Dear moderators, please don't kill me for this. I'm doing it for the community. :angel:

Here is a link aspiring writers might find interesting: http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2008/07/how-not-to-start-story.html

So does he ever say anywhere what a good way to start a story is? I agree with most of those, though I would include not starting with a fight scene, but a small list of what is acceptable would be helpful I can think of a few, but I would want to make sure.

Didnt find that helpful in any way, But then I dont make those mistakes because it never sounds right in my head, not because it doesnt look good on paper. I'd rather see a guide written by some one who isnt middle aged and depressed, and who actually includes some "Do's" instead of just "dont's"

Yeah, the guy came off as just another arrogant [censored] who is mad at the world. A lot of books are classics for doing exactly what he said not to do. Especially the "don't write how they say it, write how I would have said it!" crap. I've read dozens of much more helpful guides and talked, in person, to much more helpful people. Although I appreciate Peleus' intentions.

That's exactly what I said when I read the article.

But seriously, these kind of people decide who wins competitions and eventually who gets published. This bloke had to go through 10,000 stories in the last month or so. You have exactly two words to impress them. If you fail, your story goes into the trash bin.

My advice: keep writing. Eventually you will see what works and what doesn't. And if you really love doing it, then you will not let anyone's opinion mess that up.

OK, most might find this place more suitable: http://www.fictionfactor.com/articles.html

That guy should not be judging stories if it annoys him that much. It was just funny to read that because he uses the word 'endure' talking about other peoples work. He shouldn't really complain because he's getting paid to read those stories, like an english teachers job, they probably have to read some right rubbish but they're paid to do that.

The other thing I have to say about that guy is he doesn't say a good way to start a story and he doesn't say the do's and don'ts of how to end a story either so basically everything he has said is worthless. Due to his biased opinions he probablt isn't a very good judge because I believe "The Almost Moon" by Alice Sebold (the author of the lovely bones) starts with a sentence something like:

"I decided to kill my mother"

And Alice Sebold is a publish author not one in a contest. >.<

I agree with most everything the author of that first link said. He is spot on about most everything. You should never start with a prologue. You should not tell. You should avoid using anything other than "he said/she said" in speech tags. You should not use the same word over and over again. You should use proper grammar and spelling (in this case no one can catch every error they make however, so I do not expect perfect, that is what editor's are paid for. But a person can at least make a serious effort.). Yadda, yadda, yadda. He obviously has an axe to grind, but it is also for good reason.

However, something important to keep in mind that skill as a writer has nothing to do with being published. Plenty of hacks get books in print, and plenty of quality work is never accepted by publishing houses. I see fiction here on the boards that far outstrips what I see in print.

I guess it was somewhat helpful, but to be honest, the guy just annoys me.

Can I just ask, what is wrong with starting by setting the scene? If it's simply telling the scene, then fair enough... but otherwise, I don't understand why he frowns upon it. Not saying he's wrong, but I'd like an explanation.

I may be the only person who doesn't agree with that statement. Sometimes telling works very well. Having paragraph after paragraph is bad, of course, but a short paragraph that explains a bit about the land, a piece of history, can be a good thing.

As for those...guidelines (yeah...), I have to agree with Chriso. That fellow makes my blood boil.

Meh, that guide is a lot like a bunch of other guides I've read on the road to getting my original work published. It's nothing special, though a bit more succinct than most.

Advice like that is good to keep in mind, so as to make sure your work is original and exciting... but it's suggestion, not guideline. Or so I've found.

The problem with telling is that is boring. Simple as that. If you want to explain the setting, the way to do it is to reveal it as the story progresses through the eyes and experiences of the characters.

Of course it's boring if it is used all the time, but if someone wanted to write with speed (like James Patterson), wouldn't showing all the time just slow everything down? That's what I always thought, anyway.

I think the key is to tell without the reader realizing you're telling. A little exposition is good, especially if you want to move things along without an extended dialogue sequence to set everything up. But sometimes little details can do wonders to reveal a setting without that dreaded telling... describing the poverty infesting the capital city is more poignant than expositing about what a greedy tyrant the king is. Making a villain kick the metaphorical puppy in the first scene gets the point across just as well as reading a list of his past crimes.

So, yeah, telling works sometimes. But it is often not nearly as relateable from the reader's standpoint, and showing need not be a lengthy, painful process. Think about the clumps of paragraphs that the Star Wars movies used to introduce important background info... it was important to tell that stuff... but the meaning of most of what it said doesn't hit you until the blasters and lightsabers come out. Telling, while a decent tool, is just not as strong as showing.

It just matters what method you use to show, really.

I suppose you're right... as always Thanks for clearing that up.

On a side note, it's nice to see you back around.

Personally I've always preferred this:

http://www.horror.org/writetips-laymon.htm

Not the full thing, and there are better and more complete guides to buy, but for a freebie online...

Indeed, I've seen many people break his rules in some amazing books (the first sentence in "The Gunslinger" by Stephen King comes to mind, "The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.") Though for novice writers it is a good idea to get around some of those common mistakes early, then go back and review them later when they understand more.



If I absolutely need to make my characters do anything monotonous, like walking, I'll tell, but other than that ninety percent of my writing is showing. Albeit, I admit I timeskip far too much between my scenes, but that's the space that would be taken up by telling most of the time. Mundane things, things that the reader can see without needing any explanation, or unimportant things that just aren't essential to the story, can be told without any problem, but I agree that it is rather boring, and should be avoided for the most part. Especially for newer writers who tell far too much, they should probably just avoid it all together until they can use it correctly.

Going back to Stephen King, he is only showing about half of the time, at best, but it is a gripping novel nonetheless. He doesn't get up close with his character's emotions, but you feel them through his dialogue and actions regardless. It takes a while to get into, and I doubt it would work for many others, but in this case telling can make some great stories.

Another example, the Lord of the Rings involves a lot of telling, especially in the early parts before the real adventure starts up, or in some of the other slow bits. Reading it over always makes me wonder at how gripping something can be without that poetic description I waste so much time on




Indeed, we most certainly missed you :goodjob: I suppose it takes a thread like this to catch your attention, eh?

Mhmm...

DO NOT MAKE YOUR MAIN CHARACTER AN ANIMAL
Ever.

Don't we all know that?

He is helpful to a degree, but it is a blog...A BLOG!

I can go write a blog and put whatever I want on it: That flying pigs (That have the ability to summon Daedra, of course) are coming to destroy us all with their magical fire breathing noses. Well, it isn't going to happen, and I want to see what this guy has published

Well, I'm sure those of us that have been graced by one, can all agree that the best guide is a 'friggin' long critique from Sparrow! :dance:

Indeed, such are always most appreciated, criticism is the ultimate praise for a writer, I would think. I would most certainly devote more time to reading stuff here if I could, I am always amazed not only by the talent I see, but the improvement and the desire to learn. It simply brings tears to one's eyes :touched:

This guy sounds like a bad critic Though I can see where he's coming from.


Though if we're in the habit of posting links to helpful websites (and it seems we are very, very against blogs), here's a http://www.writingforums.org/index.phpI have found particularly helpful, even in such a short amount of time. I believe some of you have already visited it

That's the most terrible guide I've read ever. Guy wouldn't be able to judge a pie eating competition.

Also, I'm going writing a story about a fox. It starts with a prologue and a setting.

About MEEE????

:D