Just needed to put it out there.

[mariko_writing]

Good grammar + good spelling ≠ good writing

Comments

[maxiekatt2]

I agree completely.

I doesn't matter to me if the writer has placed every comma in the right spot and never messes up "Their, they're, and there" if their writing is stale and boring. I think it's more important to trust your instincts and write the way the story wants to be written. Worrying too much or paying to much attention to the structure of each sentence can sap your writing of the individuality that makes it interesting.

I don't mean grammar should be thrown out the window, but I don't think it's the be-all-end-all of what makes a writer good.

[mariko_writing]

Oh, I certainly don't mean that grammar should be thrown out the window or that proofreading isn't a valuable use of time. But I don't expect to see atrocious grammar/spelling in a published book and I've read some pretty atrocious books in my time. Good spelling and grammar is just another bare minimum type of thing -- another bare minimum would be that I'd expect to see words at some point in the book. :P

[hanfastolfe]

IAWTPC.

Still, spelling and grammar makes stuff a lot more readable, and you can make an informed judgement as to whether or not the thing you're reading really is dreck or not.

[mariko_writing]

I'm not saying that grammar and spelling aren't important; they're just not a hallmark to me of good writing.

[hanfastolfe]

True. An ingredient does not make the whole recipe.

(harhar, I made a wittey)

[mariko_writing]

I mean I would never dream of publishing something without proofreading (and even then I know I let some typos by ... shame!), and I'm actually a huge grammar freak. It's just that, unless the writer knows what s/he's doing, I expect good spelling and grammar in writing. That doesn't mean what I'm reading is good, though.