I came across this quote just the other day with another set of rules for authors and I think it sums up my response to many of the rules I have just looked at for writing a modern novel. Rules can be broken, unlike laws which are more binding. Rules are things you have in a game, and if everyone agrees, they can be changed for the benefit of all.
Certainly, it’s clear the rules I have just been looking at did not apply when people like Jane Austen and Charles Dickens were writing. So they will probably change with the times as things progress. And what will force the change? Who decided these rules in the first place? Was it simply some boffin in an office somewhere, some submissions editor maybe, who decided what they were?
More likely, they came out of a reflection of what the audience demanded, or perhaps what publishers think the audience demands. So they are considered useful things to adhere to if you want to pique a publisher’s interest in your work. However, the public is a fickle beast and things can change in the blink of an eye. Perhaps any one of us might be the author that sets the trend for a new rule rather than the one who follows the crowd!
Hi Lynne
I love that quote – it is so true.
I sometimes think that if the “rules of writing” keep progressing the way they are we will run out of parts of speech to write with – first it was the adjectives, then the adverbs – soon it will be – maybe nouns (never use a noun when a verb will do)?
Where do the rules come from – “how to books”, literary courses, editors and agents – all looking at “what makes a bestseller” maybe?
One thing that has influenced the change – I think – is that readers these days have far less time so what to get to the point quickly – plus they are much more movie literate & modern movies tend to be fast paced and dramatic – and I think this influences what they want from books as well – more visual and dramatic.
Also, I think some of the trends tend to be reactions to overuse of the past. So in the past authors were tempted to use “purple prose” in which adjectives were piled up with wild abandon – or dialogue that did its best to banish “s/he said” with as many “she cried” “he groaned” “she spluttered” as possible – preferably with an adverb attached (softly, derisively, gingerly). Hence the reaction against the resultant florid style.
As C S Lewis says – history is a bit like a drunken man riding a horse leaning from one extreme to another.
However, having said that, I can see that the rules are not arbitrary – they do have a point and following them does strengthen one’s prose.
As long as they are taken as guidelines (rules not laws as you mention)- that may be broken.
I hadn’t heard that quote before. CS Lewis was a very wise man!