"The Opposite of Kill Your Darlings"

[Bramblethorn]

Some good reading here from Chuck Wendig:

Kill your darlings.

It is, as with all pieces of writing advice, good advice.

Until it’s not.

Meaning, no one single piece of writing advice is a one-size-fits-all unitasker. Nearly all pieces of writing advice — with maybe the exception of FINISH YOUR SHIT — can easily be Judo-flipped onto its back. Nearly every piece of writing advice and its opposite is true, at some point, for many writers. And it’s vital we not be rigorous with what we feel are these chestnuts of writing advice...

 

[Alice_Rosaleen]

I tend to think "murder your darlings" is a general warning not to be self-indulgent. But there's definitely no universal rule to writing except always finish your sen

 

[JasonClearwater]

Some good reading here from Chuck Wendig:

Even 'write dialogue correctly' gets flipped when you look at the novel The Road by Cormac McCarthy.

Although, reading it, all I could think was, interesting story, but it's fucking annoying having to figure who's saying what. Most of the time it's fairly obvious, but there are times when I can't understand why an editor would let it slide.

He was just hungry, Papa. He's going to die.

He's going to die anyway.

He's so scared, Papa.

The man squatted and looked at him. I'm scared, he said. Do you understand? I'm scared.

The boy didn't answer. He just sat there with his head down, sobbing.

You're not the one who has to worry about everything. (ambiguous)

The boy said something but he couldn't understand him. What? He said.

He looked up, his wet and grimy face. Yes I am, he said. I am the one.

― Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Now, a pedant might argue there's a lot more ambiguity than I've pointed out, but while I would have to speed re-read some of those sentences, that's the only one that's really jarringly irritatingly ambiguous.

Maybe I'm just lazy, but I like things to be obvious.

 

[Alice_Rosaleen]

I looked at it this way to figure it out:

You're not the one who has to worry about everything. (ambiguous)

The boy said something but he couldn't understand him. What? He said.

He looked up, his wet and grimy face. Yes I am, he said. I am the one.

 

[JasonClearwater]

I looked at it this way to figure it out:

You're not the one who has to worry about everything. (ambiguous)

The boy said something but he couldn't understand him. What? He said.

He looked up, his wet and grimy face. Yes I am, he said. I am the one.

It's not ambiguous on a second read, but it was irritating to reach the line below it and have to readjust.

 

[Alice_Rosaleen]

It's not ambiguous on a second read, but it was irritating to reach the line below it and have to readjust.

Ah, I see. Sorry. I'm not a big fan of "naked" dialog, and it's totes ambigoats, but it can be a powerful choice stylistically.

 

[THROBBS]

nurture your nemesis.

 

[KindofHere]

..............

 

[Alice_Rosaleen]

Kill your darlings has to do with editing. Oh no ... oh no, I've made some terrible relationship mistakes.

You literally loved someone to death?

 

[KindofHere]

.................

 

[Alice_Rosaleen]

No I just killed ... never mind.

Maybe it was just a little death...

 

[SamScribble]

Maybe it was just a little death...

La petit mort (somehow it sounds better in French )

 

[Hypoxia]

Killing-off one or a few sympathetic characters creates tragic tears. Killing-off the whole cast clears the stage for something new. The opposite of killing your characters is to let them breed, proliferate, spread like cancer. That can be fun, too.

 

[Sir_Maveric]

Quote:
He was just hungry, Papa. He's going to die.

He's going to die anyway.

He's so scared, Papa.

The man squatted and looked at him. I'm scared, he said. Do you understand? I'm scared.

The boy didn't answer. He just sat there with his head down, sobbing.

You're not the one who has to worry about everything. (ambiguous)

The boy said something but he couldn't understand him. What? He said.

He looked up, his wet and grimy face. Yes I am, he said. I am the one.

― Cormac McCarthy, The Road

---------------------------------------

I can't read things like that. Drives me batty. I overlook the he said/she said in stories as I read but my mind registers them and things make sense. If I have to wait two lines to figure out who's saying what then I lose the rhythm and tend to give up. I find I have to do a lot of 'he said' in my writings and cringe every time, but I know it will make for an easier go for readers. Especially when there are more than two characters in the conversation.

 

[Oblimo]

Killing-off one or a few sympathetic characters creates tragic tears. Killing-off the whole cast clears the stage for something new. The opposite of killing your characters is to let them breed, proliferate, spread like cancer. That can be fun, too.

The darlings you’re supposed to kill aren’t characters, though.

 

[KindofHere]

...............

 

[Bramblethorn]

Even 'write dialogue correctly' gets flipped when you look at the novel The Road by Cormac McCarthy.

Although, reading it, all I could think was, interesting story, but it's fucking annoying having to figure who's saying what. Most of the time it's fairly obvious, but there are times when I can't understand why an editor would let it slide.

Yeah, I haven't read the book, but from the excerpt you posted I get the feeling it was successful despite and not because of that particular stylistic choice.

Edit: As far as the article goes, I enjoyed this paragraph.

More to the point, Kill Your Darlings (besides from being a great band name) is 101-class writing advice. It’s entry-level, as are most of the authorial platitudes. Show Don’t Tell? Sure, great, until the time comes when you need to tell the reader something. Write What You Know? Go for it, until you realize you don’t know a whole lotta shit, and if you take that advice too literally you’ll never write a goddamn thing that isn’t you sitting at the keyboard writing about writing about writing. Never Use Adverbs, For They Are Wizard Prisons! Great, great advice, perfectly golden always and forever, oh, except the words “always” and “forever” are motherfucking adverbs.

Chuck is fun to read, and he speaks a lot of truth. I think I first encountered him through this conversation, which is glorious.

 

[Hypoxia]

The darlings you’re supposed to kill aren’t characters, though.

Of course kill your babies means to write that cleverly-worded passage, then immediately delete it. But I like absurd literalist tangents. So sue me.

I rather like to leave my 'darlings' out there. I like being clever and jarring occasionally. I like breaking flow so readers may take a moment to consider what they just read. Nobody pays me to write otherwise..

And I have no delusions of literary mastery. I don't ooze timeless prose. These are bits of fiction with more or less sex. Vivid images and good orthography are enough for me.

Characters are more expendable than clever writing that tickles me. I guess that's the opposite of "kill your darlings". Indulge the little bastards.

 

[oggbashan]

This is the original quote from one of Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch's books about Writing:

Whenever you feel an impulse to perpetrate a piece of exceptionally fine writing, obey it—whole-heartedly—and delete it before sending your manuscript to press. Murder your darlings. [sic]

On the Art of Writing: Lectures Delivered in the University of Cambridge, 1913–1914
Often misattributed, e.g. to Hemingway, Faulkner, and others, or shortened to 'Kill your darlings.'

I have the complete set of books. Q's advice is extensive and that statement was only one short passage in a long lecture.

 

[KindofHere]

...........

 

[Alice_Rosaleen]

Indulge the little bastards.

^My new writing motto