Breaking the Law

[hmmnmm]

Vanity Fair comes to mind.
It is supposed to be one of the great literary pieces of history, but I could not get through it. Mainly because of the way the writer kept interjecting his observations in first person (although if I remember, maybe incorrectly, the writer was the narrator or something). It irritated me much, primarily because of the fact that I was going along in the story. And it is not that the writer did such a thing - just the way it was done, and the extent with which it was done and the way it came across to me the reader, then, some years ago; but now we get into a reader's personal preferences, rather than the writer's choice which is a bit off topic.

 

[EnglishMuffin]

The aside, wink, intermission comment from writer to reader: sometimes it can work wonders, sometimes it can destroy the whole thing. A matter of what to do where and when - and when not to do what where and when.

uh-huh

 

[sincerely_helene]

Thanks everyone, for all your feedback. I learnt quite a bit from this thread and am glad it was able to remain on topic. I'm sure it will prove to be a useful refference to me for future writing ventures. {{Bookmark.}}

You guys rock!

 

[cantdog]

Some of us rock, some boogie.

 

[sincerely_helene]

Some of us rock, some boogie.

Nobody Maceranas anymore.

 

[carsonshepherd]

Sentence fragments. Short choppy sentences. Verb phrases not separated by commas: Want it need it...

Inventing adverbs that don't exist, apparently: wavery being a recent one. Is inventing words conceited? Or just creative? Is there even a difference?

Making statements out of sentences that appear to be questions. Read: "Who is James." Someone insisted this HAD to be a question because of the word who. But I maintain it's a statement, because the character who said it knew exactly who James was. Read it aloud, with the question mark and without. It's a statement.

In order to manipulate language, you have to break the rules in my opinion, but you have to do it subtly, in a way that doesn't distract the reader.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

I tend to have a Bradbury outlook on the rules. If it sounds good breaking the rules, fuck the rules.

Brackets are there when you need them. In my novel, the narrator is a character in his own right and will include bracketed statements of his private assurances or speculations while he is describing the ins and outs of what's going on. He also breaks the laws by getting confused by his own terminology and the story thread and by referring to the eventual readers though not until the very end do the real readers learn who this referred party truly is.

Anyway, the rule I go with is if the broken law doesn't sound bad to you or if you can play with it or mock it enough to make everyone accept it then all is well.

If a fragment sentence punches right, even the most strict english buff will flex their knuckles and reluctantly say keep it in. If the deus-ex-machina is done cleverly and as a self-effacing pun, it'll sit better than if it was just thrown out there.

Overall, the point is don't care about the rules. Concentrate more on making it flow right.

 

[cantdog]

I just don't find the rules that difficult.

Breaking the rules works a lot better when it's deliberate. Like the cubists and the other turn of the century art movements. Those people could draw. They simply chose to eschew drafting and see what transpired. Let the cameras capture, let the human mind free itself.

But if they'd had to foreshorten they could have.

A lot of work on lit breaks the rules, but so often it is by default, because the author has no grounding in them to begin with. Ignorant writing is not avant-garde, it is merely ignorant.

 

[Pure]

Anyone allow themselves the adverb which modifies a sentence:
Thankfully, he did not beat me for long. OR more subtle: Thankfully the beating ended after only five minutes.

 

[Guest]

I heard somewhere that you should never use two exclamation marks. Either one, or three. Can't say there's any logic behind it, but it does imo make visual sense. It looks better.

#L

I like five!!!!!

How's about this?????

I break rules, but do so in a deliberate way, so that it's pretty obvious I know the rules, but choose to break them. Fragmented sentences. Beginning a sentence with a modifier. Or even a paragraph!!

And I think it can have a lot of impact.

But only when done sparingly.

Because it can get a bit gimmicky and annoying.

Don't you think???



Oh yes, and on the parentheses issue: I use em dashes--like that. I got over my semi-colon addiction a while back, and even taught myself to give up the run-on sentences.

Lou

 

[domjoe]

lo
ved your POST, lou.!!!!!!!!!!!


Now: Please do to me what you do to the English language.

 

[Guest]

lo
ved your POST, lou.!!!!!!!!!!!


Now: Please do to me what you do to the English language.

I didn't know you were that kinky!!!!

Want butchering, do ya.? Eh, dom JOE?!?!!!

 

[C's Button]

Thank you for the thread, Sincerely. People who did not grow up with this insane language thank you.

Personally, I am addicted to "the Bedford Reader" and "the Bedford Handbook"; they were used by but university I went to for the English Composition classes. I am also likely to pull out my S and W's "Elements of Style" at the least bit of provocation.

I am not yet over my semi colon addiction and I am severely apostrophe-impaired. Technically speaking I know where to put them in a contracted word; the problem I have is which letters to take out? For stuff I have written offline, the spell-checker that comes with Word works for me, but iespell misses at least one word a day. It does not like the apostrophe either, I think. That is sort of sad, since it is the best browser spell checker I have found!

Did anyone else enjoy "Eats, shoots and leaves" as much as I did?

 

[sincerely_helene]

Nice to log on and see some more replies to this, Authors. Some great, useful tips and words of widsom.

C's button: I hear what you are saying, and appreciate the words of gratitude. I still have a long path to travel with regards to understanding the English language myself, and I find puncutation particularly tricky for some reason.

A few months back I edited my first novel, thinking it would be great practice towards correcting my grammatical problems. If i knew then what I know now I would have realized that I just wasn't ready. At least the poor feller is a bad enough writer that he hasn't confronted me on the mistakes I made/left behind.

 

[cantdog]

I liked "Eats, shoots, and leaves." It was cool. But I used to read Richard Lederer, so that doesn't count.

I see apostrophe issues all over the board here, sincerely_helene. People really do not seem to get it. And they are native speakers! I see a trend beginning, "reforming" the apostrophe from the POV of total bafflement. The usage will change soon, over the next fifteen years.

Not that it will help you, of course. Just the opposite, I would think. A transition in the rules is always a frustrating time for a non-native speaker of a language.

 

[sincerely_helene]

I liked "Eats, shoots, and leaves." It was cool. But I used to read Richard Lederer, so that doesn't count.

I see apostrophe issues all over the board here, sincerely_helene. People really do not seem to get it. And they are native speakers! I see a trend beginning, "reforming" the apostrophe from the POV of total bafflement. The usage will change soon, over the next fifteen years.

Not that it will help you, of course. Just the opposite, I would think. A transition in the rules is always a frustrating time for a non-native speaker of a language.

Wow! Colored me officially embarassed to admit I am indeed a native speaker... who is just grossly under-educated.