Ithilwen, I can see your point, but I think you're missing what Bickham was getting at. I think what he was doing was trying to discourage bad attitudes and help motivate those people who want to write but have never written anything.

Also, I'm very sorry you "dislike most modern works because of the lack of quality and substance." Yes, the classics are great, but that doesn't mean that nothing else is just as good. There's some stuff I've discovered in YA Literature that has blown me away. Also, as much as I don't like Twilight, Stephanie Meyers must have done something right, because so many people like her books.

I don't really think Bickham gives "bad advice". A lot of his advice coincides with many of the standards of today. A lot of the classics and other books were written in different time periods, with different mindsets. He's trying to give advice that helps people now. And his advice coincides with what I've heard from Orson Scott Card, Rachelle Gardner, and others. I think it is important to have basic rules in writing fiction, so you have a good structure and foundation. But, once you understand those rules and why they work, you can artistically break a few to make a point or an impact. I'm taking an editing class, and most everything Bickham says matches up with what we are being taught.

Btw, I'm curious as to how you've written 105 novels. How'd you do that? I think that's impressive.

I do agree that reading books that list rules are quite boring and unhelpful. It's only one way of writing and, personally, I've already developed my style so I don't fit into the model.

Now, I'm not saying it's my favorite, but "Bird by Bird" by Anne Lamott is a hilarious read. She's writing down tips based on classes and workshops she's taught. You'd probably like her writing style/tone, Ithil.

fire fairy, I didn't know that orson scott card had written writing books. Thanks for posting about them! I'll have to go looking them up (especially cause I'm looking at submitting to the magazine he edits/runs).

Interviewee #14, Narnian_Badger is up on my blog! http://annamittower.blogspot.com/2012/02/interview-14-narnianbadger.html

~Anna

Edit: Oh btw, if you want some really good advice on writing stories, sign up for this course from a fellow I'm in a writing group with. He's got some really good tips. http://www.writers-village.org/courses.php It's looks like he's turned it into a paid course now (updated with new information) but the price is only $1.60...I took the old course last year when it was free.

Ithilwen, I can see your point, but I think you're missing what Bickham was getting at. I think what he was doing was trying to discourage bad attitudes and help motivate those people who want to write but have never written anything yet.

I addressed that issue in my last post, and said that sort of message is fine for people who are first starting, or for those who have never written anything yet. Then I went on to make further points related to people who do not fit into such a category.

Also, I'm very sorry you "dislike most modern works because of the lack of quality and substance." Yes, the classics are great, but that doesn't mean that nothing else is just as good. There's some stuff I've discovered in YA Literature that has blown me away. Also, as much as I don't like Twilight, Stephanie Meyers must have done something right, because so many people like her books.

Like I said, I dislike most modern works. Not all modern works. There is some stuff out there that is very good, such as The Hunger Games (which was absolutely brilliant). But for the most part, I find modern literature to be sadly lacking in quality, filled with cliches, and purposely copying other books in an attempt to ride off other people's fame. It isn't too often that I find something that really contains anything of true imagination or style anymore.

As for Twilight, I don't at all believe Meyer's books are popular because of anything in them being "done right". I think they are popular because of the unhealthy relationships they portray -- which, unfortunately, is the kind of relationships most teen girls want these days. Girls don't go insane over Twilight because the prose is beautiful, or because of anything that is usually valuable in literature. They go insane over it because they think Edward and/or Jacob would make "the hottest boyfriend ever". What with the fallen state of the world, what's "popular" is not always synonymous for what is "good" or even "tasteful".

I don't really think Bickham gives "bad advice". A lot of his advice coincides with many of the standards of today. A lot of the classics and other books were written in different time periods, with different mindsets. He's trying to give advice that helps people now. And his advice coincides with what I've heard from Orson Scott Card, Rachelle Gardner, and others. I think it is important to have basic rules in writing fiction, so you have a good structure and foundation. But, once you understand those rules and why they work, you can artistically break a few to make a point or an impact. I'm taking an editing class, and most everything Bickham says matches up with what we are being taught.

I'm sure what he says does match up with what a lot of editing/writing class teachers say. I disagree with a lot of writing and editing teachers, as well. And what's worse, different writing teachers will tell you different things. There are many different views of what literature is supposed to be; and each teacher will tell you their view is the correct one. For example, I've seen writing teachers who have also read Bickham's book. About half of them thought it was the best thing they ever read. The other half thought it was rubbish, and said his advice should not be followed under any circumstances.

Personally, I like the styles of classic lit, and hope to see it return soon. The only things in them which are out-of-date are the social rules and mindsets portrayed in the books; not the style itself. Good prose is recommended no matter what age you live in, and only a few books today still have good prose. There are some out there, like I said. But precious few, IMO.

Btw, I'm curious as to how you've written 105 novels. How'd you do that? I think that's impressive.

Thank you. I've been writing for 17 years now. I write fairly fast -- about 50,000 words per week, when I'm working on a story. So the novels just sort of piled up over the years.

I do agree that reading books that list rules are quite boring and unhelpful. It's only one way of writing and, personally, I've already developed my style so I don't fit into the model.

Glad to see I'm not alone. I used to look into all the writing rules and formulas, and tried to follow the guidelines to ensure my works were "good enough". I wrote my worst books during that time. Plus, it's amazing how much stress it added. Even when I allowed myself to break the rules once in awhile when I thought it was necessary, and stuck with the formulas and guides the rest of the time, it didn't help. Finally, I just set the rules down and let my words flow freely, unhindered by writing teachers' well-meant guidelines. Best decision I've ever made.

~Riella

You write insanely fast, ithil, you know that, right?

Now about those classics, they did write differently back then (though different does not equal worse or better). And, personally, some of it is not to my taste. I prefer terse writing and most classics are anything but terse. (Like Jane Austen! I still like her books but man does she write some convoluted sentences....) I think this is also why I've switched from reading mainstream, sword and sorcery fantasy to sci-fi. Modern fantasy is too wordy for me (even the stuff that's grammatically correct and not purple prose). Sci-fi has a more direct style (though sometimes unnecessarily filled with jargon). So, each person's taste varies.

However, as a society, we really have lost the art of being eloquent. It's because we're reading stuff daily that is of poor quality (fb statuses, twitter, etc.) and we aren't limited to high quality literature like we used to be before the internet went viral. What someone reads on a daily basis influences how they think and therefore write.

Now, for Twilight (can't resist a parting shot), I think I saw it phrased quite excellently somewhere as this: Girls like Twilight because they can "put on" Bella and pretend to have her life (in other words, two hot boyfriends). It's a simple as that. It's escapist fantasy.

~Anna

You write insanely fast, ithil, you know that, right?

Haha, I've been told so. When I get into the story, I can't stop. In fact, I lose a lot of sentences because my fingers can't keep up with my brain. But I make up for all of this with my turtle-slow planning stages. (I'm in those stages now. Tedious stuff, that. But such fun! I actually find the planning stage more enjoyable than the writing stage.)

Now about those classics, they did write differently back then (though different does not equal worse or better). And, personally, some of it is not to my taste. I prefer terse writing and most classics are anything but terse. (Like Jane Austen! I still like her books but man does she write some convoluted sentences....) I think this is also why I've switched from reading mainstream, sword and sorcery fantasy to sci-fi. Modern fantasy is too wordy for me (even the stuff that's grammatically correct and not purple prose). Sci-fi has a more direct style (though sometimes unnecessarily filled with jargon). So, each person's taste varies.

However, as a society, we really have lost the art of being eloquent. It's because we're reading stuff daily that is of poor quality (fb statuses, twitter, etc.) and we aren't limited to high quality literature like we used to be before the internet went viral. What someone reads on a daily basis influences how they think and therefore write.

Ditto this. I think it's the eloquence I'm thinking of that makes me prefer the classics. The good taste, the real style. Modern novels so often try to be modern, they basically end up as a parody of themselves. Everything is about how emo the MC is, and how that's supposed to be so deep and sad, and everything's so overly-emotional that I feel like watching a soap opera, just for the sake of watching something less emotional.

I can also name many classics I can't stand. There are some really famous ones I just couldn't get through, they were so cringe-worthy to me. I love Jane Austen, but you are right about her sentences. Did you know -- I actually found a sentence that covered a whole page and even went on to the next page. By the time I reached the end, I had forgotten the beginning.

And a lot of them have too much of a technical style, IMO. Especially the "adventure" novels. I mean, as much as I love my dear cousin Robert Louis Stevenson, his book Kidnapped is worded more like a bank statement than a pirate story.

~Riella

...Kidnapped is a pirate story? Since when?

What someone reads on a daily basis influences how they think and therefore write.

Sooooo true. I'm a style sponge; if I read a lot of something 'catchy' or distinctive, I pick it up and I need to consciously refrain from sounding like x instead of... whatever it is that is my habitual style of communication.

Characters and Viewpoint is pretty good. I have a copy, and it's been fairly helpful.
The thing about viewpoints, and why I could probably never do first person, is that I can't seem to tell a novel-length story from just one person's point of view. In The Black Galloper, it was mostly from Estam and Elwen's viewpoints. But there was also a scene with Laswell, and a scene with Findal. in Thiswold Thyster I have the title character, the queen who opposes him; the man he's falsely accused, the guy who's hiding the falsely accused man, and that guy's girlfriend who's helping him, and the story is barely half-way through. In Elwen . . . I've got Elwen herself, her uncle, two of her cousins (possibly the third), her love interest, her love interest's younger brother, her friend, two of her nephews, her younger sister (or one of them,) and probably at least one other person I've forgotten about. It's a huge, sprawling fantasy epic.
I envy people who write fast. It takes me about four years per book. I am determined to finish Elwen by the four-year mark!

...Kidnapped is a pirate story? Since when?

I can't tell if you're being sardonic or not. But if you're really asking, the people who kidnap David aren't exactly portrayed as the most... honorable people to sail the seas. Although, Treasure Island is much more of a pirate story than Kidnapped is, it's true. In fact, if my memory and/or research serves me correctly, I don't believe the characters in Kidnapped were ever officially labeled as pirates, though they do have a habit of stealing and murdering and kidnapping, and exhibiting overall pirate-like behavior.

What someone reads on a daily basis influences how they think and therefore write.

Sooooo true. I'm a style sponge; if I read a lot of something 'catchy' or distinctive, I pick it up and I need to consciously refrain from sounding like x instead of... whatever it is that is my habitual style of communication.

Same here. Sometimes I like to play around with it by reading a bunch of works by two authors at the same time, and then writing something to see what their two styles sound like when combined.

~Riella

Random note about modern/older literature: i think it's important to remember, too, that time has a way of weeding out most of the lame stuff. There were some truly awful works out in the days of Dickens, Austen, Shakespeare, etc.

Fifty, a hundred, five hundred years from now, most people probably won't be able to name 99.99% of the authors popular now; they'll just remember the most notable ones. And some of them will be complaining about how much better people could write in the 2000s.

*reads over the last page*

Huh. So now they're saying to use "said" a lot? And here I was thinking I should avoid that because it'd be so repetitive...

Ah well. Good to know, because my stories do tend to have a lot of dialogue.

Anyone here try writing some explicitly Christian fiction? Right now, I'm working on a story which is simply the story of the lives of some Christian college students. I want to move away from the more common (at least, it seems to me) themes of converting non-believers and overcoming huge faith-obstacles and away from anything really fantasy/sci-fi/horror and just write something that is more of the daily life of Christians, perhaps so that Christian readers can identify themselves with it more.

That doesn't mean I'll be completely going all-Christian fiction or completely avoid the fantasy/sci-fi stuff, but this is what I'm working on right now.

Random note about modern/older literature: i think it's important to remember, too, that time has a way of weeding out most of the lame stuff. There were some truly awful works out in the days of Dickens, Austen, Shakespeare, etc.

I've seen some pretty awful stuff from the 1930s while browsing through old bookshops.

On a random note, I'd love to see the equivalent to Twilight they had in Shakespeare's day -- the book everyone disliked, yet seemed to be all the craze with the masses. That would be fascinating reading, though in a much different, historical way.

Fifty, a hundred, five hundred years from now, most people probably won't be able to name 99.99% of the authors popular now; they'll just remember the most notable ones. And some of them will be complaining about how much better people could write in the 2000s.

I shudder to think how de-evolved literature will be in the future. The way society seems to go, many authors in that time might even end up being jealous of today's worst authors. Anyone seen the movie "Idiocracy"?

Every age definitely has its gems and its clunkers. But I can't help but wonder what the results would be if we compared this year's very best novel with the very best novel of some long ago year.

Edit: 1000th comment! Woohoo!

~Riella

As for Twilight, I don't at all believe Meyer's books are popular because of anything in them being "done right". I think they are popular because of the unhealthy relationships they portray -- which, unfortunately, is the kind of relationships most teen girls want these days. Girls don't go insane over Twilight because the prose is beautiful, or because of anything that is usually valuable in literature. They go insane over it because they think Edward and/or Jacob would make "the hottest boyfriend ever". What with the fallen state of the world, what's "popular" is not always synonymous for what is "good" or even "tasteful".

Touche. But, don't get me wrong. I hate Twilight. But you may be right. After all, I almost got caught in the Twilight craze, and was luckily saved from it after reading the second book . I think my Young Adult Lit teacher described it the best: "Twilight is a cotton-candy book. It's sweet, but it dissolves quickly."

As for rules of writing and all that, I say we just agree to disagree.

Wow! Discussion! I wonder how long it's been since the Writer's Thread has seen this many posts in one day...I would add more to the discussion but as it's late at night I shan't trouble you with my disconnected thoughts. Instead, a new interview to read.

Interviewee #15 Meltintalle! http://annamittower.blogspot.com/2012/02/interview-15-meltintalle.html

~Anna

Wow! Discussion! I wonder how long it's been since the Writer's Thread has seen this many posts in one day...

I know, right? It's so nice. This is such a nice thread. Such a shame it doesn't get more action than it does. There are so many writers on NarniaWeb, it's strange that we seem to talk about everything but writing.

We should keep the conversation going. How about... endings? Do you guys prefer writing happy endings or sad endings? Most people agree that writing a tragic ending, just for the sake of being tragic, is a bad idea. Do you agree with this? Why/Why not? What would be an example of an acceptable time to use a tragic ending?

~Riella

I know, right? It's so nice. This is such a nice thread. Such a shame it doesn't get more action than it does. There are so many writers on NarniaWeb, it's strange that we seem to talk about everything but writing.

some writers are just a little *cough cough* shy me being one of those cases. Since my novel and story writing isn't something that's really encouraged by some people in my family, most people look at it as 'oh wild's writing trip' I tend to be VERY shy of my writing and writing abilites and find it hard to talk about them to others cause I feel like such an amature compared to some people who really know a lot about writing I read everything you folks write hear.....just don't find much courage in posting also I like to write in English to prefect it, but this also makes me very shy of my writings cause I don't know how grammatically correct they are

We should keep the conversation going. How about... endings? Do you guys prefer writing happy endings or sad endings? Most people agree that writing a tragic ending, just for the sake of being tragic, is a bad idea. Do you agree with this? Why/Why not? What would be an example of an acceptable time to use a tragic ending?

Once again I'm no professional but here's how I do it, I basically go with how realistic my story is, where it is set and to what auidence it is geared too. For example I was writing historical fiction set right before, during and right after the French Revolution. Naturally I couldn't give it a perfectly happy ending, and I ended it rather sad, because giving it a perfectly happy ending just wouldn't make sense. However when I was writing a children's fairytale titled 'The Peasant Princess' then I did give that one a happy ending, not only because it was geared for children, but because the story called for a happy ending and making a tragic ending would have completely ruined the story. I rarely go for the 'make it tragic simply for the sake of it being tragic', in my opinion that's dumb all my stories have to have a point and reason, they teach some moral value or lesson, so if I do make a tragic ending, there has to be a reason to why I did this. I do have a couple of stories where the ending is pretty tragic, but again, that is to prove some point, what certain decisions will lead to etc.

Well, that said the reason I can here is actually for some advice, I have this nove that I wrote for CampNaNo, and well, it's supposed to be a children's fantasy novel, it's a journey novel, about two very different people, one a child from out world who jumps over a fence and lands in a magical world that has been cast under a spell and the only way for him to get back to his world is to help the exile princess destroy the evil sorcere, but a lot of the novel takes place with just the two of them as they travel. As much as I would like to give more characters, it doesn't really work cause the rest of the world has been turned to stone, I do send them different trials and they do meet up with other characters, but most of these are the bad characters that they have to defeat, still I think the novel came out a little boring, does any one have any idea how to keep a story more or less interesting, even when the amount of characters is shall we say, limited?
(I hope this didn't sound really dumb )