Book Review / Rec
Just finished Stephen King's On Writing and I give it a big thumbs up. I loved it and would rec it to any fanfic writer, aspiring writer, or anyone who simply likes to talk about and to think about stories.
The book, for the most part, isn't a 'how to' on writing. Two-thirds of the novel is truly a memoir, starting with King's childhood and discussing his love of books, comics, and movies. He relates anecdotes from his life such as going to see the movie The Pit and the Pendulum (which he admits had only the smallest resemblance to the work by Poe) and being so excited that he rushed home to write... well, they didn't call it fanfic in the 1950s, but it's what we would know as fanfic.
He discusses meeting his wife in a college poetry class and falling in love with her through her work. He goes on to tell how he worked his way through college and how one of his jobs was as a janitor at a high school. That job had him noticing that there were shower curtains in the girls locker room but not in the boys to which his fellow janitor mused that young girls were probably more shy than boys. When naively asking what the dispensers on the wall were, he was told they were tampons... and anyone even vaguely familiar with King's work is aware of where this is going.
He explains that it was this incident that inspired Carrie, his first novel. He goes on to say that he doesn't like Carrie White. In fact, he admits to not liking any of the characters in the book and that after writing the first hundred or so pages, he put the story aside believing that it wasn't good and that he couldn't finish it. His wife found the novel, found something in it, and encouraged him to go on.
He discusses two girls he had known in high school, girls who were outcasts. As he describes them, you see how the people he knew informed the character of Carrie.
This is the way that he discusses writing. He discusses the process he has gone through and the things he has learned about writing while going through that process.
When discussing his tendency to write situations rather than plot, presenting himself with a set of circumstances and the way that he works out events, he discusses the process by which he produced Misery, revealing that when the inspiration of the story first hit him, he'd envisioned a short story, something quite brief. He explains how he had initially planned the story to go, how he had thought it would end, and how it became something else entirely.
He talks about writers block, about the way he had come up with the idea for The Stand, was five hundred pages in, and then stalled, having no idea where he was going and feeling that there was no way to deal with all the issues and plot lines that he had begun. He discusses his frustration and apathy with the story and how he had worked through the writers block, solved his plot problems, how he discovered a new through-line in his story, and how he had reworked and edited the story to work the whole thing out.
Incidents like these are what makes this book on writing far more interesting than a simple 'how to', not that he doesn't give practical, clear-eyed advice about writing. He discusses grammar (he has been both a high school English teacher and a college creative writing professor), the necessity of excising adverbs. How early in his career a rejection notice he received had the note attached that a second draft should always be 10% smaller than a first draft, and that he's always followed that advice since. (I think about the size of the novel "The Stand" and goggle.) He also talks dialog, description, pacing, the use of symbollism, themes, etc.
In fact, I think the next time I end up in some fan wanky discussion where someone tells me that it doesn't matter that Buffy's plan in "Chosen" was tactically absurd or that the overt story in "Chosen" was weak (or that another plot element in another series or story) is excused because the theme or symbolism, I'll pull out this book and quote it. (I agree with what he said just that much).
Quote:
It's the ability to summarize and encapsulate that makes symbollism so interesting, useful, and -- when used well -- arresting. You could argue that it's just another kind of figurative language.
Does that make it necessary to the success of your story or novel? Indeed not, and it can actually hurt, especially if you get carried away. Symbolism exists to adorn and enrich, not to create a sense of artificial profundity. None of the bells and whistles are about story, all right? Only story is about story...
Late in the book, King reveals that he had been writing On Writing when he was (infamously) run over and nearly killed in 1999. The last section of the book deals with the accident, describing it and his recovery, how writing played a part in his recovery, and ending the book with an opus to the love of writing.
The book is relatively short, straight forward, and lacking in pretension. It's as much autobiography as book review (both his own and other famous writers as he discusses everything from David Mamet to John Grisham, Harper Lee to J.K. Rowling), and a book on how to write. King himself comes across as endearing through his much professed love for his wife and children as well as his admissions that he doesn't remember writing "Cujo" and that there are stories he's produced that he's embarassed about. At the end of the day, this is one of the better books I've read in a while. Well worth the $8 for the paperback.
The book, for the most part, isn't a 'how to' on writing. Two-thirds of the novel is truly a memoir, starting with King's childhood and discussing his love of books, comics, and movies. He relates anecdotes from his life such as going to see the movie The Pit and the Pendulum (which he admits had only the smallest resemblance to the work by Poe) and being so excited that he rushed home to write... well, they didn't call it fanfic in the 1950s, but it's what we would know as fanfic.
He discusses meeting his wife in a college poetry class and falling in love with her through her work. He goes on to tell how he worked his way through college and how one of his jobs was as a janitor at a high school. That job had him noticing that there were shower curtains in the girls locker room but not in the boys to which his fellow janitor mused that young girls were probably more shy than boys. When naively asking what the dispensers on the wall were, he was told they were tampons... and anyone even vaguely familiar with King's work is aware of where this is going.
He explains that it was this incident that inspired Carrie, his first novel. He goes on to say that he doesn't like Carrie White. In fact, he admits to not liking any of the characters in the book and that after writing the first hundred or so pages, he put the story aside believing that it wasn't good and that he couldn't finish it. His wife found the novel, found something in it, and encouraged him to go on.
He discusses two girls he had known in high school, girls who were outcasts. As he describes them, you see how the people he knew informed the character of Carrie.
This is the way that he discusses writing. He discusses the process he has gone through and the things he has learned about writing while going through that process.
When discussing his tendency to write situations rather than plot, presenting himself with a set of circumstances and the way that he works out events, he discusses the process by which he produced Misery, revealing that when the inspiration of the story first hit him, he'd envisioned a short story, something quite brief. He explains how he had initially planned the story to go, how he had thought it would end, and how it became something else entirely.
He talks about writers block, about the way he had come up with the idea for The Stand, was five hundred pages in, and then stalled, having no idea where he was going and feeling that there was no way to deal with all the issues and plot lines that he had begun. He discusses his frustration and apathy with the story and how he had worked through the writers block, solved his plot problems, how he discovered a new through-line in his story, and how he had reworked and edited the story to work the whole thing out.
Incidents like these are what makes this book on writing far more interesting than a simple 'how to', not that he doesn't give practical, clear-eyed advice about writing. He discusses grammar (he has been both a high school English teacher and a college creative writing professor), the necessity of excising adverbs. How early in his career a rejection notice he received had the note attached that a second draft should always be 10% smaller than a first draft, and that he's always followed that advice since. (I think about the size of the novel "The Stand" and goggle.) He also talks dialog, description, pacing, the use of symbollism, themes, etc.
In fact, I think the next time I end up in some fan wanky discussion where someone tells me that it doesn't matter that Buffy's plan in "Chosen" was tactically absurd or that the overt story in "Chosen" was weak (or that another plot element in another series or story) is excused because the theme or symbolism, I'll pull out this book and quote it. (I agree with what he said just that much).
Quote:
It's the ability to summarize and encapsulate that makes symbollism so interesting, useful, and -- when used well -- arresting. You could argue that it's just another kind of figurative language.
Does that make it necessary to the success of your story or novel? Indeed not, and it can actually hurt, especially if you get carried away. Symbolism exists to adorn and enrich, not to create a sense of artificial profundity. None of the bells and whistles are about story, all right? Only story is about story...
Late in the book, King reveals that he had been writing On Writing when he was (infamously) run over and nearly killed in 1999. The last section of the book deals with the accident, describing it and his recovery, how writing played a part in his recovery, and ending the book with an opus to the love of writing.
The book is relatively short, straight forward, and lacking in pretension. It's as much autobiography as book review (both his own and other famous writers as he discusses everything from David Mamet to John Grisham, Harper Lee to J.K. Rowling), and a book on how to write. King himself comes across as endearing through his much professed love for his wife and children as well as his admissions that he doesn't remember writing "Cujo" and that there are stories he's produced that he's embarassed about. At the end of the day, this is one of the better books I've read in a while. Well worth the $8 for the paperback.