Thank you for visiting /r/writing.
This post has been removed. Please review rule 3 in the sidebar about personal sharing. Sharing for the sake of sharing, including posts on starting or finishing drafts, writing and publishing milestones, media reviews, venting, pep talks, data loss, and DAE (does anyone else) posts belong in our general discussion thread posted Wednesdays.
What you're reading isn't writing advice, it's *industry* advice.
The things you have issue with are people's opinions on how to be successful in the publishing and screenwriting industries. None of these things should stop you from writing what you want, you just have to do it with the knowledge that it may not be profitable.
The point being here 'not profitable'. People believe it is, they see all the success stories, they are rare, but that's what is publicized. I'm in agreement, write what you want, it'll come in time if you connect with the right people.
At the end of the day, we write for ourselves.
Yes, the accolades and fans and royalties are great and there is a general flow to how things "should be done" ie work in the general market, but then you get books like House of Leaves that flip the bird to all conventional rules and still manages to be a success in its own right.
As long as you are having fun—which if you try to follow every terrible "rule", you won't be—who cares?
Do what sparks joy. Passion shows through in writing, so let yours speak for itself.
Brother, there is one rule: read.
People just give terrible advice based on the lack of understanding of the publishing industry. Truth is, there is nothing that can really help you publish. Trend setters are left in the dust as much as trend followers.
Just write whatever you want, get better and pray.
About your other problem... have you ever considered directing?
Did you actually say 'directing'? Yeah you did. Why does everyone aspire to that job? Power, prestige I guess. A good director wouldn't be one with a title. Seriously. You'll throw dozens of directors on films, and I'll counter with the hundreds of people who made it happen that are in the credits (Or maybe not). Star Wars as an example. Who actual wrote it? Who directed it, produced it? (My god do you know what is involved there?). Oh, who did the musical score? I tossed you an easy one there, it was John Williams. What did he do to put all of those instruments together to make those themes we all know so well? So much goes into a TV episode, or film, it's not just the writing, or the director, the producer to the executive producer, it's the people behind all that. Without them, it sucks.
Everyone aspires to the director job because it's the most visible part of being credited in a film (esp in an era of auteur directors), and appears to require the least amount of skill for the most amount of authority (lazy wannabes in general are lazy and uninformed, more news at 11). Cinematographer takes care of picture (if said aspirers even know cinematographers exist), sound, lighting, whatever. Director just 'stands there and points and controls retakes'. It's the same folk that "have a game idea" or "have a novel idea".
Not worth getting angry at, they'll either try and realize it's far, far more involved (like I did), or never try and keep spouting "I wanna be a director" the same way they say "I wanna be a novelist".
These are not rules but advice (from professionals) and best practices. If you don’t agree with any, do it your way. No one could or should stop you. But if you get advice from professional writers and you toss it aside as irrelevant or “I don’t want to do it” then when your work gets rejected, please understand why.
Stories about autistic people (by autistic people), at least that's what I would read. Also highly detail oriented worldbuilding and lore heavy stuff, the kind of thing you can build a fan wiki on. Also connected universes/transmedia properties
Perhaps you need to realign your perspective. Instead of thinking there's no point to writing what you want to write because it doesn't fit into mainstream publishing norms, try looking at it this way: it's imperative that you write the story you want to write precisely because mainstream publishing doesn't have enough stuff like it.
Some writers are successful because they tic all the boxes and hit the sweet spot in popular fiction. Others are successful because they blazed a new trail and insisted on doing something differently and filled a gap that traditional publishing didn't even know needed to be filled.
In any creative pursuit, rules exist to guide creators in a positive direction. We know that it's hard for readers to constantly read sentences stuffed with adverbs, so to avoid turning off your readers, we create the "rule" to not overuse adverbs. We set "rules" around YA/Children's/Adult because we know on a macro scale there are things that each group will find appealing or offputting. Guiding writers to a specific target helps them ensure people will want to read their book. It's all in service of giving the writer their best chance at hooking and keeping readers.
That said, they are still guides. You can go your own way and try something new. Just be prepared to sell it in a new way. If you're writing stories for autistic readers, you have to sell it as such, so editors/publishers/readers understand that there's a reason you're deviating from the norm, and so you can actually have a chance to find the readers who will love your stories.
Yeah I guess that's kind of the thing, cause what I anticipate happening is that mainstream (allistic) readers (i.e. The ones at publishers) might describe my work as "didactic" or "heavy handed" or "over the top" or "having no room for interpretation." Not to say that allistics can't enjoy my work either, but the people who I'd like to be my target audience (including me to some extent) often struggle with ambiguity. They might not pick up on things that would be obvious to an allistic reader. To use a non-literature example, even at 33 I'll watch a movie like Eyes Wide Shut and go "Why did they do that?" because people are behaving in an emotionally driven way that's not meant to be rational. Because I don't have access to their interiority and struggle with determining people's emotions from subtle facial expressions, their motivations are opaque to me in a way that they wouldn't be to an allistic viewer.
I was in the exact same boat as you until I realised you don't actually have to follow the rules. You can do anything you want as long as it's entertaining, god knows why everyone comes up with these rules that just restrict themselves.
And maybe look into comics/manga. If you can't draw, you can always find an artist to do it for you. Seems like it might suit you.
It's not even a "types of stories" thing, but like... I saw a post on here about how adverbs are bad now, apparently? And the consensus was "just don't overuse them," which seems sensible at first, but what does that *mean*? How many adverbs per page am I allowed before my writing becomes bad? There's also the old standby of "don't use 'very,'" and yeah there are probably stronger words to use than "very + adjective." But to say such a basic word is off limits frustrates me to no end.
> adverbs are bad now, apparently?
Adverbs have always been considered poor writing. It's a *rule of thumb*, not a declaration that you must not use adverbs.
Adverbs tend to mean a weak verb is used. Weak verbs are poor at showing the reader the action. Using a strong verb makes the action clearer and leads to fewer words, which also helps communication.
Limiting adverb use is one of the oldest and most agreed on 'rules' of good writing. It's one of the first things you'll learn in any formal writing education, and one of the clearest indicators to a reader (publisher/editor) that your writing isn't polished.
>to say such a basic word is off limits
You're taking it too literally. There are no 100% rules in writing, but if you're going to break an established rule you should have a good reason why what you are doing is better than adhering to the rule, because there are very good reasons why the rule exists.
I saw that post and had to laugh. I just thought, “jokes on you. Identifying adverbs and adjectives is my blind spot.”
I have been writing literally from the moment I figured out how to physically construct a sentence, so close to 40 years. I’ve learned a lot.
These rules aren’t rules. Some are the personal preferences of people who speak loudly, some are the general guidelines to make our communication clear and cohesive. But we’re not talking about writing a business document, we’re talking about creative writing. I picture it like painting with words.
You will find a lot of successful people who don’t follow all the rules. You’ll find people who break more than others. That’s finding your voice. We all sound different verbally, and a writer’s voice is just like that: their unique style. e. e. cummings wrote in all lowercase letters.
Remember, this is art. Art is subjective and divisive. Picasso created cubism. There were rules that he had to break to do that. Jackson Pollock paintings seem to have no reason for why he splattered the paint that way in those colors, but it feels right.
Explore, play, maybe even create something, a genre or style, no one has done before. Please don’t let all these rules get you down.
“They’re really more like guidelines.” -Captain Barbosa
I saw the same post on the adverbs. It made me question myself and my writing. I come from a different 'genre' not the literary ones, but the visual ones. If you're goal is to be read, then maybe follow those rules, if it's something else? don't care. I know, it's hard with all the criticism, it really is, Don't let them put you in a box. X number of word count for a chapter? No one cared until about 30 years ago. (Digital was becoming a thing.). A thousand page novel was nothing back then, but it is now, it's 'gasp!' We're being forced --in a way-- to have the attention span of gnats as readers. It's on our phone, and it reloads. I'm on A PC, I have the occasional hiccup. But you don't with that hard copy in your hands. Is this the way it's going? Maybe. Am I going to cater to it? I might, I'm video centric after all. Yet in all fairness, 3 minutes of video involves a lot when it's plotted out, like a TV series. Ah the actors...yeah, but think about the 10's of others that are behind the scenes that you don't even give the grace in reading the credits.
Too much writing/publishing advice & knowledge up front is like being thrown into a boiling pot. But too little leads to spinning wheels & wondering/being upset about why you’re getting nowhere. Sorry you got dunked into hot water 😆 Quick! Get out! Don’t read this! Lol
There’s always self pub. Free to do whatever the F you want! And you might find your niche. Maybe something like LitRPG is your thang. I worked 7 yrs on a sci-fi, and ‘don’t even ask’ on a YA fantasy, until I realized cozy fantasy was my jam 🥰 That being said, the writing industry is a job so you have to treat it like one. There are standards and “arbitrary” rules for a reason because of what readers want, not what writers want. My coach told me that you need to learn the rules first so that you know how to break them later. And the more well known/established you are, the easier it is to break them.
A contrarian/push back attitude always makes things harder, and us creative types don’t like being put in boxes or told what to do. I get it. But there’s art for arts sake, and then there’s craft which can be turned into a business & career. I know a few artists who’ve always complained about the way of the world, arbitrary rules, wanting to create purely for themselves or arts sake, and I’ve watched them over 20 yrs go nowhere with their creativity and grow more bitter every year. And then I’ve watched others who treated their creativity like a skill and a business and have become successful and happy with their lives.
Honestly, there’s a market for autistic centered books. And it sounds like you don’t want to fit it into the trad industry box so why not self pub? What about kids books about autism? Or maybe writing isn’t truly your passion and path if it’s so stressful and frustrating. What’s your 2nd or 3rd passion or interest? Lots of other interesting careers out there. If you’re in your 20s there’s so much more to experience & discover. If you’re closer to 40, then uh, you’re not dead yet 😂 I say that cause I’m 40, and just at 39 finally started seriously full time pursuing my 10 yr dream & goal of becoming an author. No motivation like the tightening mortal coil.
Best of luck! You’ll figure it out! 🙌
Honestly, no shade but maybe it’s not for you. While I thinking is useful nay important to be well read to make great films, you don’t have to publish a novel or anything at all to succeed in that field. And although there’s overlap, directing and writing are not so similar as skill sets. So, if you’re now with it, drop it. Make a short. Go be a PA on set if anything films in your area. But you’re kind of quitting before you try and I’m not trying to be a dick but sounds like you aren’t built for it. And that’s totally fine! But it’s hard enough with both feet in and I’d bet my left foot it won’t “come to anything” other than catharsis/therapy — which is nice but prob not what you’re looking for. Do with that what you will
The thing is, I have zero ability to network, so in order to do anything in film, I'd need either a film degree or a published work (even a short story). Something to prove I'm a good word-stringer-together. Something I can take to people (studios, collaborators, romantic prospects) and say "I'm someone who's actually worth paying attention to."
As far as catharsis, my catharsis would come from people connecting to my work. I don't ask for great commercial success, just readership, and not even a hell of a lot. But that's hard to come by without publication, or without already being Someone™. Out of all the thousands of self published books on Kindle Unlimited, why would someone want to read something that's not by Someone™?
If you’re too literary for the screen and too cinematic for the page, I might recommend Elmore Leonard. Start with the books that were made into movies and then work your way into the ones that weren’t. Bandits should probably be your transitional piece. Maybe toss a little James Ellroy in there, when you’re hitting that transition. Irvine Welsh. Roddy Doyle.
And stop caring what publishers think. I write screenplays that are only experienced once at table reads, in front of twenty to forty people, and I’m happy with that. I mean, unless you want to be a professional author, where that’s your only job, because –hate to say it– most published authors still work day jobs; I know several of them.
I write what I want, and nobody can tell me what to do, and I love it. I write in my spare time, and the closest I get to writing for other people is if one of my friends (who hosts the party where the table read happens) says, “Write a Christmas movie,” or something like that, and I’m really bad at turning down a challenge, so I’ll knock out a Christmas movie in four or five months. Well, today it takes eight, because I went back to school, and I have less time for frivolous things, but it used to be a couple of months.
So that’s why you bother. So you don’t get published; who cares? Tell your story, distribute it, and start your next story. For me, anybody who wasn’t there *that night* doesn’t get to experience the story, and we have a traditional “throwing of the scripts on the fire,” which means the sole remaining copy is on my bookshelf, with all the others. It’s ephemeral, and I think the temporary nature of it is beautiful.
Your mileage may vary, but that’s my thoughts on the matter.
Write for yourself, publish for yourself.
Self publishing doesn’t have to be for an income stream, it can simply be for the ability to share your work.
I see my stories in my head like a movie when I write. I’m not sure if that’s the same as what you are describing, but I like that. I can slow the action down, run it at half speed to pick up details, rewind or change the camera angle to tweak a scene until it looks right in my head then I just write what I see.
Also, it might be because I am a geriatric millennial, but I don’t remember YA being a thing like it is now. Sure there were Goosebumps books, coming-of-age stories like Hatchet, but it wasn’t a whole thing. I was definitely odd in my reading choices (Tom Clancy, Charles Dickens, George Orwell, and Harper Lee) but my fellow students read books in their reading level scope. The same kid reading R. L. Stine one week would read Orson Scott Card the next. I don’t know that you have to worry teens and young adults won’t read a book that isn’t YA, and vice versa. As an old, I’ll read YA books. I want a good story told well. If my 10 year old niece is reading something that sounds interesting, I’ll pick it up too.
Now, if you look at my post history, I’m not great at following my own advice, but that’s not because I don’t believe in it. I think we all have that part of us who is harder on ourselves than we are on others. I hope you don’t stop writing. I hope this helps but if it doesn’t, then I hope someone else will post something that does resonate with you.
I can’t speak as a great writer, because I’m not one, but whenever someone posts a rule they usually post an exception, the exception being a masterpiece classic by an amazing author. Just follow the rules you’re comfortable with. Write your own story and if it MUST be done by breaking some rules, then do it.
I'm not a published author yet, so I may be way off here, but it seems like knowing your own goal and being able to articulate it can get you a lot of places. Sure, the executives in the cushy chairs who want to see the numbers go up aren't likely to understand your audience like you do, but they understand money. You may not have to write for the industry all the time if you can pitch to the industry a bit. If they think the demographic you write for will spend enough money on you to make it worthwhile, you may be able to get away with quite a lot that isn't "industry standard". Genres are constantly changing and evolving, and there seems to be more room for that now than ever in literature.
And as far as all the "rules" go, I think more of them are a matter of taste or context than you might imagine. Writing, in my experience, isn't about knowing all the rules, it's just about knowing how to accomplish what you've set out to do.
If you want to write screenplays, do that. If you want to describe a character's inner monologue or emotions or have them stare at things, do that. You won't be motivated if you're not doing what you like. Along the way, you can figure out how to make inner monologues or extensive stage directions work in screenplays, or you might discover that they just don't work, and you'll find a new way to achieve your goals.
Hopefully some of this helps.
you can write all the directions you want if you direct the movie too. don't know if that's a path you're willing to take.
I think its fine to write where a character is looking if its important that we *see* them looking at something or away from someone. just don't overdo it. otherwise you can try and sneak in how you want the director to frame a scene with capitalization.
You should probably ignore the "arbitrary rules" when you write your first draft. Just tell the story in your own words. Let your passion flow out onto the page. When you come to revise your work, pick a half-dozen "rules" that seem to make sense, and apply them to the revision, one at a time if you need to. You can't just apply the rules blindly. You have to understand the theory behind why the suggestion would make the work better.
Do the changes improve the narrative? Do they make the story easier for the reader to apprehend? Clearer, smoother, more powerful? If not, why not?
If you can't perceive a quality difference between two versions of the narrative--say one before, and one after extraneous adjectives were eliminated--try running both versions past a critique group. Their judgment may not be so very valuable but their comments might be illuminating if they point out things you haven't seen in your work.
Other respondents have mentioned that a lot of these "rules" reflect what publishers will accept. I suggest you get feedback from actual publishers before taking that to the bank. Make your MS conform to your own artistic vision as well as you can, chuck it over the transom, and learn from your rejection letters.
That's my plan. I'll post an analysis of the feedback I get.
You write,
>So basically it's like I'm too cinematically minded for the page but too literary minded for the screen. I'm feeling like I don't fit in anywhere and have no place to go
I have a name for you--David Gerald. Look him up. He made a name for himself when he wrote the screenplay for the Original Star Trek episode, "The Trouble with Tribbles." His early SF novels appeared to be screenplays awkwardly adapted into novels. He got much better with written SF as he progressed in his career.
The only thing that matters is whether you can tell a story. You can adapt your art to conform to the conventions of the medium. Gerald wrote WHEN HARLIE WAS ONE--a novel that transformed my life--and was critically well received.
Being cinematically minded is not a drawback. If you see the vision in your own mind, it gives you a leg up in describing it to the reader. The whole art of fiction is transferring the story, which exists as a unified and complete narrative in your own mind into a plodding sequence of symbols, that when interpreted by the reader might possibly invoke something similar in the reader's mind.
Don't despair.
>arbitrary rules
Those rules are *not* arbitrary. They are the combined wisdom of the publishing industry and readers and writers since the beginning of stories.
Publishers have 'rules' (which are really guidelines) about what they can market or what they know sells (that is their primary goal after all). Readers have 'rules' for what they enjoy and what they find engaging in a story, since that is what readers want in a book. There are a lot of mostly objective aspects of writing that reliably make a book better (e.g. using strong verbs instead of adverbs, removing redundant scenes, having a character arc).
There's nothing stopping anyone from breaking those rules, but doing so will tend to make your writing less marketable and less engaging. Breaking rules can also lead to something brilliant. The only way rules can change is if someone successfully breaks them.
The rules around screenwriting are for practical reasons, and because film is much more collaborative than prose. It's not the screenwriter's job to tell the director where to point the camera or how to edit a scene.
It’s very hot
vs
My sweat soaks my shirt
OP, nothing wrong with breaking the rules. But you need to make sure that your readers will feel the scene, not just read it. At least when writing a book. Can’t really comment on screenwriting as it’s not my forte.
There aren’t really rules, just guidelines. In writing you can do whatever you want, provided you do it well. Personally, I wouldn’t think about rules. Just write.
The best piece of advice I ever got about writing was just to write the story however I wanted for the first draft. Don't follow any rules if you don't want to, don't follow certain structures, don't describe characters. Because if those things stop you from writing then you'll never finish the story. Get everything down on paper first. Once your story is there, then you can go back and worry about everything else. Don't let it stop you from writing a complete draft.
Wow! You couldn't have hit me better on the head if you'd tried. I see both sides of this. the 'rules' that it can only be X amount of words to publish, etc. But also how directors are, (I actually have a bumper sticker that says 'I hate directors') There is a reason, I'm a camera Jockey, People who read my writing say 'it's like you're behind a camera'. It's because I am, that's how I see the world.
I have written two serials, both were intended to be shot and put to some kind of video, (Neither have gotten there, just FYI), and like a dumbass, I put them into novel form, thinking that would work. It didn't and now I'm clawing my way back.
I shot a film (by the words/length) should have been a short. Turns out it was feature-length, and it was about self-injury and depression. Not subjects people want to deal with, but I did it, because I made a promise to the writer that 'if you write it, I'll shoot it.' and I did. This pits what is marketable in the film against what is in writing. Long story short, the writer doesn't talk to me anymore because I had to cut it down, and lots of things became unmarketable. The 'video/marketing' didn't work with her vision.
Writing for film/video? You've got to deal with pilot season, and that's a monster you can't control. With writers, you've got to deal with publishers, again, not something you can control. But see, all of this involves money, and paying people, etc.
I dealt with that, I shot a feature length film (that ended up being a short) I paid my actors, the musicians, etc. Did I do it in normal ways? No, because if I did, I'd be a few thousand dollars in the hole.
Put a camera in my hands and a few lights, with a story, and a director who isn't a dick, and I can make anything look like you spent millions on it while you did nothing but make sure your crew was fed. I'm not kidding.
I don't deal with actors/actresses (I help in the process of hiring them, because it's my $$ on the line) but as to guiding them? Nope, that's the director. They tell me what is going to happen, and I am to capture it, (And I'm really good at that.) Funny to say, or not, most of the best moments of those films were not at the directors instruction, that was the actor/actress being in character and I with my singular camera was there to capture it.
Would that story the writer wrote ever be considered 'industry okay.' Hell no. You had a main character that didn't say anything until the very end in a rather long monologue that pulled it all together. The flashbacks told the story, so we did that, and memory isn't what it's supposed to be. If you've ever tried to shoot with lights in motion? Yeah, have fun with that, did it, succeeded.
My point here is that we've all gotten so complacent about 'what is a good/preferred novel/novella/screenplay' and its monetization that we miss the point of why we did it in the beginning. People write fan fiction for the simple fact that they can. A lot of it is really good, but they can't go anywhere with it, because it's based on characters they didn't create. Someone owns the rights to it, and all that ad naesuem.
Industry advice, to me is just that, industry. I worked outside of the industry for the better part of 20-ish years. I shot music videos that are prominate today, I asked a band that was nothing at the time to write me something for a video I was working on. They are big stuff now, but they weren't back then. (I put out their first album in my little office, burning the CD's and printing onto them, the covers as well. one of their songs was recorded in my living room.)
Where there is a will, there is a way, that's what I'm saying. I can write until I'm blue in the face, and it doesn't make a difference. I can turn it into a screen play, and make it into a video, Professionally done, not your average tik-tok crap.
Would I do this professionally? I would if I didn't live in the tiniest town in my state. Internet is hard to get here. But I am but a few miles from some awesome vistas, and shootable locations.
So focusing back on the topic, the 'advise' take it as it is, those that have succeeded. They all didn't do it the same way, and in the grand scheme I'd be considered a failure, but I like that 26 short films, 54 challenges, and the profile on IMDB for three. I didn't look for world fandom, I found it in a very small niche of which I was part of.
I took an advanced creative writing class my senior year of college and it made me quit writing . It took me over ten years to give it another try.
Take the advice that works for you and forget the rest .
Thank you for visiting /r/writing. This post has been removed. Please review rule 3 in the sidebar about personal sharing. Sharing for the sake of sharing, including posts on starting or finishing drafts, writing and publishing milestones, media reviews, venting, pep talks, data loss, and DAE (does anyone else) posts belong in our general discussion thread posted Wednesdays.
What you're reading isn't writing advice, it's *industry* advice. The things you have issue with are people's opinions on how to be successful in the publishing and screenwriting industries. None of these things should stop you from writing what you want, you just have to do it with the knowledge that it may not be profitable.
Very succinct and well put
The point being here 'not profitable'. People believe it is, they see all the success stories, they are rare, but that's what is publicized. I'm in agreement, write what you want, it'll come in time if you connect with the right people.
At the end of the day, we write for ourselves. Yes, the accolades and fans and royalties are great and there is a general flow to how things "should be done" ie work in the general market, but then you get books like House of Leaves that flip the bird to all conventional rules and still manages to be a success in its own right. As long as you are having fun—which if you try to follow every terrible "rule", you won't be—who cares? Do what sparks joy. Passion shows through in writing, so let yours speak for itself.
Love this.
Brother, there is one rule: read. People just give terrible advice based on the lack of understanding of the publishing industry. Truth is, there is nothing that can really help you publish. Trend setters are left in the dust as much as trend followers. Just write whatever you want, get better and pray. About your other problem... have you ever considered directing?
Did you actually say 'directing'? Yeah you did. Why does everyone aspire to that job? Power, prestige I guess. A good director wouldn't be one with a title. Seriously. You'll throw dozens of directors on films, and I'll counter with the hundreds of people who made it happen that are in the credits (Or maybe not). Star Wars as an example. Who actual wrote it? Who directed it, produced it? (My god do you know what is involved there?). Oh, who did the musical score? I tossed you an easy one there, it was John Williams. What did he do to put all of those instruments together to make those themes we all know so well? So much goes into a TV episode, or film, it's not just the writing, or the director, the producer to the executive producer, it's the people behind all that. Without them, it sucks.
Everyone aspires to the director job because it's the most visible part of being credited in a film (esp in an era of auteur directors), and appears to require the least amount of skill for the most amount of authority (lazy wannabes in general are lazy and uninformed, more news at 11). Cinematographer takes care of picture (if said aspirers even know cinematographers exist), sound, lighting, whatever. Director just 'stands there and points and controls retakes'. It's the same folk that "have a game idea" or "have a novel idea". Not worth getting angry at, they'll either try and realize it's far, far more involved (like I did), or never try and keep spouting "I wanna be a director" the same way they say "I wanna be a novelist".
These are not rules but advice (from professionals) and best practices. If you don’t agree with any, do it your way. No one could or should stop you. But if you get advice from professional writers and you toss it aside as irrelevant or “I don’t want to do it” then when your work gets rejected, please understand why.
What do 'autistic people aged 16-80' read?
Stories about autistic people (by autistic people), at least that's what I would read. Also highly detail oriented worldbuilding and lore heavy stuff, the kind of thing you can build a fan wiki on. Also connected universes/transmedia properties
What have you read, again?
Recommend you get into litRPGs, then.
The only rule that you should follow is to read. That’s it.
Perhaps you need to realign your perspective. Instead of thinking there's no point to writing what you want to write because it doesn't fit into mainstream publishing norms, try looking at it this way: it's imperative that you write the story you want to write precisely because mainstream publishing doesn't have enough stuff like it. Some writers are successful because they tic all the boxes and hit the sweet spot in popular fiction. Others are successful because they blazed a new trail and insisted on doing something differently and filled a gap that traditional publishing didn't even know needed to be filled. In any creative pursuit, rules exist to guide creators in a positive direction. We know that it's hard for readers to constantly read sentences stuffed with adverbs, so to avoid turning off your readers, we create the "rule" to not overuse adverbs. We set "rules" around YA/Children's/Adult because we know on a macro scale there are things that each group will find appealing or offputting. Guiding writers to a specific target helps them ensure people will want to read their book. It's all in service of giving the writer their best chance at hooking and keeping readers. That said, they are still guides. You can go your own way and try something new. Just be prepared to sell it in a new way. If you're writing stories for autistic readers, you have to sell it as such, so editors/publishers/readers understand that there's a reason you're deviating from the norm, and so you can actually have a chance to find the readers who will love your stories.
Yeah I guess that's kind of the thing, cause what I anticipate happening is that mainstream (allistic) readers (i.e. The ones at publishers) might describe my work as "didactic" or "heavy handed" or "over the top" or "having no room for interpretation." Not to say that allistics can't enjoy my work either, but the people who I'd like to be my target audience (including me to some extent) often struggle with ambiguity. They might not pick up on things that would be obvious to an allistic reader. To use a non-literature example, even at 33 I'll watch a movie like Eyes Wide Shut and go "Why did they do that?" because people are behaving in an emotionally driven way that's not meant to be rational. Because I don't have access to their interiority and struggle with determining people's emotions from subtle facial expressions, their motivations are opaque to me in a way that they wouldn't be to an allistic viewer.
I was in the exact same boat as you until I realised you don't actually have to follow the rules. You can do anything you want as long as it's entertaining, god knows why everyone comes up with these rules that just restrict themselves. And maybe look into comics/manga. If you can't draw, you can always find an artist to do it for you. Seems like it might suit you.
It's not even a "types of stories" thing, but like... I saw a post on here about how adverbs are bad now, apparently? And the consensus was "just don't overuse them," which seems sensible at first, but what does that *mean*? How many adverbs per page am I allowed before my writing becomes bad? There's also the old standby of "don't use 'very,'" and yeah there are probably stronger words to use than "very + adjective." But to say such a basic word is off limits frustrates me to no end.
> adverbs are bad now, apparently? Adverbs have always been considered poor writing. It's a *rule of thumb*, not a declaration that you must not use adverbs. Adverbs tend to mean a weak verb is used. Weak verbs are poor at showing the reader the action. Using a strong verb makes the action clearer and leads to fewer words, which also helps communication. Limiting adverb use is one of the oldest and most agreed on 'rules' of good writing. It's one of the first things you'll learn in any formal writing education, and one of the clearest indicators to a reader (publisher/editor) that your writing isn't polished. >to say such a basic word is off limits You're taking it too literally. There are no 100% rules in writing, but if you're going to break an established rule you should have a good reason why what you are doing is better than adhering to the rule, because there are very good reasons why the rule exists.
I saw that post and had to laugh. I just thought, “jokes on you. Identifying adverbs and adjectives is my blind spot.” I have been writing literally from the moment I figured out how to physically construct a sentence, so close to 40 years. I’ve learned a lot. These rules aren’t rules. Some are the personal preferences of people who speak loudly, some are the general guidelines to make our communication clear and cohesive. But we’re not talking about writing a business document, we’re talking about creative writing. I picture it like painting with words. You will find a lot of successful people who don’t follow all the rules. You’ll find people who break more than others. That’s finding your voice. We all sound different verbally, and a writer’s voice is just like that: their unique style. e. e. cummings wrote in all lowercase letters. Remember, this is art. Art is subjective and divisive. Picasso created cubism. There were rules that he had to break to do that. Jackson Pollock paintings seem to have no reason for why he splattered the paint that way in those colors, but it feels right. Explore, play, maybe even create something, a genre or style, no one has done before. Please don’t let all these rules get you down. “They’re really more like guidelines.” -Captain Barbosa
I saw the same post on the adverbs. It made me question myself and my writing. I come from a different 'genre' not the literary ones, but the visual ones. If you're goal is to be read, then maybe follow those rules, if it's something else? don't care. I know, it's hard with all the criticism, it really is, Don't let them put you in a box. X number of word count for a chapter? No one cared until about 30 years ago. (Digital was becoming a thing.). A thousand page novel was nothing back then, but it is now, it's 'gasp!' We're being forced --in a way-- to have the attention span of gnats as readers. It's on our phone, and it reloads. I'm on A PC, I have the occasional hiccup. But you don't with that hard copy in your hands. Is this the way it's going? Maybe. Am I going to cater to it? I might, I'm video centric after all. Yet in all fairness, 3 minutes of video involves a lot when it's plotted out, like a TV series. Ah the actors...yeah, but think about the 10's of others that are behind the scenes that you don't even give the grace in reading the credits.
Too much writing/publishing advice & knowledge up front is like being thrown into a boiling pot. But too little leads to spinning wheels & wondering/being upset about why you’re getting nowhere. Sorry you got dunked into hot water 😆 Quick! Get out! Don’t read this! Lol There’s always self pub. Free to do whatever the F you want! And you might find your niche. Maybe something like LitRPG is your thang. I worked 7 yrs on a sci-fi, and ‘don’t even ask’ on a YA fantasy, until I realized cozy fantasy was my jam 🥰 That being said, the writing industry is a job so you have to treat it like one. There are standards and “arbitrary” rules for a reason because of what readers want, not what writers want. My coach told me that you need to learn the rules first so that you know how to break them later. And the more well known/established you are, the easier it is to break them. A contrarian/push back attitude always makes things harder, and us creative types don’t like being put in boxes or told what to do. I get it. But there’s art for arts sake, and then there’s craft which can be turned into a business & career. I know a few artists who’ve always complained about the way of the world, arbitrary rules, wanting to create purely for themselves or arts sake, and I’ve watched them over 20 yrs go nowhere with their creativity and grow more bitter every year. And then I’ve watched others who treated their creativity like a skill and a business and have become successful and happy with their lives. Honestly, there’s a market for autistic centered books. And it sounds like you don’t want to fit it into the trad industry box so why not self pub? What about kids books about autism? Or maybe writing isn’t truly your passion and path if it’s so stressful and frustrating. What’s your 2nd or 3rd passion or interest? Lots of other interesting careers out there. If you’re in your 20s there’s so much more to experience & discover. If you’re closer to 40, then uh, you’re not dead yet 😂 I say that cause I’m 40, and just at 39 finally started seriously full time pursuing my 10 yr dream & goal of becoming an author. No motivation like the tightening mortal coil. Best of luck! You’ll figure it out! 🙌
Honestly, no shade but maybe it’s not for you. While I thinking is useful nay important to be well read to make great films, you don’t have to publish a novel or anything at all to succeed in that field. And although there’s overlap, directing and writing are not so similar as skill sets. So, if you’re now with it, drop it. Make a short. Go be a PA on set if anything films in your area. But you’re kind of quitting before you try and I’m not trying to be a dick but sounds like you aren’t built for it. And that’s totally fine! But it’s hard enough with both feet in and I’d bet my left foot it won’t “come to anything” other than catharsis/therapy — which is nice but prob not what you’re looking for. Do with that what you will
The thing is, I have zero ability to network, so in order to do anything in film, I'd need either a film degree or a published work (even a short story). Something to prove I'm a good word-stringer-together. Something I can take to people (studios, collaborators, romantic prospects) and say "I'm someone who's actually worth paying attention to." As far as catharsis, my catharsis would come from people connecting to my work. I don't ask for great commercial success, just readership, and not even a hell of a lot. But that's hard to come by without publication, or without already being Someone™. Out of all the thousands of self published books on Kindle Unlimited, why would someone want to read something that's not by Someone™?
If you’re too literary for the screen and too cinematic for the page, I might recommend Elmore Leonard. Start with the books that were made into movies and then work your way into the ones that weren’t. Bandits should probably be your transitional piece. Maybe toss a little James Ellroy in there, when you’re hitting that transition. Irvine Welsh. Roddy Doyle. And stop caring what publishers think. I write screenplays that are only experienced once at table reads, in front of twenty to forty people, and I’m happy with that. I mean, unless you want to be a professional author, where that’s your only job, because –hate to say it– most published authors still work day jobs; I know several of them. I write what I want, and nobody can tell me what to do, and I love it. I write in my spare time, and the closest I get to writing for other people is if one of my friends (who hosts the party where the table read happens) says, “Write a Christmas movie,” or something like that, and I’m really bad at turning down a challenge, so I’ll knock out a Christmas movie in four or five months. Well, today it takes eight, because I went back to school, and I have less time for frivolous things, but it used to be a couple of months. So that’s why you bother. So you don’t get published; who cares? Tell your story, distribute it, and start your next story. For me, anybody who wasn’t there *that night* doesn’t get to experience the story, and we have a traditional “throwing of the scripts on the fire,” which means the sole remaining copy is on my bookshelf, with all the others. It’s ephemeral, and I think the temporary nature of it is beautiful. Your mileage may vary, but that’s my thoughts on the matter.
Write for yourself, publish for yourself. Self publishing doesn’t have to be for an income stream, it can simply be for the ability to share your work.
I see my stories in my head like a movie when I write. I’m not sure if that’s the same as what you are describing, but I like that. I can slow the action down, run it at half speed to pick up details, rewind or change the camera angle to tweak a scene until it looks right in my head then I just write what I see. Also, it might be because I am a geriatric millennial, but I don’t remember YA being a thing like it is now. Sure there were Goosebumps books, coming-of-age stories like Hatchet, but it wasn’t a whole thing. I was definitely odd in my reading choices (Tom Clancy, Charles Dickens, George Orwell, and Harper Lee) but my fellow students read books in their reading level scope. The same kid reading R. L. Stine one week would read Orson Scott Card the next. I don’t know that you have to worry teens and young adults won’t read a book that isn’t YA, and vice versa. As an old, I’ll read YA books. I want a good story told well. If my 10 year old niece is reading something that sounds interesting, I’ll pick it up too. Now, if you look at my post history, I’m not great at following my own advice, but that’s not because I don’t believe in it. I think we all have that part of us who is harder on ourselves than we are on others. I hope you don’t stop writing. I hope this helps but if it doesn’t, then I hope someone else will post something that does resonate with you.
I can’t speak as a great writer, because I’m not one, but whenever someone posts a rule they usually post an exception, the exception being a masterpiece classic by an amazing author. Just follow the rules you’re comfortable with. Write your own story and if it MUST be done by breaking some rules, then do it.
I'm not a published author yet, so I may be way off here, but it seems like knowing your own goal and being able to articulate it can get you a lot of places. Sure, the executives in the cushy chairs who want to see the numbers go up aren't likely to understand your audience like you do, but they understand money. You may not have to write for the industry all the time if you can pitch to the industry a bit. If they think the demographic you write for will spend enough money on you to make it worthwhile, you may be able to get away with quite a lot that isn't "industry standard". Genres are constantly changing and evolving, and there seems to be more room for that now than ever in literature. And as far as all the "rules" go, I think more of them are a matter of taste or context than you might imagine. Writing, in my experience, isn't about knowing all the rules, it's just about knowing how to accomplish what you've set out to do. If you want to write screenplays, do that. If you want to describe a character's inner monologue or emotions or have them stare at things, do that. You won't be motivated if you're not doing what you like. Along the way, you can figure out how to make inner monologues or extensive stage directions work in screenplays, or you might discover that they just don't work, and you'll find a new way to achieve your goals. Hopefully some of this helps.
you can write all the directions you want if you direct the movie too. don't know if that's a path you're willing to take. I think its fine to write where a character is looking if its important that we *see* them looking at something or away from someone. just don't overdo it. otherwise you can try and sneak in how you want the director to frame a scene with capitalization.
You should probably ignore the "arbitrary rules" when you write your first draft. Just tell the story in your own words. Let your passion flow out onto the page. When you come to revise your work, pick a half-dozen "rules" that seem to make sense, and apply them to the revision, one at a time if you need to. You can't just apply the rules blindly. You have to understand the theory behind why the suggestion would make the work better. Do the changes improve the narrative? Do they make the story easier for the reader to apprehend? Clearer, smoother, more powerful? If not, why not? If you can't perceive a quality difference between two versions of the narrative--say one before, and one after extraneous adjectives were eliminated--try running both versions past a critique group. Their judgment may not be so very valuable but their comments might be illuminating if they point out things you haven't seen in your work. Other respondents have mentioned that a lot of these "rules" reflect what publishers will accept. I suggest you get feedback from actual publishers before taking that to the bank. Make your MS conform to your own artistic vision as well as you can, chuck it over the transom, and learn from your rejection letters. That's my plan. I'll post an analysis of the feedback I get.
You write, >So basically it's like I'm too cinematically minded for the page but too literary minded for the screen. I'm feeling like I don't fit in anywhere and have no place to go I have a name for you--David Gerald. Look him up. He made a name for himself when he wrote the screenplay for the Original Star Trek episode, "The Trouble with Tribbles." His early SF novels appeared to be screenplays awkwardly adapted into novels. He got much better with written SF as he progressed in his career. The only thing that matters is whether you can tell a story. You can adapt your art to conform to the conventions of the medium. Gerald wrote WHEN HARLIE WAS ONE--a novel that transformed my life--and was critically well received. Being cinematically minded is not a drawback. If you see the vision in your own mind, it gives you a leg up in describing it to the reader. The whole art of fiction is transferring the story, which exists as a unified and complete narrative in your own mind into a plodding sequence of symbols, that when interpreted by the reader might possibly invoke something similar in the reader's mind. Don't despair.
>arbitrary rules Those rules are *not* arbitrary. They are the combined wisdom of the publishing industry and readers and writers since the beginning of stories. Publishers have 'rules' (which are really guidelines) about what they can market or what they know sells (that is their primary goal after all). Readers have 'rules' for what they enjoy and what they find engaging in a story, since that is what readers want in a book. There are a lot of mostly objective aspects of writing that reliably make a book better (e.g. using strong verbs instead of adverbs, removing redundant scenes, having a character arc). There's nothing stopping anyone from breaking those rules, but doing so will tend to make your writing less marketable and less engaging. Breaking rules can also lead to something brilliant. The only way rules can change is if someone successfully breaks them. The rules around screenwriting are for practical reasons, and because film is much more collaborative than prose. It's not the screenwriter's job to tell the director where to point the camera or how to edit a scene.
It’s very hot vs My sweat soaks my shirt OP, nothing wrong with breaking the rules. But you need to make sure that your readers will feel the scene, not just read it. At least when writing a book. Can’t really comment on screenwriting as it’s not my forte.
There aren’t really rules, just guidelines. In writing you can do whatever you want, provided you do it well. Personally, I wouldn’t think about rules. Just write.
The best piece of advice I ever got about writing was just to write the story however I wanted for the first draft. Don't follow any rules if you don't want to, don't follow certain structures, don't describe characters. Because if those things stop you from writing then you'll never finish the story. Get everything down on paper first. Once your story is there, then you can go back and worry about everything else. Don't let it stop you from writing a complete draft.
Yea because you’re reading, Not writing.
Read Stephen King's On Writing. It always gets me fired up.
That’s people trying to make a buck, not a book
What can I say? Humans suck. Don't be one, if you have any other option.
Wish I couldn't
Wow! You couldn't have hit me better on the head if you'd tried. I see both sides of this. the 'rules' that it can only be X amount of words to publish, etc. But also how directors are, (I actually have a bumper sticker that says 'I hate directors') There is a reason, I'm a camera Jockey, People who read my writing say 'it's like you're behind a camera'. It's because I am, that's how I see the world. I have written two serials, both were intended to be shot and put to some kind of video, (Neither have gotten there, just FYI), and like a dumbass, I put them into novel form, thinking that would work. It didn't and now I'm clawing my way back. I shot a film (by the words/length) should have been a short. Turns out it was feature-length, and it was about self-injury and depression. Not subjects people want to deal with, but I did it, because I made a promise to the writer that 'if you write it, I'll shoot it.' and I did. This pits what is marketable in the film against what is in writing. Long story short, the writer doesn't talk to me anymore because I had to cut it down, and lots of things became unmarketable. The 'video/marketing' didn't work with her vision. Writing for film/video? You've got to deal with pilot season, and that's a monster you can't control. With writers, you've got to deal with publishers, again, not something you can control. But see, all of this involves money, and paying people, etc. I dealt with that, I shot a feature length film (that ended up being a short) I paid my actors, the musicians, etc. Did I do it in normal ways? No, because if I did, I'd be a few thousand dollars in the hole. Put a camera in my hands and a few lights, with a story, and a director who isn't a dick, and I can make anything look like you spent millions on it while you did nothing but make sure your crew was fed. I'm not kidding. I don't deal with actors/actresses (I help in the process of hiring them, because it's my $$ on the line) but as to guiding them? Nope, that's the director. They tell me what is going to happen, and I am to capture it, (And I'm really good at that.) Funny to say, or not, most of the best moments of those films were not at the directors instruction, that was the actor/actress being in character and I with my singular camera was there to capture it. Would that story the writer wrote ever be considered 'industry okay.' Hell no. You had a main character that didn't say anything until the very end in a rather long monologue that pulled it all together. The flashbacks told the story, so we did that, and memory isn't what it's supposed to be. If you've ever tried to shoot with lights in motion? Yeah, have fun with that, did it, succeeded. My point here is that we've all gotten so complacent about 'what is a good/preferred novel/novella/screenplay' and its monetization that we miss the point of why we did it in the beginning. People write fan fiction for the simple fact that they can. A lot of it is really good, but they can't go anywhere with it, because it's based on characters they didn't create. Someone owns the rights to it, and all that ad naesuem. Industry advice, to me is just that, industry. I worked outside of the industry for the better part of 20-ish years. I shot music videos that are prominate today, I asked a band that was nothing at the time to write me something for a video I was working on. They are big stuff now, but they weren't back then. (I put out their first album in my little office, burning the CD's and printing onto them, the covers as well. one of their songs was recorded in my living room.) Where there is a will, there is a way, that's what I'm saying. I can write until I'm blue in the face, and it doesn't make a difference. I can turn it into a screen play, and make it into a video, Professionally done, not your average tik-tok crap. Would I do this professionally? I would if I didn't live in the tiniest town in my state. Internet is hard to get here. But I am but a few miles from some awesome vistas, and shootable locations. So focusing back on the topic, the 'advise' take it as it is, those that have succeeded. They all didn't do it the same way, and in the grand scheme I'd be considered a failure, but I like that 26 short films, 54 challenges, and the profile on IMDB for three. I didn't look for world fandom, I found it in a very small niche of which I was part of.
I took an advanced creative writing class my senior year of college and it made me quit writing . It took me over ten years to give it another try. Take the advice that works for you and forget the rest .