Very sorry
for the delay. Taxes. Jury Duty. Making the New York Times bestsellers list
with Paradox Bound. And that’s
just what I can talk about. The past two
weeks have been kind of crazy, and last Thursday was when it all caught up with
me. Well, Wednesday night, to be honest.
But now
that I’ve got my excuses out of the way...
(did I
mention the New York Times bit...?)
I stumbled
across an interview I did with author Jessica Meigs a few years
back. I said something that sounded
vaguely profound. Or, at least something
I was trying to make sound profound...
“I think
people like radical new ideas, but sometimes—most of the time, honestly—they
just want the basics. There’s only so many times you can go out and have a mesquite-smoked
sirloin patty garnished with goat cheese and pine nuts on a croissant. It’s
cool, but eventually you just want to have a cheeseburger.”
If it
sounds vaguely familiar, Stephen King’s said something similar a few times. I think I may have been subconsciously
mimicking him. Plus, I’ve used cooking metaphors
here a few times. Hopefully it’s not too
obscure or vague as metaphors go.
Now, I don’t
watch a lot of cooking shows (used to love Kitchen Nightmares), but I’ve
never heard anyone make the argument that we should all eat nothing but gourmet
food. I can imagine how much we’d all
scoff at someone who campaigned to ban cheeseburgers. And if anyone tried to tell me I’m a crappy
cook because I don’t make my own pizza dough from scratch, I’d probably laugh
in their face. And then not invite them over for pizza.
But...
Every
couple of months I’ll see some new article about how
aspiring writers should use better words. Better descriptions. Better structures. Only uneducated simpletons and talentless
hacks would use verbs like said or was. You used red
instead of encarmine? It’s cute
that you’re trying to write for grade schoolers...
None of
this is true, of course. And I can’t
help but notice that the vast majority of people who make these declarations...
well, they don’t tend to sell a lot of books.
In fact, I’d guess the majority of them aren’t even professional writers. Or even amateur writers.
It keeps
coming up, though. And aspiring writers keep trying to follow it. And often they end up in this horrible
downward spiral, progressing less and less as they try to make every sentence
“better.”
Possibly
weird aside. But it has a point. Honest.
There’s a
type of riddle that often stumps people—the one with the obvious answer. Those ones where we stop and think and think
because the answer can’t be that simple.
I mean, isn’t the whole point of a riddle to trick you into
giving the wrong answer? So even if the
simple answer fits all the requirements of the question, people will convince
themselves it’s got to be something more complex and spend who knows how long trying to figure out what that unnecessarily complex answer
must be
When I’m
telling a story, there’s going to be lots of times that call for simplicity
over complexity. It’s not uncommon for a
short, straightforward sentence to have far more impact than a far more
elaborately-crafted one. A simple
structure can be a faster, much more enjoyable read for my audience than a
twisting, interwoven one. And a basic
character motivation is going to be much easier for my readers to grasp
and relate to than one that needs thirty pages to explain.
Let me mention two or three basic, solid writing devices that get a bad rap.
Let me mention two or three basic, solid writing devices that get a bad rap.
It was/
he was/ she was—If I’m writing in third person, past tense (it’s not as
dominant as it used to be, but I think it’s still the most common type of
narration you’re going to stumble across), I’ll be coming across this form of “be”
a lot. If I’m leaning toward present
tense—and that’s okay, a lot of the cool kids are doing it—I’ll probably see is
just as often.
There are
times was can be the sign of some needed work. Whenever I edit I tend to do a was pass and see how often I can turn things like “Wakko
was running” into “Wakko ran.” But
sometimes, after all that running, I might just have “He was exhausted.” Sure I could be a lot more descriptive and
evocative, but there’s also going to be points where “He was exhausted” is
quick, gets the information across, and lets me move on to other things.
Said—The
most basic dialogue descriptor there is.
Said is a classic. Quite literally.
People have been using said for almost a thousand years. And it’s still around and still in regular
use.
I’ve talked
about said a few times in the past, so I won’t go into too
much here. I just want to remind you
that one of my first face-to-face interactions with an actual, book-buying,
money-paying editor was him telling me to get rid of the dozens of different
descriptors I was using on every page and replace 95% of them with said. Let it do all the heavy lifting and save the
special words for special occasions.
Linear
Structure—I also talked about this just a few months ago. It’s very common for linear structure and
narrative structure to run side by side.
It’s so common because it’s the
way we’re used to experiencing things.
Our brains are pretty much
programmed to accept stories this way, and if we’re given them in other
ways we’ll try to mentally wrestle them into this format.
Now,
personally, I love a story that uses clever structure or devices to move the
plot along. I think most people do.
That’s kind of the trick though—I’m using them to move the plot along. If I have dozens of flashbacks that
don’t really accomplish anything, or running the story backwards just because it sounded like a cool idea, I’m just making the story more complex for no reason. And once my convoluted structure breaks the flow for the third or fourth time, well...
Again,
something like 85-90% of all fiction (numbers pulled from experienced ether) is
going to have this very straightforward format.
There’s nothing wrong with it. I
shouldn’t be nervous about just... telling my story.
Y’see,
Timmy, there’s nothing wrong with simplicity.
Nothing’s inherently good just because of overly-complex structure or
incredibly obscure vocabulary. My
writing isn’t automatically better because I decided to use four syllable words rather than two syllable ones.
And to be
very clear—I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with complexity either. Nothing at all. There are some wonderfully complex books out there. It’s when I insist that everything has to be
one or the other that problems arise.
Okay, that’s a lie. Problems arise all the time. Hell, I could shut this blog down if that was the only time problems arose...
Okay, that’s a lie. Problems arise all the time. Hell, I could shut this blog down if that was the only time problems arose...
My point
is, if I insist that everything has to be exquisitely crafted, impenetrably
structured, polysyllabic sentences that run on for pages, collected in an order that would
stump most cryptography software... my writing’s probably going to be very hard
for most people to get into. It’s going
to be tough for it to have any kind of flow.
And it’s going to take me a very, very long time to get that
first book done.
And that means it’s going to be tough for me to have a lot of readers.
And that means it’s going to be tough for me to have a lot of readers.
Anyway...
I’m going to go watch Infinity War now.
Next time, enough about workhorses. Let's talk about cats and dogs.
Until
then... go write.