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]

So if it's aesthetically pleasing, it should be cut?

It seems to me, if you write to please yourself, you'll have a better chance, because if you like it, probably there are others that like it too.

But writing with the aim to please others doesn't sound very efficient to me. You'll never please everyone, so who is it you are aiming to please? The market? Well who's that? The market is made up of many individuals with differing tastes.

[Jude Hardin]

In On Writing, Stephen King suggests that all novels are really letters aimed at one person:

Call that one person you write for Ideal Reader. He or she is going to be in your writing room all the time: in the flesh once you open the door and let the world back in to shine on the bubble of your dream, in spirit during the sometimes troubling and often exhilarating days of the first draft, when the door is closed. And you know what? You’ll find yourself bending the story even before Ideal Reader glimpses so much as the first sentence. I.R. will help you get outside yourself a little, to actually read your work in progress as an audience would while you’re still working. This is perhaps the best way of all to make sure you stick to story, a way of playing to the audience even while there’s no audience there and you’re totally in charge.

So, no, we don’t attempt to please everyone; just one astute person (or an agent, an editor, a critique group, what have you) whose praise and criticism we can somewhat anticipate.

[Dana King]

Jude,
Thanks for reminding me of this. I've read King's book several times (a refresher once a year or so), and this was timely advice. It's probably time for me to read it again.

[Jude Hardin]

It's been a very useful reference for me, Dana.

[John Dishon]

Of course, King is talking about making the book a better read, not making it easier to sell. And nowhere in that book does he suggest a writer shouldn't write because he likes to.

[John Dishon]

Also from ON WRITING:

"What would be very wrong, I think, is to turn away from what you know and like (or love, the way I loved those old ECs and black-and-white horror flicks) in favor of things you believe will impress your friends, relatives, and writing-circle colleagues. What's equally wrong is the deliberate turning toward some genre or type of fiction in order to make money. It's morally wrong, for one thing--the job of fiction is to find truth inside the story's web of lies, not to commit intellectual dishonesty in the hunt for the buck. Also, brothers and sisters, it doesn't work." [pages 154-155 in the mmp version]

See, I can quote King too. ON WRITING is like the Bible: you can use it to make whatever point you want.

[Jude Hardin]

I agree with that passage too. I'm not suggesting trend-watching, or trying to hop on this or that bandwagon, or anything like that. All I'm saying is that if you ever expect someone to actually pay you for your writing, then you have to be at least somewhat aware of a thing called audience.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with having writing as a hobby, btw, but it's a completely different ball game if you expect to land an agent and sell to a publisher. It's also possible that you're a literary genius, like, say, James Joyce, and you can be as indulgent as you want and still manage to get published. It's not likely, but it's possible.

[Jon Loomis]

"To thine own self be true," said Polonius.

[Dana King]

The two excerpts from King's book are not mutually exclusive. The Ideal Reader exists in the writer's head, so it cannot be too distant from his tastes. The Ideal Reader should be someone who likes the same things as the writer, but has a somewhat more objective perspective toward the writer's "darlings."

[Jon Loomis]

This is a reasonable point--mostly I write to please my wife, who is a fine writer and an astute critic. She's taught me pretty much everything I know about writing fiction. But the first person that has to like it is me: I have to like the characters and the voice and all the stuff that happens--if I don't, then there's little chance I'll pursue the project past the first few pages. Thinking about audience can be daunting, for sure: I tell my students--who don't have writing groups, editors or brilliant writer spouses--to write for their smart friends. As opposed to their dumb friends. Which means they're writing for and from their better, smarter selves, ultimately.

[Dana King]

I read every chapter to my Beloved Spousal Equivalent as soon as it's first draft is cleaned up. She points out what'smissing, whether anything is confusing, and if the voice works. I make notes from there, to be corrected in the next draft. She basically serves as my IDeal Reader, as she'll respond to thing I might be too close to, but also knows what I'm trying to do. More than an Ideal Reader, she's my Trusted Reader.

[I. J. Parker]

I think I write for reviewers. Hmm. What an insight!