Just keep reading and reading: the best writers will shape your brain, until you notice bad writing automatically, like a splinter on a smooth banister!
Couldn’t agree with this more. I know so many writers who take course after course and workshop after workshop but when you ask them what they’re reading they don’t seem to see the connection.
My husband and I asked for a copy of Fowler’s Modern English on our wedding registry (fifteen years ago). And maybe this is, uh, uncouth, but we keep it in the bathroom so that anyone visiting the facilities can catch an entry or two. 😎
Absolutely on target. But why are we not teaching these things in grammar school? So many writers of all ages haven't the faintest idea about syntax or punctuation or sentence structure or...! As a dancer who practices at the barre every day for years before ever stepping onto the stage, writers and even non-writers should have these essentials ingrained in our minds so that we don't have to reach for technique. We simply know.
Have to be careful what we wish for here though. In the UK our kids are being taught about things like fronted adverbials thanks to a conservative politician who got it into his head this is Vital Information. All their creative writing lessons seem to have been developed by people who hate both reading and writing and want to make sure kids do too.
I am in favour of children learning as much as possible. Generations of children were taught intensive Latin and Greek grammar and it did them the power of good. I used a fronted adverbial in this piece in fact.
Ahem. A small number of children learned Latin & Greek. My father (50s inner city secondary modern) barely learned English and had to go to night school to rectify that. He was also a very good writer.
I learned French - so I learned grammar and I am also able to order a baguette.
My main beef with Duolingo is that it tries to teach language purely through repetition rather than using syntax and grammar as well.
I see what you’re saying, but I disagree on this. Children at primary school should not be having their creativity squished by pedantic notions of correctness. I say this as a massive pedant who has made a living from writing and who acts like a walking grammar checker for my own children. I’m all for older kids learning this stuff, but primary school children are taught it without any nuance or discussions of alternative stylistic choices. I cannot see how it helped my youngest daughter in any way. If anything, it stifled her love of writing – and put her off reading altogether. Here is Michael Rosen on the subject http://michaelrosenblog.blogspot.com/2023/01/fronted-adverbials-what-about-fronted.html
What we have here are competing ideas of creativity. The predominant idea among modern people is that writing is a release of inner feeling. The alternative idea is that writing is something you are trained to do, as per the old grammar schools. Both are true, the question is one of balance. Personally, I don't see why so much emphasis is put on creative writing for children. If they want to write stories, they should be encouraged and helped. But creative writing lessons seem like a strange alternative to learning grammar. Most great poets and novelists were taught like this.
You can teach creative writing alongside grammar. I do. In primary school, grammar is often taught through simple 'complete the sentence' style tasks or 'identify the mistakes'. I prefer seeing grammar and punctuation as a set of tools we can use to help us express creativity. I always include it in description or storytelling when teaching. For me, it's down to communication. Grammar and punctuation are vital in good communication. And yet, through my experience teaching creative writing to kids, we miss out on so much if we funnel them down a heavy grammar focus and don't let then use writing as an outlet. If we can get them hooked on writing and discovery, then grammar and punctuation skills can be refined along the way.
Apologies for the grammar and punctuation mistakes in this comment! Lol
You convinced me with one piece that my years of not caring about grammar were an absolute disservice to myself and my craft. Thank you. What was I thinking?
Alongside the ones you recommended, E.B. White’s Elements of Style is still one of my favourites. The last chapter really hit home because White instructed writers to focus on content and saw style as a byproduct. Whereas today, there’s an overemphasis on writing in our “voice” instead of clarifying what we’re trying to say. Great post!
At least in the U.S., the title of Virginia Tufte's book is Artful Sentences. Syntax as Style is the subtitle. For those who are wondering, she was Edward Tufte's mother. She died in 2020, at the age of 101, and this obit suggests why she knew so much about style: https://dornsife.usc.edu/news/stories/in-memoriam-virginia-tufte/
From Poe’s Philosophy of Composition to Lanham’s Revising Prose, there are so many useful discussions of writing with understanding and purpose. What passes as writing advice now is too often marketing advice. Glad to see i’m not the only one who appreciates the difference.
I don't even know what left-branching sentence is-I don't know anything-I never learned anything, well maybe in secondary school but English was second language, pretty rudimentary-they designed it to be like that too, so one could read mostly...in short, I know nothing, never learned anything, the only good thing is that I realize it and it pains me. No, I'm not reading advice, usually-afer all it's not like I'm a writer, or going to be one.
Man does this need to be said. I will say literary techniques do not actually give you sense or meaning through incompleteness. This follows chomsky's adaption of early analytic philosophy into linguistics but that is a perspective with way more explanatory power. Literary techniques mean little on their own and we pick and choose based on some unformalized or unrecognized meaning we have of our own. Literature, as you said, explores meaning. You don't get dickens without romanticism applied to Victorian England. Modernism uses a lot of techniques postmodernism does even though both drop themes for narratives which is much more prominent in Melville or romanticism in general.
Just keep reading and reading: the best writers will shape your brain, until you notice bad writing automatically, like a splinter on a smooth banister!
Yes!!!
Couldn’t agree with this more. I know so many writers who take course after course and workshop after workshop but when you ask them what they’re reading they don’t seem to see the connection.
:/
My husband and I asked for a copy of Fowler’s Modern English on our wedding registry (fifteen years ago). And maybe this is, uh, uncouth, but we keep it in the bathroom so that anyone visiting the facilities can catch an entry or two. 😎
I love this! Fowler has such elegant prose.
Absolutely on target. But why are we not teaching these things in grammar school? So many writers of all ages haven't the faintest idea about syntax or punctuation or sentence structure or...! As a dancer who practices at the barre every day for years before ever stepping onto the stage, writers and even non-writers should have these essentials ingrained in our minds so that we don't have to reach for technique. We simply know.
I think grammar is coming back to schools now, at least in England.
Have to be careful what we wish for here though. In the UK our kids are being taught about things like fronted adverbials thanks to a conservative politician who got it into his head this is Vital Information. All their creative writing lessons seem to have been developed by people who hate both reading and writing and want to make sure kids do too.
I am in favour of children learning as much as possible. Generations of children were taught intensive Latin and Greek grammar and it did them the power of good. I used a fronted adverbial in this piece in fact.
Ahem. A small number of children learned Latin & Greek. My father (50s inner city secondary modern) barely learned English and had to go to night school to rectify that. He was also a very good writer.
I learned French - so I learned grammar and I am also able to order a baguette.
My main beef with Duolingo is that it tries to teach language purely through repetition rather than using syntax and grammar as well.
I see what you’re saying, but I disagree on this. Children at primary school should not be having their creativity squished by pedantic notions of correctness. I say this as a massive pedant who has made a living from writing and who acts like a walking grammar checker for my own children. I’m all for older kids learning this stuff, but primary school children are taught it without any nuance or discussions of alternative stylistic choices. I cannot see how it helped my youngest daughter in any way. If anything, it stifled her love of writing – and put her off reading altogether. Here is Michael Rosen on the subject http://michaelrosenblog.blogspot.com/2023/01/fronted-adverbials-what-about-fronted.html
What we have here are competing ideas of creativity. The predominant idea among modern people is that writing is a release of inner feeling. The alternative idea is that writing is something you are trained to do, as per the old grammar schools. Both are true, the question is one of balance. Personally, I don't see why so much emphasis is put on creative writing for children. If they want to write stories, they should be encouraged and helped. But creative writing lessons seem like a strange alternative to learning grammar. Most great poets and novelists were taught like this.
I don’t actually think we’re disagreeing. I definitely want them to be taught grammar. I just don’t think the curriculum is doing a good job of it.
You can teach creative writing alongside grammar. I do. In primary school, grammar is often taught through simple 'complete the sentence' style tasks or 'identify the mistakes'. I prefer seeing grammar and punctuation as a set of tools we can use to help us express creativity. I always include it in description or storytelling when teaching. For me, it's down to communication. Grammar and punctuation are vital in good communication. And yet, through my experience teaching creative writing to kids, we miss out on so much if we funnel them down a heavy grammar focus and don't let then use writing as an outlet. If we can get them hooked on writing and discovery, then grammar and punctuation skills can be refined along the way.
Apologies for the grammar and punctuation mistakes in this comment! Lol
Both.
Agree. It's too stifling. Grammar is very important, but so is creative experimentation.
All writing advice is a lie but for my How to Write Good: A Short, Ten-Step Guide to Better Grammar. Read and weep: https://www.whitenoise.email/p/write-good
You convinced me with one piece that my years of not caring about grammar were an absolute disservice to myself and my craft. Thank you. What was I thinking?
Alongside the ones you recommended, E.B. White’s Elements of Style is still one of my favourites. The last chapter really hit home because White instructed writers to focus on content and saw style as a byproduct. Whereas today, there’s an overemphasis on writing in our “voice” instead of clarifying what we’re trying to say. Great post!
Yes good shout I love EBW too. Thanks!
Another good one is Orwell's Politics and the English Language: https://michaelmohr.substack.com/p/george-orwells-politics-and-the-english
At least in the U.S., the title of Virginia Tufte's book is Artful Sentences. Syntax as Style is the subtitle. For those who are wondering, she was Edward Tufte's mother. She died in 2020, at the age of 101, and this obit suggests why she knew so much about style: https://dornsife.usc.edu/news/stories/in-memoriam-virginia-tufte/
Ak! you are quite right. I shall change it. Thanks for the link.
Brilliant and so true. Thank you.
From Poe’s Philosophy of Composition to Lanham’s Revising Prose, there are so many useful discussions of writing with understanding and purpose. What passes as writing advice now is too often marketing advice. Glad to see i’m not the only one who appreciates the difference.
Very true 👍
I don't even know what left-branching sentence is-I don't know anything-I never learned anything, well maybe in secondary school but English was second language, pretty rudimentary-they designed it to be like that too, so one could read mostly...in short, I know nothing, never learned anything, the only good thing is that I realize it and it pains me. No, I'm not reading advice, usually-afer all it's not like I'm a writer, or going to be one.
Thank you-I loved the post.
Yes! I love this.
I hate reading the writing advice because it's given as a blanket tool for every situation.
If it's not in service to the theme or the story, then it's pointless. It's true in fiction and nonfiction writing.
It's about being aligned like polarized light for writing to be Impactful
It kind of seems like going to a psychic. General advice based on probabilities and speculation might turn out to be true in retrospect.
But you can go to 5 different psychics and get 5 different narratives.
There’s a lot of context and nuance that is missing from most writing advice. Especially blanket writing hacks and tips.
But like going to a psychic, it can give you hope or reinforce that you need to keep going. So there’s that.
True
Man does this need to be said. I will say literary techniques do not actually give you sense or meaning through incompleteness. This follows chomsky's adaption of early analytic philosophy into linguistics but that is a perspective with way more explanatory power. Literary techniques mean little on their own and we pick and choose based on some unformalized or unrecognized meaning we have of our own. Literature, as you said, explores meaning. You don't get dickens without romanticism applied to Victorian England. Modernism uses a lot of techniques postmodernism does even though both drop themes for narratives which is much more prominent in Melville or romanticism in general.
Full agree that style without moral purpose is vacuous (e.g. Martin Amis)
You made me look up the phrase "periodic sentence." Now I know that I've used this rhetorical device before.
Giving writing advice while eschewing writing advice. When does it end?
Irony?
Ha. Touché.
A sign of what being online has done to writing- and writers.
I don't think the internet invented irony?
Your piece wasn't ironic. It was a sign of frustration.