbs, I find a couple of things when writers use them. First, they tend to be repetitive. A person will write something like "he strode purposefully." Well, yes, he did -- if you're striding anywhere, you have a purpose because a stride is a confident type of walk. I'll see "wandered aimlessly," and again yes -- that's what wandering is. If you weren't wandering, you'd likely be striding.

As for slowly, quickly, etc., in the sex scenes, it is a challenge to get away from them. But I try for phrases like "he dragged his fingers over her skin." A reader can put their own speed on that.

Another place I find adverbs overused are dialogue tags. I've read stories where an author seemed incapable of letting dialogue happen without an adverb, no matter what the speech word was. That's flat out annoying. I can tell from the dialogue or the scene how the speaker is speaking, and I don't need an adverb to tell me.

However, all that said, I am not saying to never use them. Just use them judiciously.

 

[Ironiclaconic]

All style rules can be taken too far. I find overuse of "said" tags to put me to sleep in the writing of others. But the key is "overuse". Same with adverbs. I believe fast paced scenes should use crisp prose avoiding drawn out metaphors and introspection. As such I use "quickly" because it's to-the-point in a short sentence.

I think the single best writing guide is George Orwell's "Politics and the English Language". It's short and freely available on the net.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

This is how I write poetry (and, maybe even how I write in general). I don't start writing until I have constructed something in my head. When it ends up on the page, it's already finished. For stories, I need a couple of sittings with some subconscious thinking-time in between.





Hahahahah. Agreed, agreed! Never overestimate writing guides. I do, however, find it useful to pick up a way of looking at writing that helps me distinguish why I like or dislike certain books or poetry.

I once heard Terry Pratchett say that to write good fantasy, do not read fantasy.
Or you'll produce more of the same, but it will feel like cheap rip-offs. Read all kinds of other books. Fiction, but preferably non-fiction. I read a lot of non-fiction, just because I like it, and I have to say, the dude might be right; it gives one the most interesting ideas (well, me, at least).

I fill notebooks with snippets of prose that grabs me, then I autopsy them for why they work so well.

I agree that non-fiction is a goldmine of excellence.