What Are You an Expert On?

I mean, I'm not saying I'm an expert on any one thing. I'm more like one of those "Jack of all trades types"... you know, a smart arse.

But, we all have that one thing we that we just "know boats" and condescend others over.

For me, it's being a sarcastic arse.

No, not really. I kid, I kid.

I do have hobbies though, and of those hobbies I would like to think I know what I am doing. Read that sentence again, obviously I know nothing about anything I think I know... things about. Sometimes I can get all "I know boats, I can make them float!", and people look at me and whisper to one another, "God, she is a condescending, know-it-all, bitch."

To be honest, there is a certain amount of expert opinion that every one can take before they want to close their ears and block out the noise.

I for one, hate hearing myself speak about things when I pretend I know what I am doing.

And expert opinions are what brought me here today.

*god, i am weird*

Recently, I attended an author's group with my crazy author friends and we got onto the topic of being taught by those "in the industry" and how to's and strict rules of writing that - if I am honest - seem really militant for a creative writing style.

I like to think of creative writing the same way that I think of art.

Every Artist has their own Style

I mean, it's fun to think that we can all draw like other people, or paint, or whatever we want to do with our art, but the reality of it is... All artists have their own styles that they are comfortable with. As an artist myself, I often find myself going in circles on whether I actually can draw, but usually this only happens when I try to do it the way someone else is saying it should be done.

In the end, if the image can be interpreted even remotely close to what I am trying to depict - I can do it. Right?

So, why then, is it not the same for an Author. Creative writing, if given enough license and a lot less rules can be uniquely different in the same way.

---

#1: Why Is This Topic So Important?

We are sitting around the table, drinking coffee and eating the orange and poppy seed cake our meeting coordinator passionately baked for us. Conversation is flowing. The topic - An industry editor whose only interest is to limit our new comer's writing style and reduce it to the same manufactured writing style as every other mainstream author.

Don't get me wrong, I fully understand the importance of marketability, but should the author's voice not be taken into account? Or better yet, the reader's ease?

The topic at hand contained nuts and bolts like:

• Fragmented Sentences

• Showing, not telling

• Running Dialogue

Who doesn't use these from time to time? And if you don't, why?

WHY?!

Fragmented sentences, especially in moments of urgency or action scenes - if not used too often - can be an effective use of creativity. So, why then are we told expressly, that Fragmented Sentences are banned?

Good Question, Author Lady. Good Question.

So, our new member was explaining how some editor had explicitly asked her to remove all of her fragmented sentences and lengthen them into full, take forever to read because they are written as an entire sentence for a full paragraph explaining every single detail that anyone could possibly need inside the single sentence which eventually just becomes an entire paragraph that take the reader an explicitly loooooong tiiime toooo reeeead...

You're getting my point now, yeah?

In the same token, sentences that are 'run on' sentences are equally, if not more, annoying. and also... BANNED! (for those of your wondering what a run on sentence is, that ^^ whole paragraph above, is a run-on sentence)

So, I have my own story that relates here.

I was young, but 16 years of age...

Dramatic as ever...

Like most teenagers on rampage.

*Recognise your age, its a teenage rampage... Dance, dance, headbang* Cough... umm.

Anywho, in English class we had an assignment that I could absolutely get on board with. (Funny, cause school work and I were mortal enemies, especially homework.) At the time, I was exploring the world of writing for myself, in secret, in a dark room, like a mushroom. Honestly, not much has changed, really.

I digress.

So, we had to write this short story that connected to movie we had just watched in class... Like, it was the after story?

I got into the assignment and wrote my short story, entirely on topic and handed it in with absolute glee. To be fair - in all my dramatic flair - at the time I was a huge fan of fragmented sentences.

My teacher, took every liberty in not only grading the paper with a C+ *16yr old me absolutely Devastated* but she gave me a verbal critique session. I swallowed the lump in my throat four hundred and sixty-seven times during this constructive criticism session, at least until I was out of her vision. (if it helps, english and art were the only subjects I didn't fail)

Looking back now, I do see why. She could see the potential in my writing and was only trying to help. But I was an arrogant teenager... and got... indignant.

At first.

I ran home to mother, spluttering and crying and all, "Why doesn't nobody love me!"

Not really, haha.

I spoke with my mother at length about it and finally came around to taking my English Teacher's advice into consideration.

Advice which was NOT to remove them completely, but to recognise when and if fragmented sentences were useful to the progression of the story and the imagery for the reader.

In all honesty, Miss English Teacher was entirely correct. Effective writing takes the understanding of knowing when to create a certain type of ebb and flow for your reader. Fragmented sentences can seem jarring to a reader, especially when they are one after the other. Fast paced. Jolting. Giving not much explanation. Barely making a point.

I bet you're getting the point I am making though, right?

However, when I finally got out into "the industry" I found, much like my author friend, that this advice was not considered good advice by editors. Which, if you ask me, is just shit... I mean, incongruent. After all, how is it that my ENGLISH AND CREATIVE WRITING TEACHER IN SENIOR HIGHSCHOOL didn't know what she was talking about?

Can you tell I didn't like being told not to use fragmented sentences at all?

I'm not saying they should be used all the time, but let me make an example.

Imagine a character is going about their usual day, everything is normal, all sweet and lovely the birds are chirping, there is a lawn mower going in the distance, a dog is barking the character is as happy as Larry, whoever he is.

Then, something dramatic happens, and instead of the author saying:

Something dramatic jolted her!

They say:

A dramatic thing took place right next to the person and there was a moment where they took a really long time to react to the dramatic thing that was taking place and it took the reader a full paragraph to read that it was a JOLT and that the character should have reacted to... in real time.

I don't know about you, but if something abrupt were to happen I would want to read about it in as an abrupt sense to pull me into the same feeling of shock... and not have to read about it forever.

Just throw me in!

#2: What about the other Nuts and Bolts?

Showing not telling? I mean, it is kind of a no brainer. But how do we know when we are not telling!!

Honestly, this one comes down to a lot of time spent editing and rephrasing. It is unnatural to some of us, to write 'showing' straight off the bat.

^ the bat

See, I'm showing you the bat.

Myself, I write with a lot of flow and often just need to get it down onto the paper and come back and go over it. And in all honesty, I've never really been given a review from a reader to even know what it is a READER expects in this area - not an editor. Editors will always tell you how shit you are.

As a reader, can you tell what is being told to you and what it being shown?

Can you tell the difference?

I can't. (I can... truly.)

So what is the difference, you ask? I know you didn't ask. But I also, am still going to show you. Ha ha, see what I did there?

Telling is the easier, shorter way of giving the facts with no illustration.

Like, you know, like...

He walked into the room. He sat down on a chair. There was a table. He put his feet on it. There was a bug. It had wings. And it could fly.

Showing is fluffier, illustrative. Engaging. And I mean, in all honesty, if we were just told that - and not - Show! Don't Tell! which in all honesty can leave you reeling in a "What the fuck does that even mean?" kind of way.

So... I show.

Adrian stepped into the cramped room, a chair sat awkwardly by a foldable table that sported grimy blackened marks along its edge. He'd been here so often he no longer cared for the hygiene of the place, or for the lack thereof.

He sat down in the chair, it creaked under his weight, the plastic weakened with age. He eyed an insect as it ruffled its shimmering, harlequin wings, adjusting its belt so to speak,. crawling across the grimy surface of the table.

He put his foot on the table, etc. etc. (this is not a great example, but you can get it)

Get it? Get my point?

Is this helpful?!

I like to look at showing as though the reader is sensing the scene. Senses are our most useful skills and often, we don't even think of them in that way. But when writing, we really need to rely on those sensations to show what we are attempting to get across.

RANT SESH!

I once had an editor that kept on telling me to show and not tell, I went over and over and over the text he was referring to, asking all the while what the flying rabbit he was talking about and we never came around to - well.. anything. I was left dazed and confused and he just kept saying "Don't you get it? If you don't get the simple, showing and not telling, then you can't write."

Which is not constructive criticism any way you look at it, its just downright nasty.

Turned out, I did get it. I was already doing it. So, he was the one, that was clearly confused? How do I know this? Well, I took the same text for a second opinion and told this new editor the notes I'd been given and she was like...

She then proceeded to tell me I was writing well and not to listen to him.

So, I did that.

I didn't listen. Maybe I took it to far and stopped listening to anyone. I do what I want!

But that's less about the topic and more about differences of opinion... I guess.

What is even real?

If it feels real, is it real?

Which leads into my next point. I want to talk about running dialogue. I find as a reader, I can get really bogged down by Dialogue that is written a little like this:

The room was quiet, nothing but the gentle hum of the air conditioner. Jason stood, his hands on his hips as he looked at Minerva and his brow furrowed, "You're a real bitch, lady." He said with words form his mouth, his mouth forming an expression and his hands shaking in an exasperated manner, as though he danced in anger with a notion of pure indignant petulance.

She looked at him with her face and scrunched up her nose with a scrunchy nose face, thoughts on her mind that she wouldn't say out loud, but how can anyone really know what she is thinking anyway, and said, "You suck, Jerry."

Already, you're distracted by all the stuff they're doing, right? I am, why are they doing and thinking things when they should be just reacting and speaking to one another?

(have you noticed I write really shit when I'm trying to make a point about how shit it is to read it? *laughing*)

I like to think of dialogue as it happens in real life. For example:

The room was quiet, nothing but the gentle hum of the air conditioner. Jason stood, his hands on his hips as he looked at Minerva and his brow furrowed, "You're a real bitch, lady."

"You suck, Jerry?" Minerva pouted.

"My name, is Jason."

"That's a stupid name. I think you should change it to Jerry." She sneered.

Jason balked, how dare she say such a thing? He flustered as anger boiled in his belly.

You're in the conversation. And I mean, Jason isn't wrong. She's a real bitch. But the point I am making is, the conversation moves forward, and if you really set it up, its easy to follow who is saying what. (I didn't set this up, just to be clear. Just making a distinction between two styles.)

Another thing I have commonly come across as a reader, is conversations during action scenes. To me, there is no room for conversation with your Party members when a Dragon is eating you. Stop Yapping and take action. It is jarring for me as a reader, so I won't do it as a writer. This is just my opinion and I know there isn't an author alive that will listen, but I hate feeling like I am reading one of those cartoons with massive monologues during action scenes...

It's disembowelling. Yeah I said that. I feel like I am being disembowelled when writer's do this.

It just isn't realistic.

Which brings me to my final points...

#3: Is Your Reader Feeling Empowered?

I have never understood why Editor's notes are not based on the reviews that serial readers give to authors.

Often, when at signing events or other author events, there are readers that offer wonderful reviews directly to the author. And I do not mean, to myself, specifically. Every reader is different, people like what they like, all of our brains work differently, which I understand - *writes in neurodivergent* - there may be people that are entirely opposed to any of the points I am making here.

But, when it comes to reviews I have received (or witnessed) I have always wondered why readers say the exact opposite things to me about my writing to what editors have.

Some notes I have taken to heart and snuggled with are as follows:

"I love the way you write dialogue. It feels like I'm seeing it in real time."

"I love your action scenes. It's like I'm watching a movie in my head."

And these are just the ones directed at me. I once heard a fan say to another author that they enjoyed their "punchy sentences, they are delightfully shocking..." and if that reader wasn't talking about Fragmented sentences I interpreted it incorrectly.

But, it's funny. Because I know that in my action scenes are full of fragmented sentences. Is it possible the 'short, punchy' sentences help the image appear in the minds eye?

I find it odd that we are basing our writing on the marketing that has been decided by the industry and not, the reader.

Reader's are often excited by the creative styles some authors use.

So, why can we not have the same flexibilities granted to us? Why do I have to be famous to matter?

And, as I am sure many of you are aware there are popular authors today that break all of these rules, and are internationally acclaimed. I mean, some of them can't even spell good. *sparkle-pires cough cough*

So I say, Burn it to the ground! Do what makes you happy! Be a rebel and write what you want, how you want.

Just edit it good.

Opposite to the way I edit blog posts.

I don't even care.

Or, in the words on the host of our Author/Writing Club, and I am totally paraphrasing "Writing is an expression, it's an individual interpretation that needs to excite the imagination. However we get there, in the end, its always right if you wrote it from your heart." Or something... like that. ...

And, it's at this point, I'm realising, it's her that should have written this blog. And not... the troll that is me.

*whispers in self deprecation*

Be seeing you, rebels.

Ta-ta