Taking a Writing Course

[popmuze]

I'd been looking forward to taking a course on how to write a mystery, since it would A) get me out of the house one night a week and B) I've never written a mystery and I'd like to try a class, rather than read a book about the subject.

However, I just started reading one of the books by the teacher and it's awful. I got to page 25 without encountering a single "said" as a dialog tag. One paragraph had eight adverbs. On the other hand, this person has published a half a dozen books in hardcover.

I have two questions: are the standards so low in mystery writing that all that matters is the mystery?

And two: could a writer whose work you don't respect be a good teacher anyway and/or have valuable insights about getting a mystery novel published?

[Ava Jarvis]

This probably belongs in the Get With the Genre -> Mystery/Thriller forum.

The faults you mention are not necessarily fatal, or even faults. How are the Amazon rankings and customer reviews on them? Were the hardcovers followed by paperbacks?

If it works, it works somehow. Faults with technique can be forgiven when plot and characters are extremely good.

As for standards being low in the mystery genre... have you read the genre at all? Try that before making a sweeping statement based on a single author (especially when you haven't yet read their book through with an ear for plot and characters).

[popmuze]

This probably belongs in the Get With the Genre -> Mystery/Thriller forum.

The faults you mention are not necessarily fatal, or even faults. How are the Amazon rankings and customer reviews on them? Were the hardcovers followed by paperbacks?

If it works, it works somehow. Faults with technique can be forgiven when plot and characters are extremely good.

As for standards being low in the mystery genre... have you read the genre at all? Try that before making a sweeping statement based on a single author (especially when you haven't yet read their book through with an ear for plot and characters).




To tell you the truth, when the writing is bad it's hard for me to get interested in the plot or the characters, no matter how many people may rave about the book on Amazon or buy it in the stores. I wouldn't say I was a diehard mystery fan, but I love people who use it for their own purposes, like Jonathan Lethem, Michael Chabon, Jerome Charyn, Carl Hiaasen.

Anyway, this particular single author is the one giving the course. And to me the question is less about the mystery genre than about taking a course with a writer whose book you really don't like (after 25 pages)

[Ava Jarvis]

As a sort of illustrative...

Progenitor to much of the genre is Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories and novelettes. The best Holmes stories are well-plotted (good mysteries need good plotting), but the series is most memorable for its titular character.

Another giant in the sub-genre of detective fiction are the Nero Wolfe mysteries by Rex Stout. One of the best masters of the written word, on a par with E.B. White I think. Not all the books were good, but obviously some were quite excellent. One of the fan favorites is not properly a mystery (The Doorbell Rang). But the characters of Archie Goodwin and Nero Wolfe carry the day. And of course, Stout's books tend to be well-plotted.

When we start looking at other sub-genres, like Private Investigator fiction, the mystery takes on a more visceral nature, rather than being the puzzle box of detective fiction. For PI fiction, see A History of Private Eye Fiction (http://www.mysterynet.com/books/testimony/history-of-private-eye-fiction.shtml).

Then there are police procedurals, which sound like what they are. You can probably trust this Wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_procedural).

Other sub-genres include the cozy, where a non-PI, non-police, non-detective character figures out the mystery, usually as it happens in a little happy community, but not necessarily.

I have yet to work out if spy fiction falls more into mystery or thriller, but so far what I've seen amounts to "A Very Big Usually International Mystery".

But go to the library and grab armfuls of the stuff if you haven't already.

[Ava Jarvis]

Anyway, this particular single author is the one giving the course. And to me the question is less about the mystery genre than about taking a course with a writer whose book you really don't like (after 25 pages)

Part of your question also dealt with something more answerable to in the Mystery/Thriller section. :)

As for taking a course from a writer whose fiction ya don't like: you haven't gotten far enough to determine if plot and character, which sound like what you're going to get out of the course, is what this author excels in. Without that, a further decision would be on shaky grounds.

[NicoleMD]

I'd give the book a little more of a chance, if I were you. I've been iffy on books around that page that have turned out not so bad. Was this an early book in the teacher's career? That might make a difference, too. And besides, styles vary just as much as a reader's personal preferences, so you still may have much to learn, even if you end up not liking your teacher's book at all.

Nicole

[amber_grosjean]

Not everyone is going to like the same books, for so many reasons. Bad writing is one of them. Being able to single out the errors says something about your ability as a writer. You can learn from that. Have you talked to your teacher about this? His/her feelings aren't going to be hurt. Your teacher may respect you as a writer by pointing out the errors. Don't point them all out but point out the ones that really bugged you about the story and explain why it bugged you.

NicoleMD made a point as well. Writers generally improve their writing skills as they write more books and learn as they go. Every writer does this. Even the great masters of the craft. They are all human and all humans make mistakes. It makes me feel better knowing that. I hope it does for you as well!

Amber

[David I]

Read through first before making your decision. See if, despite spotty prose, you think there is something you could learn--or if the prose is simply too high of a hurdle.

I commend you for reading the book first, though. I've taken classes from three different novelists, and in each of the classes I was the only student enrolled who'd actually read the teacher's fiction prior to signing up!

In one case the class was from a novelist I admired. In another case it was from a solid, competent writer who didn't write my kind of thing but was a clear professional.

In the third case, though, the writer was one whose book I didn't enjoy, either from a prose or a story perspective. And guess what--I ended up dropping the class.

There are teachers who are better teachers than writers, and vice-versa. But in my opinion, you are being smart in thinking this over first. You're asking important questions.

[popmuze]

As a point of information, this is the writer's most recent book, written within the last couple of years. But it's also the sixth or eighth in a series, so I'm thinking maybe the writing has become lax over the years because the character caught on and the author has been under pressure to produce a title every two months (it seems like this was written in two months).
That being said, after having had several YA novels published by a major house, my flaw has always been plot (strengths are character, description, humor and dialog). So I'm thinking, maybe I could learn a bit about plotting in this class and develop a lead character for a series of cozy type mysteries.
I have one in mind based on a part time detective I met in my town (who seems to have led quite a boring life nonetheless) and another around a divorced father and his estranged son--which obviously could be the same guy. Or the same book!

[Ava Jarvis]

That being said, after having had several YA novels published by a major house, my flaw has always been plot (strengths are character, description, humor and dialog). So I'm thinking, maybe I could learn a bit about plotting in this class and develop a lead character for a series of cozy type mysteries.


Cool! Plot is difficult for me too. Not a good thing going into a mystery genre ;) so I just read as much as possible (including stuff I would not normally read). Also, you may want to consider Bell's _Plot & Structure_ if you haven't already. It's been invaluable.

Agatha Christie was the queen of mystery puzzle box.

I have one in mind based on a part time detective I met in my town (who seems to have led quite a boring life nonetheless) and another around a divorced father and his estranged son--which obviously could be the same guy. Or the same book!

That sounds good to me. The most well-rounded mysteries have a theme that binds the mystery and the investigator's lives together. Spenser for instance. This can lead to problems (e.g., you cannot write fifty books easily if your characters develop), but it leads to a concoction satisfying for both writer and reader. Both Sherlock Holmes and Poirot did not develop much, which I think played a part in the authors coming to despise their own characters.

I do not want that happening to me, so I plan on development, even if it will shorten the life of the series.

Good luck! I salute thee, fellow mystery genre explorer!

[preyer]

well, it's not a critique class, right? ne'ertheless, i'd ask him to justify excessive adverbs and hope the answer is, 'that's what the reader wants,' as opposed to, 'that's because i'm a lazy schlub with hands out making cheap money grabs.' i mean, you wouldn't write a bodice-ripper without adverbs and purple prose if that's your target audience, eh? lol. sounds like the guy is writing pulp, not great art, necessarily. nothing wrong with that, but it's good to know, imo.

if i felt his answer was honest and intelligent, i might stick around. after all, you're there to learn how to write a mystery story (though i think stylizing the prose is definitely worth discussing). my question would be the exact same one you asked about the quality of mysteries and see what his answer is. it's worth giving the guy the opportunity to explain things, imo.

[JoniBGoode]

Anyway, this particular single author is the one giving the course. And to me the question is less about the mystery genre than about taking a course with a writer whose book you really don't like (after 25 pages)

I would also say read the entire book first. IMHO the quality of mystery writing varies a lot from Ed McBain to...people who are NOT Ed McBain.

I will say that I've taken a number of writing courses, and the single most important element is the instructor. Someone can have a very different writing style than you do, and still be a great teacher. But, if you have an instructor who doesn't write well, or can't teach, or isn't good at managing the workshop dynamic, then you're going to have a bad class.

If you sign up for this class and drop it after 1 or 2 weeks, can you get a full refund? (That's true in most college courses.) If so, I'd say sign up. After a week or 2, if you still have doubts, drop the class.

If it's a course where you have to pay the entire fee upfront with no possibility of refund, I'd say skip it. Or call the instructor, tell him/her that you're considering the class and have a conversation about writing. If you still have doubts after the conversation, it's a no go.

[PeeDee]

What the heck, take the class. The worst you can do is learn nothing. It still gets you outta the house a night a week. :)

[Shadow_Ferret]

I have two questions: are the standards so low in mystery writing that all that matters is the mystery?

And two: could a writer whose work you don't respect be a good teacher anyway and/or have valuable insights about getting a mystery novel published?

Well, first, what genres do you normally read? Because I keep hearing all the so-called experts here saying you can't use adverbs and you should only use said and yet nearly every book I read, and these are bestsellers in their respective genres, commit those "crimes against literacy."

So I've just started taking that advice with a grain of salt. Obviously it's do as I say, not as I do.

I always thought that the reason people become teachers is because they can't do ("those who can't, teach). So yes, someone who isn't a great writer can be a great teacher. In fact, I would think someone who wasn't all caught up in how they do things as a writer would probably make a damned fine teacher.

[PeeDee]

Mostly, I just write. Worrying about "crimes against literacy" and the "laws of literacy" over-much is sort of like being a Star Trek fan who obsesses over starship blueprints instead of just enjoying the show.

[popmuze]

Well, first, what genres do you normally read?

It seems like I read the same book over and over again, a novel much like the ones I write, with a main character pretty much like me, going through a situation I can totally identify with--you know, the male weepie, or the satiric coming of age novel, or the shnook finally gets the girl novel, a la Knocked Up.

It would be a break to read something different and, especially, to write something different.

[PeeDee]

Go read some James Joyce. After Finnegan's Wake, you will have zero idea what sort of book you've just read. :D

[Shadow_Ferret]

It seems like I read the same book over and over again, a novel much like the ones I write, with a main character pretty much like me, going through a situation I can totally identify with--you know, the male weepie, or the satiric coming of age novel, or the shnook finally gets the girl novel, a la Knocked Up.

It would be a break to read something different and, especially, to write something different.
I didn't know there was such a thing as a male weepie. Sounds horrible.

I'd suggest you try other genres. You might be surprised at what is, and isn't, considered acceptable with regards to grammar do's and don'ts.

You might even discover that what you consider low standards are in fact the norm throughout many genres.

[Ava Jarvis]

You might even discover that what you consider low standards are in fact the norm throughout many genres.

C'mon, whack the genre writers!

We be all hacks. :)

[David I]

What the heck, take the class. The worst you can do is learn nothing.

I think a bad writing teacher can be dangerous to the unprepared. I don't think you ever learn nothing, even from a bad class. The danger is learning things that are wrong.

But Popmuze sounds more than prepared to question what is handed down from the podium, and is probably innoculated against really bad lessons.

[PeeDee]

I think a bad writing teacher can be dangerous to the unprepared. I don't think you ever learn nothing, even from a bad class. The danger is learning things that are wrong.

But Popmuze sounds more than prepared to question what is handed down from the podium, and is probably innoculated against really bad lessons.

To the absolutely unprepared and impressionable? Absolutely dangerous. But I think that if you have the sense to say "No. I do not agree with that," and continue without it, then you'd do all right.

Of course, I'm the guy who lasts all of ten minutes talking to writing teachers...

[David I]

I always thought that the reason people become teachers is because they can't do ("those who can't, teach).

Hmm. Well, an awful lot of great writers teach. Joyce Carol Oates, at Princeton. Peter Carey, two-time winner of the Booker Prize, is at Hunter College. John Barth was long the mainstay of the writing program at University of Maryland.

Ah, you say, but those are all literary writers. True. But plenty of genre writers--Lawrence Block comes to miind--have taught classes to supplement their income and get themselves out of the house. Indeed, I think community colleges and college extension services are good places to look for solid, practicing writers who are supplementing their income.

Only problem is, some of them are bad writers, and some of them are bad teachers, and some are both. And a few are just plain idiots.

[Ava Jarvis]

I think a bad writing teacher can be dangerous to the unprepared. I don't think you ever learn nothing, even from a bad class. The danger is learning things that are wrong.

I agree. One must learn to question them. It's one of the reasons I do most of my learning from books that are recommended from trusted, good writers.

But Popmuze sounds more than prepared to question what is handed down from the podium, and is probably innoculated against really bad lessons.

Hee. :)

As for "does the mystery genre have such low standards..." question... does it matter? It sure doesn't matter that fantasy is full of Lord of the Rings ripoffs; you still get Gene Wolfe and Neil Gaiman there, and their writing hits the all colors in the stylistic rainbow. It sure doesn't matter that mystery may be full of Poirot copies; Agatha Christie and Ed McBain etc are there.

(In fact, the reason why Doyle was able to get his Holmes stories into the Strand was along the lines of the editor going through the Victorian version of the slush pile and going, basically, "ZOMG! He can write! Straightforwardly! And it isn't painful to read! And he can string paragraphs together into a plot! That goes somewhere! And he has memorable characters! ZOMG! Quick, send a telegram!")

So what if you think a genre is full of low lights? Be one of the highlights. Be one of the writers who, for all the negative definitions of hack, the only one that remotely applies is "you write in a genre".

[PeeDee]

(In fact, the reason why Doyle was able to get his Holmes stories into the Strand was along the lines of the editor going through the Victorian version of the slush pile and going, basically, "ZOMG! He can write! Straightforwardly! And it isn't painful to read! And he can string paragraphs together into a plot! That goes somewhere! And he has memorable characters! ZOMG! Quick, send a telegram!")
.

Amazing how long the phrase "ZOMG" has apparently been in use, isn't it...

[Ava Jarvis]

Amazing how long the phrase "ZOMG" has apparently been in use, isn't it...


Find...

Find: ZOMG
Replace: By the Lord Harry
Replace All

:)

[Shadow_Ferret]

Ah, you say, but those are all literary writers.

Actually, I didn't say that. I'm aware there are many good writers (I refuse to count Oates in that group) that also teach writing. First, I was being facesious. Second, I was making a joke. :tongue

As for "does the mystery genre have such low standards..." question... does it matter? It sure doesn't matter that fantasy is full of Lord of the Rings ripoffs; you still get Gene Wolfe and Neil Gaiman there, and their writing hits the all colors in the stylistic rainbow. It sure doesn't matter that mystery may be full of Poirot copies; Agatha Christie and Ed McBain etc are there.
I always thought Neil Gaiman wrote comic books.

[PeeDee]

I always thought Neil Gaiman wrote comic books.


*SMACK*

We are literary snobs here! We call them graphic novels!

[Ava Jarvis]

*SMACK*

We are literary snobs here! We call them graphic novels!

Didn't some award committee decide to ban comic books/graphic novels from future lists of nominees, because one of Gaiman's Sandman stories won one year and they didn't like the idea of that at all?

[KTC]

a great writer doesn't always make a great teacher. And...I have found that the opposite is also true...oddly enough.

[PeeDee]

Didn't some award committee decide to ban comic books/graphic novels from future lists of nominees, because one of Gaiman's Sandman stories won one year and they didn't like the idea of that at all?

That was the World Fantasy Award. The issue A Midsummer Night's Dream (Neil Gaiman, Michael Zulli) won. It is the only comic book ever to do so.

[Ava Jarvis]

That was the World Fantasy Award. The issue A Midsummer Night's Dream (Neil Gaiman, Michael Zulli) won. It is the only comic book ever to do so.

And sadly will continue to be the only comic book to do so....

[popmuze]

I hate the term literary. To me, a literary novel is really a "literate" novel, in that it can occur in any genre and about any theme, just that the writing is good, the characterizations sharp, etc. What gets me is when people imply that you can get away with a lot less if you write in a genre, that the readers expect bad writing or, worse, don't even notice that it's bad (and, by implication, would be confused by good writing).
So, if the lack of said and the preponderance of adverbs, in addition to taking me out of the story and making me notice the (bad) writing and preventing me from wanting to follow the plot, is, in fact, the norm in genre mysteries, is that what I have to write if I want to practice the craft?
You don't see Elmore Leonard, Dashiel Hammett, Mickey Spillane, Walter Mosley, and a lot of others doing that, do you? I don't know, maybe you do.
I just can't get into a book where every sentence delivered has to be explained with an unnecessary modifier. So sue me.

[popmuze]

Speaking of writing teachers. I took a course once with John Hawkes (The Blood Oranges). By the mid point of the semester everyone had stopped writing because of his fearful criticisms.
On the other hand, once I got back to writing, I think I was a better writer because of him.
On the third hand, my other option at the time would have been to take a course with Joseph Heller (Catch 22). I often think if I'd chosen Heller my whole life would have turned out differently.

[Shadow_Ferret]

I'll check my Dashell Hammett when I get home and post a few lines.

And YOU consider a lack of said and adverbs bad writing. That doesn't make it bad writing. Some of my favorite authors, authors who inspired me to become a writer, use words other than said and use adverbs.

I don't consider that bad writing, I consider it a PART of writing.

[GerriB]

However, I just started reading one of the books by the teacher and it's awful. I got to page 25 without encountering a single "said" as a dialog tag. One paragraph had eight adverbs. On the other hand, this person has published a half a dozen books in hardcover.

I would point out that styles of writing differ throughout the genres. What makes you cringe often won't even be noticable to a normal reader.

I'd say you've fallen into the line edit trap of critiquing, and you're applying it to published works. But if he/she has been publishing and selling well enough to hit hardcover, readers aren't paying attention to the same things you are.

I'm reminded of a Donald Maass quote.


Tension on every page is a technique that keeps readers glued to a novel, even in the absence of artistic prose, rich atmosphere, complex characters and lofty themes. It is the application of macroconflict on a microscale.
It is the key breakout skill.
–Donald Maass, Writing the Breakout Novel.


Notice artistic prose is on the list.

I'd recommend going back to the book, turning off your internal editor, and just read the Story. Then you should be able to see what others see in his/her books.

Good luck!

[popmuze]

And YOU consider a lack of said and adverbs bad writing. I don't consider that bad writing, I consider it a PART of writing.

Part of writing, yes, when used sparingly, like paprika. But this author, in the first 25 pages at least, never used "said" once. Every single solitary sentence had an annoying tag, like observed, declaimed, pointed out, sniffled, snorted, harumphed. etc.

And don't tell me about adverbs. I used to be the adverb king. But once you start noticing them in every sentence, sometimes two in the same sentence, it really distracts from the story.

[popmuze]

I'm reminded of a Donald Maass quote.



Hmmm. Couldn't get the quote to show up. But I just ordered the Maass book through Amazon. Maybe I should just read it and forget about the class.

But, as PeeDee so wisely put it, I need to get out a little.

Anyway, now I'm anxious to read another 25 pages (I've got ten minutes to spare).

[TrickyFiction]

I always thought Neil Gaiman wrote comic books.

He has also written a good number of fantasy novels.
Forgive me if this is a joke and I missed it. I seem to be doing that a lot lately.

[GerriB]

Hmmm. Couldn't get the quote to show up. But I just ordered the Maass book through Amazon. Maybe I should just read it and forget about the class.

Sorry. Thought the quote function would work. Here it is again.

Tension on every page is a technique that keeps readers glued to a novel, even in the absence of artistic prose, rich atmosphere, complex characters and lofty themes. It is the application of macroconflict on a microscale.
It is the key breakout skill.
–Donald Maass, Writing the Breakout Novel.

[Shadow_Ferret]

Part of writing, yes, when used sparingly, like paprika. But this author, in the first 25 pages at least, never used "said" once. Every single solitary sentence had an annoying tag, like observed, declaimed, pointed out, sniffled, snorted, harumphed. etc.

And don't tell me about adverbs. I used to be the adverb king. But once you start noticing them in every sentence, sometimes two in the same sentence, it really distracts from the story.

As a write you notice it and it distracts you. I can assure you there are very few readers who even notice.

And here are some examples from Dashiell Hammett, found on pages 20-21 of The Maltese Falcon.
He said reprovingly.
Dundy said hotly.
he pleaded
Spade told him
the Lieutenant went on
Spade spoke
Tom growled apologetically
Dundy replied stubbornly

I find nothing wrong with that.

He has also written a good number of fantasy novels.
Forgive me if this is a joke and I missed it. I seem to be doing that a lot lately.

Part joke. I only recently learned he wrote real stuff, though I haven't sought any out.

[popmuze]

He said reprovingly.
Dundy said hotly.
he pleaded
Spade told him
the Lieutenant went on
Spade spoke
Tom growled apologetically
Dundy replied stubbornly


I find my resolve weakening. But then why, on the advice of some of the other experts around here, did I spend revision #17 of my latest novel substituting said for all these words and removing two thirds of my adverbs?

Was it because I wasn't writing a mystery?

[David I]

Some writers balk at the thought that there are formulas to writing, but all we're listing are the ingredients. A Caesar salad contains such and such. However, two different people cooking the same recipe will not produce the same dish. The one who is more creative and innovative will concoct something that transcends formula.
– Crafting Scenes, Raymond Obstfeld

Hey, Ray Obstfeld's a good friend of mine (as well as one of the best writing teachers around--if you're anywhere within driving distance of Costa Mesa, Californina, he teaches a great novel workshop at Orange Coast College). Essential Guide to Crafting Scenes is a good book.

In terms of the adverb/dialogue-tag debate: I don't use adverbs in tags. Ever. And I seldom employ anything but "said" and "asked."

This a partly a matter of changing times. Writers used to be far more intrusive; that has tended to decline along with omniscient voice. Re-read The Great Gatsby. Brilliant prose. But all kinds of weird dialogue tags--which I have to work to overlook. Ditto Hammett--though he was at the tail-end of the Tom Swifty dialogue-tag era. Ditto Tolkein. (Though JK Rowling has introduced a whole new wave of ridiculous tags).

If you can't live without neutral dialogue tags, you should at least put the at the beginnig of the dialogue. When I read something like--

"But that letter was only postmarked on Thursday!" Bill ejaculated hotly.

--the idea that he ejaculated those words hotly is so distracting, and so much more vivid (and weird) than the dialogue, that I've forgotten what the hell Bill said.

I agree that it's good to try and read something popular to see why people like it. But sometimes it's just too painful. I have assaulted The Da Vinci Code a half-dozen times and never made it more than a few pages. The writing stops me dead.

PS to Popmuze: Hawkes versus Heller? What a bizarre choice. But I would have jumped at the chance to take a course from either.

[pepperlandgirl]

I find my resolve weakening. But then why, on the advice of some of the other experts around here, did I spend revision #17 of my latest novel substituting said for all these words and removing two thirds of my adverbs?

Was it because I wasn't writing a mystery?

well, Hammett is very, very precise. Yeah, he uses a lot of adverbs and a lot of dialogue tags beside "said" but he does so with a clean precision (and I mean a lot Several per page). There isa reason for every single (or nearly every) adverb he uses, and most of that is performative. Spade says things "hotly" and "angrily" and "coldly" and smiles "distantly" and whatnot because he wants the people around him to think he is "hot" or "angry" or "cold." It's always part of how Spade is playing the people around him. True, he does get genuinely angry occasionally, but when he does, the prose differs, and Hammett doesn't just rely on adverbs to convey Spade's anger. And that doesn't just apply to Spade. Everybody in the book is performing all of the time.

Unfortunately, many people use adverbs out of laziness. That's why they're cautioned against. And often strong verbs are preferred to the adverb + verb construct. But Hammett wasn't being lazy. I can't speak for every mystery/detective novelist ever, but there's a time when that sort of style is more than appropriate.

[preyer]

i'd make a great teacher. mine would be the room with the 'beware all ye who enter here' sign over the door and another, 'the beatings will continue until morale improves' over the chalkboard. the females would be required to wear catholic school girl clothing. you don't even want to know where i'd take them for a field trip.

[pepperlandgirl]

I, for one, would sign up for preyer's class.

[GerriB]

I find my resolve weakening. But then why, on the advice of some of the other experts around here, did I spend revision #17 of my latest novel substituting said for all these words and removing two thirds of my adverbs?

Nawh. It's because you fell for the "there's only one true way" stuff that gets spouted by people who think they know, but don't necessarily allow for differences.

I'm not saying that using a lot of adverbs is a good thing. I'm also not saying that dialogue tags aren't often misused. Unfortunately, new writers often do use and abuse adverbs and dialogue tags. However, any time someone says "get rid of all" should instantly send up flags to get out that cattle feed sized block of salt and prepare to do some serious not-taking seriously-that-advice.

It's not that adverbs should never be used. It's that many adverbs are redundant and/or shortcuts for descriptions and actions that should be carried on the nouns and verbs in the sentence. Some adverbs, like really and very, are meaningless modifiers. They used to add emphasis, but since they've been overused, they've lost their power. Used judiciously, adverbs are powerful modifiers that bring home a point that can't be done any other way.

The dialogue tag argument is a constant thorn in my butt. Cutting off all use of any dialogue tags except asked and said is just ridiculous. I am not giving up some of the most powerful tools in my writing toolkit just because a minimalist writer says to. If someone insists on it, I've got several things they can kiss, and none of them are pleasant.

Again, the problem is that many new writers abuse dialogue tags. I'm working with a young man who I flat out told to go through all of his writing and replace all his dialogue tags with said. Why? Because he's making pretty much every mistake in the book about dialogue tags. But the reason I told him that was so that I can help him get a handle on his purple prose. Once the purple is cleared out, it'll be time to go back in and show him how to use non-said dialogue tags that will emphasize his dialogue instead of causing the normal readers' eyes to bulge out and their brains to shut down.

The thing with dialogue tags that needs to be remembered is that tags emphasize tone of voice. Holler doesn't sound the same as screech, and yowled is a different sound entirely. Having a character who hollers sets one image, while screamed sets another. Mutter isn't the same sound as whisper. This way, dialogue tags become a part of describing the character as much as a way to identify a speaker. This one word can describe attitude, volume, and tone of a character. Why dismiss the potential?

At the same time, I'd really hate to see someone ejaculate something as a part of speech. Nor do I think declaim can be spoken. Hissing is for snake-like people or someone who is saying something with 's' in it--maybe. In the end, it's about judicious use of dialogue tags other that said, not about getting rid of all of them, or just as bad, going hog-wild with them. A good mixture of said, saidisms, and action tags is a solid middle ground that is less treacherous than any extreme.

Good luck!

[popmuze]

Hawkes versus Heller? What a bizarre choice. But I would have jumped at the chance to take a course from either.

I was leaning toward Heller, because I was writing what I thought was black humor at the time, but everybody said Hawkes (on loan to lowly CCNY from Brown that semester) was the better teacher.

I guess that meant Heller was more easygoing. But maybe instead of eviscerating the novel I came in to the class with, he'd have given me a glowing blurb, launching my career, and I could have been the next Terry Southern or Bruce Jay Friedman. Hawkes thought I had a touch of Malamud in my ping pong scenes. But ping pong I leave to Jerome Charyn.

[scarletpeaches]

...are the standards so low in mystery writing that all that matters is the mystery...

Maybe the greatest mystery is how this person got published.

[Jamesaritchie]

Standards are not really low in mystery, but mystery is the second largest genre out there, taking up roughly 27% of the entire novel market. The larger the genre, the easier it is for less than stellar novels to get published simply because there are so many slots to fill.

[popmuze]

I didn't know there was such a thing as a male weepie. Sounds horrible.



Off the top of my head, you could put "Field of Dreams" in there and "Kramer vs. Kramer." I guess it's the old male midlife crisis novel.

So you've got the coming of age novel and then the coming of middle age novel, both of which don't seem to be selling much these days, especially to women, who have had enough of them in real life.

[Shadow_Ferret]

I find my resolve weakening. But then why, on the advice of some of the other experts around here, did I spend revision #17 of my latest novel substituting said for all these words and removing two thirds of my adverbs?

Was it because I wasn't writing a mystery?

I write genre fiction, specifically urban fantasy, but I took everyone's "expert" advice here and purged my novel of nearly every adverb that was in it. I think it did make the writing tighter and forced me to describe things instead of relying upon a quicky adverb.

But I'm thinking my grandmother's saying, "everything in moderation" applies to novels and the use of adverbs and things-other-than-said equally well.

Once I'm more skilled at this and I understand when an adverb is appropriate, I might start using them. But when I see adverbs or things-other-than-said I don't automatically assume it's bad or lazy writing.

There are plenty of other clues to indicate that.

[J. R. Tomlin]

Off the top of my head, you could put "Field of Dreams" in there and "Kramer vs. Kramer." I guess it's the old male midlife crisis novel.

So you've got the coming of age novel and then the coming of middle age novel, both of which don't seem to be selling much these days, especially to women, who have had enough of them in real life.
Male weepies are in fact one of the larger slices of the "literary" pie. Everyone knows how mean women are to men and certain authors love to go on and on and on about it. :tongue

I also believe that writing is better when the dependence is NOT on adverbs. They should be used judiciously.

[RedScylla]

Someone earlier said it best--there are great writers who make lousy teachers and lousy writers who make great teachers. I'd advise you to stick it out a little longer, both in reading the book and in the class. I had a teacher whose writing I find unbearable--utterly spare and lifeless academic fiction--but he taught me how to moderate my more melodramatic urges.

[Shadow_Ferret]

Off the top of my head, you could put "Field of Dreams" in there and "Kramer vs. Kramer." I guess it's the old male midlife crisis novel.

So you've got the coming of age novel and then the coming of middle age novel, both of which don't seem to be selling much these days, especially to women, who have had enough of them in real life.
I've never seen "Field of Dreams." I thought that was a sports story, which don't interest me. And I did see "Kramer vs. Kramer" and thought it was a chick flick.

So at this point, I'm still unsure what a male weepie is, unless its a chick flick with a male lead.

[popmuze]

Everyone knows how mean women are to men and certain authors love to go on and on and on about it. :tongue




...and on!

[popmuze]

I've never seen "Field of Dreams." I thought that was a sports story, which don't interest me. And I did see "Kramer vs. Kramer" and thought it was a chick flick.

So at this point, I'm still unsure what a male weepie is, unless its a chick flick with a male lead.


Sports stories make great male weepies. But "Field of Dreams" is more a losing and finding your father story.

A chick flick with a male lead? Do you mean "Tootsie."

I think I'll stick with my mid-life crisis definition.

[Azraelsbane]

I'd been looking forward to taking a course on how to write a mystery, since it would A) get me out of the house one night a week and B) I've never written a mystery and I'd like to try a class, rather than read a book about the subject.

However, I just started reading one of the books by the teacher and it's awful. I got to page 25 without encountering a single "said" as a dialog tag. One paragraph had eight adverbs. On the other hand, this person has published a half a dozen books in hardcover.

I have two questions: are the standards so low in mystery writing that all that matters is the mystery?

And two: could a writer whose work you don't respect be a good teacher anyway and/or have valuable insights about getting a mystery novel published?

1) I don't think so. I'm not a big mystery novel person. I read some Harlan Coben, but only because a friend of mine was his roomie in college and suggested him. I think that might be thriller though. I'm crappy at even remembering genre when it comes to that stuff. But I thought Coben wasn't half bad.

2) Yes. There are people who can't write worth a damn, but they know the mechanics of it. They can be helpful by telling you what to look for when it comes to editing your writing, even if they can't see it in their own. Also, there are plenty of awesome authors who couldn't give you the first clue about how to write a decent novel.

And just a note about adverbs- As much as people slam them here (and I'm not a fan myself), adverbs appear regularly in popular fiction. VERY regularly. I read this book by Christine Feehan (national bestseller), and I almost threw the bastard across the room when her MC "quietly crept stealthily through the bushes while carefully avoiding..." You get the picture. :D

[David I]

I'll keep this brief, since I got severely flamed when I posted about adverbs before.

All I did in that flame-evoking post was point out that there are many types of adverbs, and the criminals everyone inveighs against are usually adverbs of manner--quickly, slowly, etc--or intensifier adverbs--very, quite, really--which should be assumed guilty until proven innocent.

But without many other adverbs--adverbs of frequency (always), place (there), time (early), or purpose (usually an adverbial phrase, such as to calm himself).

I was informed that I was being overtechnical and picky by one poster, and assailed by another for trying to draw into question an excellent rule of writing ("Eliminate adverbs!"). And I was informed by another than my post was ridiculous because everyone knows that when someone in this forum says "adverb" they obviously mean "adverb of manner". (Which clearly isn't true, since I regularly hear people complain, justifiably, about overuse of intensifier adverbs.)

At the risk of incurring further wrath, here's how I handle adverbs in my own writing:

1) Intensifier adverbs can usually be profitably cut (except in the dialogue of someone who talks like that). They are typically flab.

2) Adverbs of manner can usually be profitably cut. Their presence often means your haven't selected the right verb, or that you're overdoing it. But sometimes they are excatly what's needed.

3) Most of the rest of them don't require any more scrutiny than your writing overall. In fact, I have a hard time even recognizing the others unless I make a point of it; they are basic building blocks of language, not ornaments.

It is often asserted that Hemingway didn't use adverbs. Obviously not true. But Hemingway even used adverbs of manner. He just used them used them with precision and intent...and rather infrequently. Just check out the following from A Farewell to Arms (which contains a pile of adjectives, too):

In the bed of the river there were pebbles and boulders, dry and white in the sun, and the water was clear and swiftly moving and blue in the channels.

As GerriB says, it's a matter of moderation. And precision.

[GerriB]

David I,

Excellent post. That's a good method to choose adverbs.

I'm just going to add to your discussion of adverbs of manner.

Sometimes an adverb of manner is more precise than trying to find a verb that describes the image in the writer's mind. My favorite example:

He walked quickly (hastily, swiftly) down the street.

Yes, there are many other alternatives to walked: scurried, sidled, strode, marched, etc. But none of them have the precise connotation that I want when I say "walked quickly." It's important to pick the words carefully to convey image. Sometimes, the adverb of manner is the best choice, not a short cut.

Again, it takes scrutiny and thought to work adverbs in correctly. But eliminating them all is pointless, just as having too many is sloppy writing.

[GerriB]

I read this book by Christine Feehan (national bestseller), and I almost threw the bastard across the room when her MC "quietly crept stealthily through the bushes while carefully avoiding..." You get the picture. :D

:scared:

:Wha:

:e2shrug:

:e2thud:

That makes me....

:cry:

[popmuze]

Nobody asked, but I'll let y'all know how the first class goes. I've got about a dozen ideas that could be converted into potential cozy mysteries. Let's see if any of them fly.

[CheshireCat]

Have you talked to your teacher about this? His/her feelings aren't going to be hurt. Your teacher may respect you as a writer by pointing out the errors. Don't point them all out but point out the ones that really bugged you about the story and explain why it bugged you.

I kept waiting, and nobody said it.

PLEASE don't do this. If you don't like the writer's work, don't take his class, but do not, under any circumstances, sit in his class or workshop and criticize his work.

Just don't.

It's bad form, bad manners, will make you look like a pretentious jerk, and possibly make you an enemy for life. (And, yes, his feelings would be hurt. Or he'd be pissed. As would you, if your positions were reversed.)

It ain't worth it.

It also makes you look like a rank amateur to whine that this author "broke the rules" and how come he can while the masses of trying-to-get-where-he-is-writers can't.

Seriously. I can't emphasize this enough. Don't like his work, don't take his class. But if you do, be courteous and a pro and keep your mouth shut about what you believe is "wrong" with his work.

Oh, and don't presume you know what "happened" in his work on his series to make this particular book, in your view, so weak. Unless he sits in the class and shakes his head and says, "You know, I really screwed up in my series, and here's why," then you don't know.

Part of writing, yes, when used sparingly, like paprika. But this author, in the first 25 pages at least, never used "said" once. Every single solitary sentence had an annoying tag, like observed, declaimed, pointed out, sniffled, snorted, harumphed. etc.

And don't tell me about adverbs. I used to be the adverb king. But once you start noticing them in every sentence, sometimes two in the same sentence, it really distracts from the story.

And now you apparently suffer from the flipside of adverbitis, which is adverb avoidance. You'll get past that too, probably.

There's a happy medium, as many have pointed out. Adverbs are not wrong. They are not poison. They are not Bad Things.

They can be and often are misused, particularly by new writers and/or those who don't yet have a solid grip on their technique. But the bald truth is that writers notice them and 99.9% of the reading public does not.

That's your audience. And for them, a good story with characters they can root for trumps all.

I find my resolve weakening. But then why, on the advice of some of the other experts around here, did I spend revision #17 of my latest novel substituting said for all these words and removing two thirds of my adverbs?

Was it because I wasn't writing a mystery?

Obviously, I'm not a member of the Adverb Police. I like adverbs, just as I like verbs and nouns and adjectives and all our other tools. Used wisely, they help a storyteller do his or her job not only effectively, but often with grace and sometimes even with beauty.

As for your own work, I'd be just guessing if I said that maybe you needed to remove two-thirds of your adverbs because they were unnecessary or didn't do the job you assigned to them. I could also say that all the "experts" who advised you to do so were wrong or partially wrong -- and that would also be a guess.

And you can say I don't have a clue what I'm talking about, which would be you presuming or assuming without knowing.

The only other thing I'd say is that if you expect to read a few mysteries and take a few classes and then know how to produce a saleable mystery series, well ...

Good luck with that.

[MDSchafer]

If you want to take a class because you think you'll enjoy it and you might learn something, great, but I've stopped expecting much from writing classes. I think they help the beginner out a good bit, but after you get to a certain point there is a limit to how much you can learn.

If you really want to learn to write mysteries better I would recommend taking pysch and criminal justice course at your local university.

[popmuze]

The only other thing I'd say is that if you expect to read a few mysteries and take a few classes and then know how to produce a saleable mystery series, well ....

That's exactly why I'm taking the course.

But I'd settle for getting one book out of it, or at least the opportunity to have a professional critique my mystery in progress for six or eight weeks.

But don't worry, I had no intention of criticizing the writer or the writing. Fact is, now on page 100, I've found something I like about the book: the setting.

[Manderley]

Anyway, this particular single author is the one giving the course. And to me the question is less about the mystery genre than about taking a course with a writer whose book you really don't like (after 25 pages)

I'm currently taking a writing course led by an author whose book I put down after page one. I couldn't get past the excessive use of italics (or that he used a footnote on page one...). Although his style of writing my not be my cup of tea, he has taught me a few bits that I haven't really seen touched much upon on internet fora like this. And I've only been there for a week.

Also, I love the fact that just by attending the course I
a) get feedback on my own writing
b) meet RL-people who care as much about writing as I do
c) get inspired and motivated to keep working on my own writing

So for me it hasn't been a bad thing attending a course led by someone whose books I'll never read. In fact, I have never read any of Uncle Jim's books either and probably never will as I don't like his genres, and yet I get a great deal of knowledge and ideas from reading his teaching thread. :)

[Flapdoodle]

I'd been looking forward to taking a course on how to write a mystery, since it would A) get me out of the house one night a week and B) I've never written a mystery and I'd like to try a class, rather than read a book about the subject.

However, I just started reading one of the books by the teacher and it's awful. I got to page 25 without encountering a single "said" as a dialog tag. One paragraph had eight adverbs. On the other hand, this person has published a half a dozen books in hardcover.

I have two questions: are the standards so low in mystery writing that all that matters is the mystery?

And two: could a writer whose work you don't respect be a good teacher anyway and/or have valuable insights about getting a mystery novel published?

I've just read a murder/mystery by a UK author who has had about 30 books (It seems like that many...) published featuring the same characters. The writing is very passive, and I find this annoying, and it feels very rushed at times and occasionally difficult to follow. However, the characters, plots and setting are superb - some of the best I've read.

[lfraser]

i'd make a great teacher. mine would be the room with the 'beware all ye who enter here' sign over the door and another, 'the beatings will continue until morale improves' over the chalkboard. the females would be required to wear catholic school girl clothing. you don't even want to know where i'd take them for a field trip.

Catholic school fantsies, eh? Nuns with acid tongues and a love of random petty violence. Sounds like just the thing.