Of all the writing “rules” I have seen, Elmore Leonard’s are probably the best known and most often vilified, generally because they are misunderstood. The late Mr. Leonard (I want so bad to call him “Dutch” but, even ten years after his death, I can’t bring myself to even imply that level of familiarity) does not need me to defend him, but what else are blog posts for but to say things that could be left unsaid except that the blogger wants to say them. So there.
As Leonard himself said in the original New York Times
piece in which the rules appeared, they are not rules at all, but suggestions.
That said, I have seen few suggestions that make more sense, or that apply to
more cases, than his. I don’t consciously think of them very often, largely because
they are now so well ingrained into my writing process I don’t have to, but they
are always at the back of my mind when I write.
Here they are, with my interpretations. I use none – well,
maybe one - of his explanations, even
though ignoring those is what gets most of his detractors to look foolish.
Never open a book with weather.
“But Get Shorty opens with the weather” is a favorite
refrain of those who take issue these rules.
Let’s look at the offending passage:
When Chili first came to Miami Beach twelve years ago
they were having one of their off-and-on cold winters: thirty-four degrees the
day he met Tommy Carlo for lunch at Vesuvio’s on South College and had his
leather jacket ripped off.
It’s a single sentence and less than half of it directly
addresses the weather. The inciting incident for the book is the loss of
Chili’s coat. This being Miami Beach, the reader would have to wonder why Chili
even had a coat with him unless we know it’s unseasonably cold.
Plus, it’s one sentence. Not a page or more
describing clouds or rain or how being uncomfortably cold/hot/wet made Susan
feel about the weather/her life/ John’s failure to call. It’s a sentence to
kick off the story.
Experience has taught me that anyone so willing to ignore
context to criticize something isn’t writing anything I’d care to read.
Avoid prologues.
If possible. Sometimes it can’t be helped. My current work
in progress is presented as the memoir of a man who lived on the Western
frontier, taken from notes that were lost and only recently discovered. I
present the prologue as an editor’s note to describe how the book supposedly
came to be. (Or a foreword. I haven’t decided yet.)
It's also true, as Leonard himself acknowledges, that you
can ignore any of these rules if you’re good enough to get away with it. I’ve
read novellas shorter than the prologue to Empire Falls, yet Richard
Russo makes his so fascinating I would have been satisfied is that had been the
whole story, except that he so masterfully sets up what is to come.
Never use a verb other than "said" to carry
dialogue.
Never use an adverb to modify the verb
"said"…he admonished gravely.
These two go together. “Said” is an invisible word in
dialog, used to avoid confusion about who is speaking. If you feel the need to
use a different verb, or to modify “said,” then the dialog itself isn’t strong
enough to convey what you feel is missing. Change it, and maybe throw in something
to describe how the line is spoken.
Shane said, “I hear you’re a low-down Yankee liar.”
Wilson’s voice barely crossed the room: “Prove it.”
(Note: “He admonished gravely” is Leonard’s tongue-in-cheek
way of telling those who are paying attention that not even he is taking this
too seriously.)
Keep your exclamation points under control. You are
allowed no more than two or three per 100,000 words of prose.
This goes with the “said” comment above. Exclamation points
too often are used instead of well-chosen dialog to make sure the reader gets
it. They’re explanations, and explanations mean what came before wasn’t clear
enough. As Renni Browne and Dave King say in Self-Editing
for Writers, “resist the urge to explain.”
Never use the words "suddenly" or "all
hell broke loose."
This is a fundamental “show, don’t tell” thing. Don’t tell
us something happened suddenly, show us. And “all hell broke loose” is
lazy writing, plain and simple. Unless used as dialog from the mouth of a
conversationally bland character.
Use regional dialect, patois, sparingly.
Notice he doesn’t say not to use it. Such language can help
to define a character. (Think of Dave Robicheaux and Clete Purcell in James Lee
Burke’s novels.) To use too much, or to work too hard to spell the spoken words
phonetically, forces the reader to translate what this character is saying when
they should be immersed in the story.
I typically don’t care for writers who take examples from
their own work unless the are superstars, but this example from my novel The
Man in the Window comes to mind.
“Mr. Forte, I want to start by telling you what a fine
job you’re doing of fucking up my investigation.” At least that’s what I
thought he said. He wasn’t from around here. Farther south, Alabama or
Mississippi maybe. … What came out sounded like, “Mistuh Foe-tay, ah wunna
staht by tellin yew whut uh fine job y’all’re dewin uh fuckin up mah
vestigashun.”
And that’s the last I mentioned it, except for the
occasional uniquely Southern idiom, such as how he might be “fixing to do”
something.
Avoid detailed descriptions of characters.
Don't go into great detail describing places and things.
You want readers to be absorbed in your story, which means
you don’t want them to have to stop so they can assemble these people and
places in their heads. Give only as much description as the reader needs to
create the movie in their imaginations. If a detail is important to the story
later on – say a unique tattoo or strikingly-colored eyes – then by all means
mention it, but don’t bury it in a shopping list of other stuff.
Try to leave out the part that readers tend to skip.
Yeah, well, duh. How many times have you had to go back in a
book because a detail provided on Page 123 allows what you just read on Page
136 to make sense, but you skimmed past it because your eyes glazed over from
the minutiae that enveloped said key detail? Well, leave that shit out.
And finally, Rule 11, which he described as “My most
important rule is one that sums up the 10.”
If it sounds like writing, I rewrite it.
Remember, you’re telling a story, not gratifying your ego by
impressing anyone with all the cool words you know or constructions you can
pull off. Cool words and literary constructions are not bad things unless they
get in the way of the story, and, as much as possible, you want your audience
to forget they are reading. They should have the feeling they’re sitting back
with their eyes closed while a movie plays out in their heads.
That’s what his rules mean to me.
2 comments:
I always read, bug never comment on this blog. However, Dana's point today is SO on point I have to say something. Taking pot shots at one of the masters is so easy. You know who DOESN'T criticize Leonard? Stephen King. Jeffrey Deaver. Reed Farrel Coleman. Know why? Because the people who know how to do this know he had distilled what it took them years to learn. These guidelinesa are gold so instead of criticizing just be like Dana: Shut up and write!
Thank you, sir. You should comment more often, even when you disagree. It's always fun to chat with you, regardless of the forum.
Post a Comment