Elmore Leonard's ten rules for writing

[Eve]

I always tell my self that I will stick to his rules but I can't seem to stick to them.

Now, here's my shameful secret...I write romantic detective stories and thrillers, among other things. Can you use the great man's rules when you write romance?
Is there such genre as hard boiled romance, or have I just invented it?

One of his stories, at least, would work on Mills and Boon.

[John Dishon]

I think his "rules" are crap. Too many exceptions and too many restrictions.

[Eve]

In some ways I agree with you but for me they are helpful, in so far as I have a tendency to over elaborate description. Mr Leonard's 'rules' make me pare things down to essentials. I feel any strict adherance to rules actually kills writing, and they should be applied more in the way of loose guide lines.
I for one need all the guidence I can get from great modern writers.

[Eric Christopherson]

I think his "rules" are crap. Too many exceptions and too many restrictions.

And yet they work for him.

[Jack Getze]

I am in the midst of a self-imposed, 90-day moritorium on mentioning what's his name or his rules. However, I think he gets a bad rap because his rules are about storytelling, not writing. Lots of authors don't want to be invisible, so go ahead and break them.

What he really said: "These are rules I've picked up along the way to help me remain invisible when I'm writing a book, to help me show rather than tell what's taking place in the story. If you have a facility for language and imagery and the sound of your voice pleases you, invisibility is not what you are after, and you can skip the rules."

[B.R.Stateham]

Just read Leonard's ten rules and had to laugh. I see'em as a kind of spoof aimed at magazines like the New Yorker (he said with a devilish smile on his thin lips.)

Of course if he was serious, then a writer like Tony Hillerman wouldn't have become as successful as he did. The guy could paint in words desert scenery that'd make you ache. And forget about the immortal, Raymond Chandler. Leonard's rules simply don't apply.

But they're interesting to read and mull over. And then toss'em out with the garbage bags.

[Eric Christopherson]

I think Elmore's serious, given what I've read of his work, and I find his 10 rules--though I think of them more as "guidelines"--quite sensible, although, as Jack points out, not all of the rules are for all writers. I think I follow most of them most of the time.

[Benjamin Sobieck]

I have this, um, friend who has not read the 10 rules. And he was wondering if someone could point to/post an abridged version. It's just so my friend could see why they are crap.

I, on the other hand, don't follow any rules when it comes to writing. Not even the ones I make for myself.

[Jack Getze]

As reported in The New York Times.

[Benjamin Sobieck]

Thanks, Jack. I don't necessarily disagree with any of those rules. I can't, however, say they are the be all and end all. Some things work regardless of dogma.

[Jon Loomis]

This is the first time I've read these--thanks for the link, Jack. Leonard makes some good points, and some not so great. He's absolutely right about "said," except maybe in the case of the occasional "whispered" or "yelled" (it's hard to get relative volume into dialogue), and he's right about adverbial tinsel on dialogue tags--though I would add that in general much use of adverbs means one ought to go back and find better verbs. He's right about "suddenly" and taking care with dialect, he's write about prologues and leaving out the parts readers skip. He's wrong about starting with the weather (unless your book's set in LA, or somewhere else where it's always 75 degrees and sunny), and detailed descriptions--sometimes a sketch is plenty, sometimes more is better. He also adds a kind of snarky proviso that I sort of agree with, which is that his rules don't apply to writers with facility for imagery, who also like the sound of their own voices--as if the two went necessarily hand-in-hand. Maybe they do--I expect Jude will enter this thread any minute now and tell us.

[John Dishon]

"A prologue in a novel is backstory, and you can drop it in anywhere you want."

Except at the beginning.

I agree with what you said except for the prologue part. I think prologues have a specific use. It's not the main story, but it has influence or something to do with the main story. Yeah, you can call it chapter one instead, but I think you lose something, albeit subtle, when you do.

For me, a good example of a prologue is in Tomorrow Never Dies, the 007 movie. The part at the beginning with the fighter jets with the nuke missiles doesn't have anything to do with the main story, but the one scene showing the guy with the red GPS box does.

The prologue is the sequence before the credits roll, and you can have that in books too. I would like to see that, actually. Have a prologue before the title page, before the copyright information page. Doesn't even have to fit the "rule" for a prologue I mentioned above. Sometimes you just want the reader to read the story in a particular order.

[Jon Loomis]

There are always exceptions, sure. But generally it's good to not start with explanation; explanation is boring. Start with scene, and explain only as needed as you go along. That's what Leonard is saying, I think.