Of course you heard. Especially if you're a Potterhead like me. (Yes, that's what they call them--er, us.) But here's what sets me apart from most Potterheads: I haven't seen the movies. Well, I've seen 1-3. And was disappointed as all true lovers of J.K. Rowling's masterpieces are. Which is why I believe that if you wish to enjoy the movie, you should see it BEFORE you read the book. But, anyway, I digress.
The point of this post is that the Harry Potter fever has been rekindled inside me and I have been reading the books this past week. Yes, I am 23, and yes, the books are meant for young readers. But I still enjoy them. Not only do they contain engaging characters, well-thought-out plots, and an interesting world, but they are extremely well written.
And that's what intrigues me the most: the style in which they are written. I've yet to come across a book that uses so many parentheses. Rowling bends the writing rules to her advantage. The result is not confusing, but enriching.
When I was in college, even in creative writing classes, the writing rules were stressed. Use complete sentences. Annihilate run-ons. Avoid uncommon punctuation (like parentheses). Be brief. Avoid adverbs and adjectives. And then, of course, there is the "said" debate.
Most writers will break a few of these rules. A few brave ones will break all of them. Rowling, I believe, is one of the braver ones. (Faulkner would count as well, but I still haven't recovered from reading Absalom, Absalom, so I will leave him out of this discussion.)
The point is, what most writing groups, professors and colleagues will try to tell you about "strong writing" (which involves following the grammar rules) is not always correct. It all depends on the skill in which you use it. If it doesn't detract from the writing, then there really isn't a problem with it.
Take the "said" debate. It has been argued that the only dialogue tag necessary is "said" or maybe "asked." Everything else is irrelevant. If you are a "strong" writer, you won't need things like "whispered", "snapped", "screamed", etc. The tone of your character's voice should be derived from the action. I agree . . . some what.
And adverbs border on blasphemy. Don't you dare say "He said quietly." This also falls under the category of weak writing.
Now, let's return to J.K. Rowling's works. No, they are not the most wonderful literature in the world to which every other piece of writing must be compared to. No, they aren't even everyone's cup of tea. (Forgive the cliche.) I'm sure there are people out there who can't stand the Potter series (much like I can't stand the Twilight series, but that's another story). The point is, books who contain so-called "weak" writing can be considered brilliant, engaging, and thrilling. Take Faulkner, if you will. Or Cormac McCarthy. Both would have made their English teachers have a mental breakdown--yet both are considered highly talented writers.
And the BIG point of this post: Write what works for you. Don't sacrifice your style to fit into some sort of "proper" box. If a scene needs fragments, give it fragments. If it needs parentheses, slap them in. But it has to fit.
But, please, for the love of your reader, try to avoid run-ons. Yuck.
I completely agree, Brandi. (And, for the record, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone came out when I was your age...ouch!...and I read it anyway.)
ReplyDeleteI think it's important to remember two things while you're writing: 1) if you're going to break the rules, you need to know what they are; and 2) a successful book is more than the sum of its parts.
I haven't read the Twilight series, but I've heard more than one person comment that the writing is not good. It may not be, but no one can argue the success Meyer's had. Because a successful book is more than the writing, more than the story and the characters -- it also takes timing, marketing, and God knows what else to have it grip people's imaginations.