at the same time it doesn't do them any harm - I'm not convinced, Nik.

What sometimes happens is that people hear a tip and then it renders the writing process more conscious and they have greater difficulty finding their own voice.

Additionally, when they see published writers using a device they've been recommended to avoid, they draw erroneous conclusions such as, That writer must be rubbish, or The publishing world doesn't know what's good and what isn't, or Writers with big sales can get away with that technique but editors secretly know it's bad. The obvious conclusion, that the device is fine and good writers have been using it for years with total freedom, doesn't seem to occur. So as I've said elsewhere, such tips can tamper with a writer's ability to read critically as well. It's easy to over-sensitise yourself to one aspect of language and then it clangs on your internal ear every time you come across it, which spoils the effect of the text. And as you say, Nik, exposure to good fiction is a writer's biggest asset.

Good analogy, Emma.

I do see your point, Lammi. Maybe I'm just looking at it from where I am with my writing. I've learned a lot (mostly from reading good fiction, less so from how-to books) but I've still got a long way to go.

It's a difficult one, isn't it?

Nik.

It is, because everyone travels by a different route.

I've seen so many good authors called not fit to burn, though, from Booker-winners to genre-writers, because they used [insert device of choice]. That grieves me.

Yup.

Another thing to consider is that you can't take all the guidelines on board on one go. When we were children we were, quite rightly, told not to start a sentence with "but" or "and", but later in life, in creative writing, we find we can. There are similar rules in maths where you later learn rules that contradict the earlier rules. The teachers weren't lying in those early years, it's just that to give too much information at the start is confusing.

Here's another english example: a story must have a beginning, a middle and an end.

See? Most of us here understand why a story has more impact if you skip the beginning and go straight to the middle.

Colin

I see what you're saying but don't quite agree, Colin. A story does need a beginning, middle and end. It's just as writers we understand what that beginning needs to be. It is still a beginning - it just doesn't start before the story starts. Surely if you started in the middle there'd be huge holes in the story, the characters wouldn't be naturally developed, we wouldn't know enough about them to care, and we wouldn't know what their conflict was.

All beginning, middle and end means, for me, is, basically:

beginning - start of the story, who the characters are and what their conflict is.

Middle: bulk of the story - how the character(s) react to their conflict, how they develop and what happens.

End - how it's resolved (of it is at all), th e outcome.

If I'm wrong, correct me!

Nik.

A story does need a beginning, middle and end.

Hey, cool. This quote really backs up this other one...

I've learned a lot (mostly from reading good fiction, less so from how-to books) but I've still got a long way to go.

I'm slow today (just today? you ask)so you'll have to explain.

Nik.

How does a story begin if it hasn't got a beginning?

Are you all sitting comfortably? Then I'll middle.

Sorry, Zooter, you sneaked in - this is a reply to Nik.

Okay, let's keep it simple and confine this to short stories.

Basically, what you quoted is the lesson we're taught at school, that a story needs an introduction, a way of setting the scene and character, the character's goal and the problem that lies between them and that goal. It set's up what the story is about. The middle gives the details of the conflict - the guts of the story, how the problem or obstacle is tackled and overcome - and the ending shows the outcome, the result of the character achieving their objective, and the possibility of unforseen outcomes, ie a twist.

That's yer basic short story. Character. Objective. Obstacle. Conflict. Outcome.

But as you get older you realise that all writers don't conform, and the objective doesn't come out until the end, or isn't even mentioned, but is left to the reader to discover. In short, you can play about and experiment and turn the guidelines on themselves, even starting out with the conclusion and going back, chronologically, through events that caused the result, so the objective becomes the conclusion.

The best short story I've read is "The Good Doctor" by Adam Haslett - and I totally recommend that collection - awesome, and full of examples of what I'm probably failing to get across.

Colin

I do see what you mean and I think we're both arguing from the same hymn sheet, although there may be translation issues!

I still maintain that a story needs a beginning, a middle and an end. The conflicts and whatnot can be shifted and going back to Lammi's point - they're not rules but guidelines. How many stories start at the end and work their way back. But even in those they have a beginning. Sometimes, the beginning is the end. And that basic structure I believe (and it's only my opinion - as I've said I'm open to learning and growing) is essential, otherwise you'd end up with somethng that didn't make sense.

And thanks for making me laugh, Zooter. Very funny!

You seem to think that the opening lines of a piece of writing are the beginning of a story. You're trying to make your argument fit because the written word is chronological, but the story doesn't have to be. Therefore the "start" of the story is not necessarily the "beginning" of the written work.

How many stories start at the end and work their way back

This isn't a statistical thing - you only need one!

The point I was making, was that the rules we learn at the beginning of a subject (english, maths, chemistry) are often refined later on, and we discover that they are not hard and fast rules at all, but as most people are agreeing, guidelines. The problem comes when someone learns the first few lessons and tries to apply those lessons (rules) to something that been written by a more advanced writer. Suddenly the rules don't seem to apply and the result is either confusion or annoyance because the published writer appears to have broken the rules the new writer is currently learning.

(this is one of those arguments that would so better carried out in a pub)

Thanks, for this, Dee. Coincidentally i ordered this book a few days ago (along with TBMH, Kate!), so i'm glad it's got your endorsement.

Casey

What I mean is plenty of stroies begin at the end. Chronologly has nothing to do with it. The beginning of the story is the first line. You can't get away from that. What that 'beginning' contains, how you craft it and what you include, can be anything. It's still the beginning of the story, and if you want to make it abstract and start it at the end, for example, you've still got to make that beginning work, because it is the beginning and the point from which the reader will start it.

And yes - this is definitely a pub discussion! What next? Polotics, religion, Strictly Come Dancing anyone?

Thanks, Casey!