[Grumpy]

I think we all have pet peeves about how prose should be written - to be interesting, to be "correct", or to be easier to read. I thought we could compile a handy little thread where we detail things that could make a story so much better. Not by pointing out specific things in specific stories, of course, but more along the lines of general ideas and tips for anyone looking to write something in the future. I don't want this to seem like an arrogant power move, I know I have so much to learn and that I'm far from a great writer - which is why I also want you to contribute to this thread and expand it so that I can learn from it.



Last year I read Stephen King's On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft, and he makes a bunch of good points about writing. I won't list them all, but some big ones that I think make for a better story, and that I've tried to adopt, are:

• Don't replace "said" and, "asked" with flowery descriptors such as "effused" or "quizzed". Also, don't use adverbs to further dirty the dialogue. Example:

The party came to a crossing and Elizabeth tugged on Eric's sleeve as he kept going straight.

"Shouldn't we go east, instead?" Elizabeth queried bravely.

"No, south looks much safer," gulped Jon insecurely.

In the first line of dialogue, there is literally no reason to replace "asked" with "queried" - they are synonyms. If you wish to use queried, be consistent and only use that. The second line does set a tone of inflection, but the story flows much better if that tone can already be supposed by the reader by painting the scene in which Jon says that. The same thing with "angrily" and "insecurely" - both of those should be removed and instead implied by the story for the reader to know. For contrast, consider this:

The party came to a crossing and Elizabeth tugged on Eric's sleeve as he kept going straight. She pointed to the east with a big smile - the kind of smile she always has when she's feeling adventurous. Jon clutched his arm close to his body and a shiver went down his spine as he looked to the old gnarly forest Elizabeth pointed to.

"Shouldn't we go east, instead?" Elizabeth asked.

"No, south looks much safer," said Jon

• Don't use passive verbs.

This one is hard. I know I fall into this trap often - it's just comfortable. But it's beyond a shadow of a doubt a more interesting story to read if it's written with active verbs. So, what's an active verb and what's a passive verb? Well, I look at it as either having a commentator narrating the story for you (passive), or reading the actions of someone in the story (active). For example:

The die was thrown high in the air by Elizabeth, eventually hitting a small patch of grass. Everyone rushed over to see the result of the die roll. Elizabeth was jumping with joy as she saw the six dots on the top.

It kind of sounds like a commentator is describing the action to you, doesn't it?

Elizabeth threw the die high in the air. It eventually landed on a small patch of grass. Everyone rushed over to see the result of the die roll. Elizabeth jumped with joy as she saw the six dots on the top.

While that sounds more like you are watching the characters actually doing the actions. Technically, an active verb is one where the subject is described as doing something, while a passive verb is when the subject undergoes something. I.e. "Elizabeth high-fived everyone" is active because the subject (Elizabeth) is actively high-fiving everyone. "Everyone was high-fived by Elizabeth" is passive because the subject (Everyone) undergoes high-fiving.

[Army of One]

I'm going to be straight-up honest here: you write for the story you want to tell, the viewpoint you want to give. Writing is an art, not a science; it has no hard-and-fast rules. To take an example from your post: "don't use flowery descriptors", while may work sometimes, is actually a crock to work with practically, as no-one wants to read, "said this, said that," line after line after line. Variety in verbiage keeps their interest through a section they really don't want to. But again, not a hard-and-fast rule.

[vile8r]

All good points, Grumpy.  I know I catch myself in the passive verb trap at times. Most of my stories are written in the third-person, so I have to be careful with that.

[Grumpy]

I'm going to be straight-up honest here: you write for the story you want to tell, the viewpoint you want to give. Writing is an art, not a science; it has no hard-and-fast rules. To take an example from your post: "don't use flowery descriptors", while may work sometimes, is actually a crock to work with practically, as no-one wants to read, "said this, said that," line after line after line. Variety in verbiage keeps their interest through a section they really don't want to. But again, not a hard-and-fast rule.

Of course, these are not rules, per se. I see them as guidelines to make something more enjoyable to read. At some level, you write for the reader, not only for yourself - so why not make an effort. As for the conga-line of "he said, she said" dialogue - that's actually not that hard to avoid, I've found. You definitely don't have to follow these guidelines if you don't want, and sometimes, replacing "said" with something more descriptive is necessary or more pragmatic than the alternative. Especially if what you imagine is different from what the reader might interpret. If you wanted Jon to whisper or shout in the last example, that would be a good place to use "Jon shouted" or "Jon whispered".

If your piece is dialogue-heavy, there are several tricks to make the text flow better and not seem repetitive. For example, if there are only two people talking (which is most of the time), you don't have to put anything after the quotes, except for the first time:

"Seriously, Jon? You're such a pussy," Elizabeth said.

"No, I'm not!" Jon said.

"Is that why you're actually shaking right now?"

"I- I just- It's cold, okay?"

"Grab your balls and let's go, I ain't got all day."

If there are more than two people, or you want to stay away from the above style, infusing the text with some action is a perfectly good thing to do that breaks up the dialogue, but still describes who is talking:

"Seriously, Jon? You're such a pussy," Elizabeth said.

"No, I'm not!" Jon said.

"Is that why you're actually shaking right now?" Elizabeth walked up to Jon and poked him.

"I- I just- It's cold, okay?" Jon avoided the poke as best he could.

"Grab your balls and let's go, I ain't got all day." Elizabeth turned to the east path and started walking.

Still, definitely not something that has to be done, but I find that infinitely more interesting to read than this:

"Seriously, Jon? You're such a pussy," Elizabeth quipped.

"No, I'm not!" Jon croaked.

"Is that why you're actually shaking right now?" badgered Elizabeth.

"I- I just- It's cold, okay?" Jon stuttered.

"Grab your balls and let's go, I ain't got all day," Elizabeth scoffed

[Grumpy]

All good points, Grumpy.  I know I catch myself in the passive verb trap at times. Most of my stories are written in the third-person, so I have to be careful with that.

Yeah, same. I know I do this all the time and It's really hard to notice whilst you're in the zone, writing - maybe because we are kind of a commentator to what we're writing, so it's only natural that we'd write that way. I think it's a way better read without them, though. More immersive.

[SoftGameHunter]

I've long had a love/hate relationship with the active/passive voice issue and all the rules thereof. Usually active is the preferred style, but passive voice exists for a reason and I've long grown tired of college TAs and graders who underline the passive, write 'use active voice' in the margin, and move on with their rote scoring. The passive voice can, used correctly, put the emphasis and attention where you want it. Consider the above examples:

The die was thrown high in the air by Elizabeth, eventually hitting a small patch of grass. Everyone rushed over to see the result of the die roll. Elizabeth was jumping with joy as she saw the six dots on the top.

Elizabeth threw the die high in the air. It eventually landed on a small patch of grass. Everyone rushed over to see the result of the die roll. Elizabeth jumped with joy as she saw the six dots on the top.

Pretty straightforward, here, why the first is preferable. But what if the context of the story had us focused on the die itself? Maybe its a magic die. Maybe, to use an example suited for our forum, Elizabeth's friend Mike was supposed to replace the real die with a loaded one because she was literally being coerced into betting her virginity against a whole night in bed with the foul Lord Blakemore and she didn't know if he'd managed to make the switch in time.

No die had ever been more tightly scrutinized by everyone there than this bare black and white die. All eyes followed as it was tossed upward from Elizabeth's trembling hand. Behind the group, Mike watched with satisfaction and pride as Elizabeth was jumping with joy at the six dots facing the sky.

Longer, yes, but this version has reason to put the focus on the die, a passive little object in the game played among perverts and the pure.

So my advice is to try to learn to default to active voice but know that the rules are guidelines.

[Grumpy]

Yes, there's a time and place for a passive voice. I just wrote a story here that describes actions taken by characters through a third party - a reporter. It would be awfully strange to use an active voice in that context, as the story we're reading is an outsider's retelling of something.

With that said, there's no reason the subject can't be an object instead of a person. Especially if it's magically imbued or something like that. I mean The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy does this all the time, and that's a pretty good book (series).

However, as soon as you use a passive voice, you are adding a narrator, pretty much. If you want a narrator, that's fine, but in many cases, that's not what you're after, and active is the way to go.

[littlebluebird]

Last year I read Stephen King's On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft, and he makes a bunch of good points about writing. I won't list them all, but some big ones that I think make for a better story, and that I've tried to adopt, are:

I think that's the single, biggest problem with trying to impose a single structure or even 'general rules' on a writer. It's an impossible standard in any subjective art form. Some readers might prefer having none of them, while others have a differing opinion. The best part about writing is that every author and reader are different. We have differing opinions on what we like, how the flow of a story goes, the way we either describe things in-depth or if we opt for a more subtle approach. Everyone can argue as to why they think something works better from their perspective but at the end of the day, it's highly subjective and there's really no right or wrong way that works universally.

For example, I like to describe things in great detail - to paint a clear and vivid picture of the imagery. (see: Bluebird) While some may focus more on subtle imagery and others, pay no attention to it all. None of us are right or wrong in our approach, we just view the world's we create through a different lens.  My advice would be to soak up such advice and try it out. If you don't like it, then maybe it's just not for you. You kind of said everything you needed to say at the end by saying "the rules are just guidelines." 100% true. Every great author has one thing in common: they're different. If people try to impose general rules and laws to follow on something as subjective as art, then you've failed as an artist. That's why I think a thread titled 'tips for writing better' is a tad misleading because none of this advice really works for everyone and it may just make you worse off trying to follow the subjective rules of someone else.

At the end of the day, just write what you enjoy writing and if people like reading it, you're doing a good job. It's really as simple as that.

[Grumpy]

Well, I named the thread that in the hopes that people would chime in with their own tips on how they do it, just like you and others are doing, and thereby creating a plethora of advice you can pick and choose from. I share your sentiment, but I don't see how it's a "problem", as you describe it.

I've never called any of these tips 'rules', nor have I said anything to imply that they are. I'm just saying that I think (and evidently millions of other people do, too) that these are some things that are important to think about when writing. At the very least you should know about them so you can actively make a choice to follow them or not to.

[littlebluebird]

I share your sentiment, but I don't see how it's a "problem", as you describe it.

I wasn't talking about the thread title. I'm saying that people who try to impose rules or general structures for writers to abide by are a problem. The only thing I said about the title was that I thought it's a tad misleading because new writers may see that and just assume that some of the things they read are things they need to be doing. That's it. I say that because I've done that, looking through threads like these and doubted myself because of it. Just trying to help others avoid the same trapping. That's it.

[jenny]

 I've never summoned up the courage to post a story, but I rp quite a bit, and I think that the things which raise the quality of an rp are similar to those which improve a story.

 There are the obvious ones. Grammar. Spelling. Proper paragraphs.

 Realism is important. I think I actually mean internal consistency. I have no objection to tentacled monsters or magic bracelets, but I wouldn't like them to be suddenly introduced into a story or rp that was set in a world where it had never been mentioned that monsters or magic might exist. It would be like Sherlock Holmes announcing that he'd got the results of a DNA analysis.

  A degree of believability. RP partners have had sex with me while I was tied to a chair. They have led me up a flight of stairs after tying my ankles together. And they've described, in detail, sexual practices which would tax the imagination of the most skilled contortionist!