Published authors don’t follow the “rules”

[Martin Gill]

OK, I know there are no RULES, but there are guidelines, and in “top 10 rookie writer mistakes” blogs and the critiques section here we regularly see them recommended. Don’t start with a prologue. Don’t start with the MC waking up. Don’t start with the weather. I’m regulally told that any of these sins will banish my manuscript to reject bin hell.

But...

My inlaws are big fantasy fans. Every time they come up to visit they have new books, mostly by authors I’ve never heard of. Every visit, I read the first page of the books they bring. Almost universally they break one or more of the “rules” we would call out in the Crits section here. Today’s offerings are:

The Wind and the Void by Ryan Kirk
Battlemage by Stephen Aryan

Both break the rules:

Both start with the MC waking up.
One stars with the weather (an entire paragraph),the other starts mentioning the the Mc works up on a crisp cold morning.
One starts with a prologue.

I’ve never heard of either of these literary maveriks, but it turns out they are both well established authors, not noob hacks And it’s not just this pair, as pretty much every book my inlaws have turned up with over the last year or more sins ever I’ve been paying attention to this is similar in some way.

So what gives? Are we worrying about the wrong things when we critique each other’s work?

 

[HareBrain]

Breaking the rules isn't usually a problem if you're only being read by people who don't know the rules. (After all, if you read enough books that started with someone waking up, you'd probably think it was the rule that it should, and why not?) The rules are mostly for people writing for other writers or professional gatekeepers. Reading a book a month that starts with a wake-up isn't a problem. Reading the opening to twenty manuscripts a day that do the same, is. And remember agents etc are looking for reasons to reject manuscripts. That they see the same things all the time is bound to be a big one.

Obviously those books you mentioned got past the gatekeepers, but maybe the publisher knows that market isn't likely to be bothered by such things. Maybe those authors' first books didn't break those rules, or had very compelling other qualities, and now the authors are so well-established that they can afford to ignore them.

 

[Martin Gill]

It’s the gatekeeper thing I’m thinking of. I’m pretty dam sure my inlaws don’t give a crap about what I’ve called out. In fact my father in law just walked in and pointed at the Battlemage book and said “that’s really good”. I read the first 7 pages and NOTHING HAPPENS. At all.

As a yet unpublished author, I’m torn here because I feel like I’m writing both what I want, but trying to follow a bunch of unwritten guidelines that will get an agent to read past my first couple of pages, while not cramping my style. And I keep seeing examples of published work that is counter to any advice I get here.

I am curious to look up both their first novels now. I agree some level of complacency by the author or agent may be to blame here.

 

[HareBrain]

In fact my father in law just walked in and pointed at the Battlemage book and said “that’s really good”. I read the first 7 pages and NOTHING HAPPENS. At all.

Have you talked through how he reads it, what he expects from an opening and why this one satisfies him when it doesn't you?

As far as I can see, Battle Mage is Stephen Aryan's first book. The opening doesn't do a huge amount for me, but it's not my favourite genre. But it is possible for an agent or publisher to overlook "rules" if something appeals to them personally, and they know an editor they think would be the same.

 

[Martin Gill]

It looks like Battlemage is his first book. And after further research I’m now confused. I found this...

How I Found an Agent – Part 2

Which is helpful, but also contradictory, In which he cites a comment from his agent “Often I feel that novels start before they should: you get pages of the character on a journey, or waking up, or starting their morning routine. But the novel threw us right into the action,“ but his book literally starts with his character waking up, going on a journey and meeting some people.

Sample of one, I know, but...

 

[Martin Gill]

Have you talked through how he reads it, what he expects from an opening and why this one satisfies him when it doesn't you?

Not yet. But I agree with your earlier point that the “rules” are for the gatekeepers, not the average punter, who doesn’t care. It just confounds me the amount of intros I read that I feel “should” have been kicked back by an agent if they were playing the game I think we here think they are playing.

 

[goldhawk]

Don't start with the MC waking up. Don't start with the weather. Don't have a prologue.

The reason these guidelines exists is because the they usually indicate there is a long, rambling description to follow. Authors that break them always start a conflict in the second paragraph. Basically the first paragraph frames the first scene but the story must start in the second or the chances of publication are thin.

 

[Toby Frost]

Some of the advice we are given is too set in stone. I can't see why you can't start a book by saying "It was raining the night Jim died". To me, that's a strong way to start. What a lot of these set-in-stone comments are hinting at are more subtle suggestions. You probably shouldn't begin a book with a page about rain. The thing is, that takes longer to say and probably won't get as many readers.

Also, really good writing will trump a lot of objections. But it's best not to rely on raw talent and maximise your chances of writing a good book, and that is what I think the "rules" (well, general guidelines) are there for. I don't think it's a matter of a reader saying "Ugh, prologue, I'm not reading this" (although it seems fashionable for publishers to do so). I think it's more that getting it wrong will lessen the enjoyment of the reader and reduce the chance of them coming back for more, without quite knowing why.

And I do get the feeling that the rules for agents/publishers are a bit different to those for readers, perhaps because agents are just plain tired of reading weak prologues at the start of every book they receive.

 

[Martin Gill]

And I do get the feeling that the rules for agents/publishers are a bit different to those for readers,

Amen.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Goldhawk is right. It’s not the rules that are the constrainer - it’s that most new writers using eg a prologue use it to dump info. If you have a prologue that works well and isn’t for that purpose it’s not a deal breaker. Ditto waking up.

 

[The Big Peat]

I think there's a few things going on here but the major one is a lot of stuff that gets by the gatekeepers - by the agents/publishers - doesn't really match the standard advice. I still think the intro to Harry Potter would have been told it was making mistakes and, in fairness, that very nearly didn't get past the gatekeepers. But it only takes one and, as such, you can clearly get away with a bunch of stuff if just a couple of people like you.

edit: I would also add -

"We all scoff at the idea of rules, knowing quite correctly that great art -- even great commercial art -- often enjoys its success precisely for the reason of breaking the rules. In this business, conventional wisdom is wrong at least as often as it is right...

But -- there is something to the old maxim, 'You gotta know the rules to break them."

Took that from Terry Rossio, and he's right. We all know the rules are often wrong... but the reasons behind the rules are almost always right. As Jo said (prompting this edit tbh), there's nothing wrong with a prologue that doesn't commit the cardinal sins we associate with prologues. But if you include a prologue without understanding why people are told not to, there's a good chance you commit the sin.

That said - a lot of writing advice givers are often more black and white than that statement - including some of those advising flexibility here (including myself). We do sometimes lose the run of ourselves and you have to remember that.

 

[Venusian Broon]

But it is possible for an agent or publisher to overlook "rules" if something appeals to them personally, and they know an editor they think would be the same.

I think this is the key - fundamentally it's subjective and will depend on a large number of factors. Pondering too much on why individual cases have 'passed' when you feel they shouldn't have is probably just a recipe for a headache.

There are, after all, huge numbers of books that I personally can't believe got published. But they're out there. Some of them became mega bestsellers too.

 

[Steve Harrison]

My novel starts with a flashback prologue about a bored teenager and it was bought by a publisher. I put the prologue in as an experiment after being rejected countless times with the original draft, which had a much more logical starting point. The prologue version sold almost immediately.

Publishers only care about their own 'rules.' Those who don't like prologues will reject a book that has one. Those who love prologues will reject a novel if it doesn't have one. But the best publishers are open minded and are willing and interested to see how an author has chosen to tell his or her story.

 

[Penny]

If we all followed the "rules" stories would get very boring very quickly. The rules are good for people who are inexperienced or who are feeling lost. (like myself tbh >.> )

I think books that can be good despite breaking the rules need to work a lot harder to be noticed so, if you're going to break them, you better write something that can stand despite it.

 

[Toby Frost]

It's just occurred to me that the story I'm currently writing introduces Main Character 1 standing in the rain and Main Character 2 getting out of bed. Oh well.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Goldhawk is right. It’s not the rules that are the constrainer - it’s that most new writers using eg a prologue use it to dump info. If you have a prologue that works well and isn’t for that purpose it’s not a deal breaker. Ditto waking up.

I'm with Jo and goldhawk here - it's about understanding the "rules".

When agents/editors advise against opening with prologues/the weather/waking up, etc, it's because most aspiring writers will spend pages and pages on unnecessary detail at the start. Effectively, the beginning of the story is nowhere near the beginning the book.

Whereas in the example Toby quote, the weather only occupies three words and the opening sentence begins the story.

 

[monsterchic]

Once upon a time, I saw a picture that said something along the lines of you can have your character do ANYTHING you want in the first sentence, as long as the second is "Then the murders began."

Obviously a joke, but does, IMO, make a decent point. I've read plenty of books and stories that begin with the weather/waking up/other "bad" things and enjoyed them. As long as the writing is good, I think stuff like that can be overlooked or even encouraged.

 

[Edward M. Grant]

Are we worrying about the wrong things when we critique each other’s work?

Yes.

As a reader, I want something that grabs me in the first couple of paragraphs, and doesn't let go. If that's the main character waking up and looking out the window to see it's raining frogs again, I don't care about the 'rules' saying you shouldn't do that.

The 'rules' are mostly there because beginning writers make so many of the same kinds of mistakes that it's best to tell them 'just don't do that' because they don't yet know how to do it right.

 

[Edward M. Grant]

It's just occurred to me that the story I'm currently writing introduces Main Character 1 standing in the rain and Main Character 2 getting out of bed. Oh well.

My current novel has a prologue, then one of the main characters standing outside in the rain. The only 'waking up' scene is about a quarter of the way through the book, though.

Also, in that case, the storm is a major part of the setting. The book takes place over one night and the character wouldn't end up being involved in the main plot if they weren't looking for somewhere to spend the night out of the rain.

Actually, the last-but-one novel started with the character waking up. But they'd been asleep for months in a suspension pod that was parachuting down to the surface of a planet, so it seemed to make sense to start there. I think the sequel starts with them waking up on a beach after falling off a raft and being washed ashore. Maybe every book in that series should start with him waking up somewhere.

 

[Steve Harrison]

Are we worrying about the wrong things when we critique each other’s work?

I'm generalising, I know, but it's difficult for a writer to critique another writer's work because they know too much. They can't remove the writer in them and read with the eye of a reader.

A non-writing reader isn't worried about your technique or what you should or shouldn't do. They just want to be entertained or informed by a smooth piece of writing and will accept anything you put in front of them, unless they think it's boring, difficult to get through or find it not to their taste. They will assume the description of the weather or the detailed journey of a fly crawling up a window pane in the opening paragraph is there for a purpose and by the time it becomes apparent it was an irrelevant and unnecessary beginning, they will have moved on and forgotten about it.

And this is why publishing is such a difficult business. A good publisher has to know writing well enough to recognise what he or she believes is quality, and readers well enough to know what they will like and accept. It's a very hit and miss business and even more difficult if you self-publish without a wide range of external input.

After many years of writing I now give my writing to only two people; my wife, who is not a writer, and a professional novelist friend. I give my wife the manuscript without comment and then grit my teeth, cross my fingers and - even though I am an atheist - pray. But I give very detailed instructions to my novelist friend, otherwise he will get caught up on the writing and how would have written it, rather than just reading the damned thing!