The golden rules of writing. A guide for thought written for authors.

[Steven Lake]

This is a simple list of rules almost any fiction writer should follow. It's not a complete list, but it is a few points I came up with. You're free to share your own if you want. I think in the end it'd make a nice guide for new authors looking to get published.

1. Just because you're <insert title or degree here> doesn't mean you're a good author. There's a lot more to being an author than a title in front of your name or a plaque on the wall.

2. Just because you think your story is good doesn't mean it is. Always get multiple professional opinions.

3. If given professional advice on how to improve your book, never ignore it. Take it gratefully and fix the problems the professionals addressed.

4. Never assume your book is perfect, ever. There's always room for improvement. There are quite a few 50+ year old classics that are still being edited and improved even today.

5. Always remember to have multiple outside professional feedback readers critique your book. (IE, anyone who isn't family, a friend, or associated/related to you in any way. In other words, complete strangers) When they (and your editor) sign off on the book as being ready for publication, THEN and ONLY then you're free to publish it. Until then, keep working on it.

6. When writing fiction, always remember the rule of balance, which says: For every strength there must be an equal and offsetting weakness. IE, you can't have an insanely powerful monster without some kind of weakness that can be attacked to bring it down. Same goes for the hero or anything. This also works for characters and their traits too.

7. Character balance is important. No living person is totally perfect. Your characters shouldn't be either. They need to have some kind of weakness, character flaw, or other issue that makes them human. Even if they're not human they still need to be "human" in personality or they become impossible to relate to, and will be rejected by readers.

8. If the world you're writing about isn't as familiar and real to you as your hand in front of your face, or your own family, you haven't lived in it long enough, and thus you're not ready to write about it. Writing about characters and other worlds is like writing about your own family. IE, the more you know, the better a story you can tell.

9. Writing isn't about fame and fortune. Writing is about doing what you love and sharing it with others. If you're in it for the money, you're in the wrong line of work. But if you're in it because you love writing, and would do it the rest of your life even if you never made a dime from it, you're in the right field.

Well, that's all I have for now. I'll add more as I think of them, or people share them with me.

[Justin Nemo]

10. Do your research. If you are writing fiction that mentions real places or streets, find out about those streets or buildings and what's around them. Little extra factual details will give your work a sense of realism. Also if you're talking about antiques or fly fishing or whatever, research it, know a bit about it and try and use some of it in your narative.

11. Keep revising your work. Read it and read it until you are sick of the damn thing, then read it and revise it some more. Remember the first draft is the weakest.

12. Never kill your hero off in the first chapter, it makes for a really short book.

[Steven Lake]

Originally Posted by Justin Nemo

12. Never kill your hero off in the first chapter, it makes for a really short book.

Amen to that! Well, unless your hero happens to be one of the undead.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Steven Lake

you can't have an insanely powerful monster without some kind of weakness that can be attacked to bring it down.

I always thought that was a bit of a cop out, and it always makes me groan when I see it used. Oh look, they're allergic to sea water, they've never encountered bad breath before so we can defeat them with that, they have a big arrow on their chest pointing to a small hole in their armour what could it possibly mean?

[dadioflex]

13. Until you have a measure of success such that the average man on the street knows who you are, you shouldn't be making lists telling writers what to do, or not do.

[Steven Lake]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

I always thought that was a bit of a cop out, and it always makes me groan when I see it used. Oh look, they're allergic to sea water, they've never encountered bad breath before so we can defeat them with that, they have a big arrow on their chest pointing to a small hole in their armour what could it possibly mean?

Well, some common sense needs to be used when creating the weakness. For example, the creators of "The Blob" were smart and used cold as the creature's weakness. Cold is the enemy of pretty much anything, so it makes the perfect weakness without being silly. Even I thought long and hard about proper weaknesses in order to satisfy the rule of balance. Another way to look at it is, make a weakness, but don't make it easy to get to. Take a look at Ender's Game. Orson Scott Card forced his characters to really go out of their way to get at that weakness. Sure, he had a super weapon that would wipe out the buggers in a single shot. The problem was, it was difficult to use and had a lot of shortcomings. So to use his strength to attack their weakness, Ender had to go way out of his way to do it. That's one of the ways that an author can create a good weakness that's not totally stupid or convoluted in order to maintain the balance of power in a story.

Originally Posted by dadioflex

13. Until you have a measure of success such that the average man on the street knows who you are, you shouldn't be making lists telling writers what to do, or not do.

HAHAHA. Maybe so, but I am a teacher at heart (I actually do teach author classes along with my publisher) so I enjoy sharing my experience and knowledge with others to help them learn in hopes that they won't make the same mistakes I did. Or the same mistakes I've seen others make. ^_^;;

[gmw]

Items 6 and 7 seem like duplicates to me, okay so the emphasis in 7 is on the character, but the concept is essentially the same and I feel could be effectively grouped under one heading. But are these two items (merged or separate) "golden rules", or simply items worthy of consideration while developing your story and characters? Sure it would probably be too much to read an entire book of characters that are perfectly good and perfectly bad, but - depending on the story - there may indeed be a place for a distinct lack of balance ... it's even possible to suggest that a lack of balance can be very important to many tales.

Most of the rest of your list seems like good advice - although I'm not sure they feel like "rules" to me, but perhaps that's a good thing. For example (not picking on Justin, just taking that post as an example), a rule about not killing off your character in the first chapter is not really a rule, it is feasible to do exactly that and still have a long novel, as the reader finds out how that came to pass. Like so many other "rules" I've read, such rules are probably good things to consider, you should know the rules before you break them, but few constitute true golden rules.

[Justin Nemo]

Originally Posted by dadioflex

13. Until you have a measure of success such that the average man on the street knows who you are, you shouldn't be making lists telling writers what to do, or not do.

I love you man.

[Justin Nemo]

Originally Posted by gmw

For example (not picking on Justin, just taking that post as an example), a rule about not killing off your character in the first chapter is not really a rule, it is feasible to do exactly that and still have a long novel, as the reader finds out how that came to pass. Like so many other "rules" I've read, such rules are probably good things to consider, you should know the rules before you break them, but few constitute true golden rules.

You're always picking on me GM. Hands up who thought that I was taking the pi**

[Penforhire]

I like your rule 10. It isn't always obvious when research is weak but it sure shines when I know a location and an author describes it well. That's one of the big positives I notice about books by Barry Eisler or Michael Connelley.

[Native]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

I always thought that was a bit of a cop out, and it always makes me groan when I see it used. Oh look, they're allergic to sea water, they've never encountered bad breath before so we can defeat them with that, they have a big arrow on their chest pointing to a small hole in their armour what could it possibly mean?

And the part about heroes is a bit of a cop-out too. I don't need to constantly have other people's flaws pointed out just to make me feel bigger. There's nothing wrong with looking up every now and then.

[VydorScope]

I would relabel these guidelines not rules those it does appear to be a mixture.


In my mind, #9 is key and the rest do not matter as much. Most of the rest only matter if your goal is be be liked, and popular. Nine kind of over rules all that.

[Steven Lake]

Well, 9 kinda capstones the other 8 by saying that you should always keep your focus on your writing and entertaining others. If fame comes along, great, if not, then fine. But fame and fortune should never be the key focus. The other 8 are basically #9 distilled into individual points of focus.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by Justin Nemo

You're always picking on me GM. Hands up who thought that I was taking the pi**

... Sorry, can't do it - there's no smilie for that ... nor for "taking the pi**", how was I ever to know without an appropriate smilie.

[Justin Nemo]

Originally Posted by gmw

... Sorry, can't do it - there's no smilie for that ... nor for "taking the pi**", how was I ever to know without an appropriate smilie.

Er.... by reading what I wrote?