There are some forms of writing that I can’t understand. It is close to being double standards but is not. Maybe if it was in the same story then I could say that.
Well that is as vague as a vague thing on Vague Day.
In our wonderful Nazi PC world we receive a lot of submissions where the writer chooses ‘they’ as the pronoun and generic names so that the reader can place who they wish into being the MC. Personally I think this is a cop out and very lazy. Commit to your character. Have them clear in your mind and let us have them, warts and all.
Now the close to double standards or whatever is when a writer over describes clothing. Is that a way to explain those curves a voluptuous lady has or the six-pack you can see through someone’s tight T-Shirt? This is maybe a more complex idea but again it’s lazy writing and maybe a fear to commit to describing the more interesting parts of a human.
One part of the body that is not interesting and for some reason has been visualised immensely is a lady’s eyebrows. I haven’t a fucking clue why!! There are so many ladies walking about who look as if they have been sharpied or are the love child of Groucho Marx and that lady from Dodgeball.
I honestly think that I’ll give up the day that I read:
‘Her eyebrows were lush. They were the perfect one inch in depth. I liked them that way. I have been attracted to those pencil lines at one time but that was when I was a boy. The bushier did make me curious but give me that perfect one inch and I melt.’
IT’S FUCKING NONSENSE!!
My main point of this post is not ridiculous looking eyebrows but lazy writing which I want to explore.
I don’t have much technical knowledge when it comes to set up and I’m sure that there’s a term for this but those stories that are split into sections annoy.
I mean the ones that are:
Headed.
Him
And we read about how he sees and perceives the plot.
Then:
Her
And we read about how she sees and perceives the plot.
Sometimes it ends up with a ‘They’ (Thankfully that has fuck all to do with an ambiguous pronoun and all to do with them as a couple (Boak!!)
There can be other characters put in and it’s structured the same way.
The reason that I find this lazy is that the writer hasn’t been arsed to connect them with words. Now words are what we do. Headings and spacing are tools but they shouldn’t be used as you can’t be fucked to work on tie-ins.
Letters.
We have received so many stories that begin with the finding of a letter or journal entry.
Again this is lazy as the writer is letting the date and header be in the body of the letter and they have used this instead of an opening informative paragraph.
Fact for assumption.
This is when a magical / against physics / fantastic fact is mentioned in a throw away manner very early on and from there we need to read and simply accept every other thing that the writer throws at us.
This can be fine if it’s a work of fantasy but the stories I am on about gives us a line like.
‘She was my fourteenth kill’
It then goes onto number fifteen and you are left thinking in this age of cameras, Forensic Science, Social Media, how the fuck did they get away with fourteen kills?
The writer assumes that you accept the missing back story and will not question – They are very wrong and taking the piss.
Date
This can actually go both ways. Weirdly if your character is stating a time in their past, that is acceptable and does place the reader right there (If they know of those times). But if we receive an opening line like
‘It was the year 3256 and we had just transported onto Jupiter’
This takes us back into Fact For Assumption.
Fan Fiction
Basically the writer has stolen situations, characters, placement in time and decided to write a plot around this.
Here’s the thing, this isn’t yours.
I have never understood how Fan Fiction was ever called that. I think the word for it should be plagiarism!
In The Style Of…
Not quite the same and I would slate this more but let’s be honest, there are coincidences in writing and when some folks read writers’ work they’ll state that it does read like someone elses.
BUT and it’s a huge BUT, if you market it this way then I would slate you, as again, you’re using someone else’s structure, tone and probably wording.
For both of these I’d give you a simple piece of advice, don’t send them unless it is to a specific site who requests this type.
NB
No matter what I’ve already said, if there is something within these types that is interesting or unique, they’ll stand out. And like all things that are not to our taste, no matter what, we’ll all give them a chance. (But probably not the Fan Fiction or In The Style Of!!!)
I’d be very interested to read if there are other forms of lazy writing that you’ve spotted that irks!
Okay onto this week’s stories.
Only one new writer and four old hands.
As always our initial comments follow.
First up was our new writer.
We extend J. Saler Drees our usual welcome.
We hope that she has fun on the site and continues to send us her work.
‘There’s No Bars In This Town‘ was published on Monday.
‘Realism with strains of belief.’
‘The pathos at the end is very well done.’
‘This really does come together.’
I have no words left for Mr Sheehan.
Let’s just say, this is story number 169 and leave it at that!!!
‘Midwife Legacy‘ was published on Tuesday.
‘This comes across as a dark fable.’
‘The ending is different and it lifts this into horror territory.’
‘I wonder which country has this as a tradition?’
On Wednesday we had a very good friend of the site. This gentleman leaves constant feedback and he’s a joy to be associated with.
I know I keep mentioning this but Dave Henson has one of the best writing imaginations on the site.
‘About Uncle Story’ was his twenty-sixth outing and broke the back of the week.
‘Things went slowly and quietly wrong.’
‘That is one strong ending!!’
‘We all know how much Dave worked at this – The man is a pleasure to work with!’
David Lohrey is a very interesting writer. He touches on the darker side of life and writes beautifully. He structures his stories as well as anyone.
‘Low And Behold’ was the fourteenth time he has graced the site.
‘You have to gear yourself up to read one of David’s stories!!’
‘Oppression and Intolerance from a few angles.’
‘It was a steady thread of intolerance.’
Antony Osgood finished us off on Friday.
Tony is another writer who sends in quality work every time.
‘Gabby Gets Some Colour In His Cheeks‘ was his fifth story for us.
‘Antony excels at these weird little looks at things.’
‘The writing is lyrical and smooth.’
‘What a great piece of prose!’
Usual guys –
Commenting good.
Not commenting bad.
Sunday Re-Run have a go.
Sunday Re-Run don’t not have a go. (That makes Miss Anderson and Jesus cry.)
Just to finish off I noticed some ‘Famous People’ birthdays from this week on a site.
When I saw who was first I thought how wrong it was.
I was even more dismayed when I thought that maybe it was in date order but it wasn’t.
The first name that popped up was Mr Jeffrey Dahmer.
Now I do find Serial Killers very interesting and before anyone slags me off have a look at the *two pictures below and decide who looks interesting and who looks like a creepy weirdo!!
He was there with the likes of Janet Jackson, Andre The Giant and Notorious B.I.G.
He did have some similar company as H H Holmes was also there.
Surely there should be an ‘Infamous List’ for all the murdering bastards, Despots etc??
But when I see Janet Jackson maybe there should also be a list for ‘Murdering Music’
Hugh
**One may look interesting and a fun guy but they are both creepy weirdos!!!
…If you want to have some fun, think on some adjectives that suit both of them!!
literally stories 
Hoople the Mogg and Mogg the Hoople. I see that it just isn’t the American hills or Martha’s Vineyard where “famblies” breed their own stock.
Sterilize your needles people, never your fiction. And before you write commit to at least trying to say something. If you are afraid to do so, close the file. Hedgy stuff designed to placate never fools anyone.
Funny thing is that no rule is immune to successful breaking in writing. Sometimes things that should not be (the guys in the pics for instance), walk and talk.
Great post Hugh–I wouldn’t take candy from either of these dudes, but the top one might have good drugs.
Leila
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Leila,
What a line – ‘If you are afraid to do so, close the file.’
How many stories do we see that simply have the writer ‘pusssybawzing’ about something that they really could commit to and say something meaningful!!!
I think that ‘Mott The Hoople’ did some cracking songs and for whatever reason I think of them in the same way as ‘Hanoi Rocks’!
Oh and I would take candy from the prick with the top-hat. I would hope that ten year old me would also kick the fucker in the scrotum. I’d probably hurt his hand as well.
…Wait a minute – Maybe not – Staunchness and self-abuse doesn’t go together.
…But there is absolution so I hope that young me would have broke his hand!!! A wee bit of ache to go with his ,Hail Marys’!!
Hugh
LikeLike
Great post Hugh. Old Moggy has his forlorn little boy lost look on – how about we send him over to talk to the other dude! Oh yes, don’t hold back with your prose.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Diane,
I get more disgusted by what we have in government by the minute and I do wish all the cabinet fuckers parents met the more colourful characters in our history before they had the chance to procreate.
I’ve just read that Richy Rishi whatever the fuck is now on the rich list with over 700 million.
And that man is handing out a few pound to those who haven’t even seven grand a year to live on.
I love how our government is proud of putting a few extra hundred pounds a year into the pockets of those who would need ten times that amount to function due to the initial income they had to work with in the first place.
I’m not saying that prick can’t do a job (Ahemmmmm!!) but it is crass beyond belief that one of the richest people in Britain is making decisions for the poorest.
He should never have been in office. And I judge him and all who who allowed him for doing so.
It is fucking disgusting!!!
Hugh
LikeLike
Interesting post as always. Guess I’d better trash my novella about eyebrows on Jupiter in the style of Faulkner. (The writing, not the eyebrows.) As Leila said, good writing can break any rule. It’s up to editors to determine. I don’t envy you your jobs. Thank you for the kind words.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hi Dave,
I hope that your eyebrows are more natural than made interesting (??)
And you probably shouldn’t have said what you did as Marco grabs onto a prompt!!!
And you are right, rules and opinions can be broken. I actually love it when I read something and I state, ‘I should hate this but I don’t’
I think I have mentioned a few times about my hatred of romance (Maybe once or twice) but one of my favourite stories on the site is ‘Short Straw’ by Louisa Owen – That is as romantic as you can get!!!
Regarding what we choose, well no matter what, there always needs to be that spark that we see that we can’t explain.
HAH – It has happened in every one of your stories!!!!
Thanks as always my fine friend!!!!!
Hugh
LikeLike
I agree with one thing here. A publisher required more descriptions before he would publish a story. My attitude is “who cares” unless it is relevant. If someone is very tall, skinny or something and it matters, then mention it, otherwise not.
As a really lazy writer, I resemble those other remarks and have already forgotten them. If I have a good plot and believable characters, I’m done.
I’ve written less than ten thousand stories, but more than two, utilizing notebooks or newspapers. Am I up for lazy writer of the century?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Doug,
We really are on the same page.
I have bombed out a story after two pages over nine because a room is being described.
If you are writing a novel you can get away with this but with a short you really need to move on quickly.
You are one hundred percent right when it comes to relevance!
A short should never be padded out. If you are doing so, don’t write a short.
Thanks as always my fine friend.
Hugh
LikeLike
The use of descriptions might be an interesting topic to explore in a future Saturday post. I know it’s something I struggle with. There’s a knack for selecting descriptions that not only create atmosphere but also contribute to character-building or advance plot.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi David,
You are spot on!
Well judged description in a short enhances.
Meaningless descriptions causes the work to be red-carded very quickly.
It is a very delicate balance.
If I was giving any advice (Not that anyone should really listen to me!!) I’d say, with description, cut it back as much as you can and concentrate on dialogue / situation / emotion / back story (Specific) / back story (Hinted) more.
But and it’s a huge BUT, some folks would bomb me out the water with that. That’s where me and Writing Groups probably differ.
I’d love to write a Saturday Post about this but I don’t think I could. You either judge it or you don’t. The folks that read either enjoy it or they don’t!
But cheers Dave – You made me think what works for me.
…And now my head hurts!!!
All the very best my fine friend.
Hugh
LikeLike
I love me a bit of description but we know that too much is a big mistake. I think a lot of it has to do with pace as much as anything. I reckon description has to add enough to place the reader in the scene and give them enough to ‘see’ it whether it be a character or a location but once it becomes more than just that then it’s too much. Yes, if it’s relevant describe a character’s clothing e.g. the homeless man with the cardboard soles in his shoes which may indicate just what his life is like. Describe the hills and the weather if the hills and the weather have an impact on the story. I think, as with most writing, write it, read it, and then cut out anything that slows the reading down and gets in the way of the narrative. Someone like Elly Griffiths has it down to a fine art I think.
LikeLike
I’ll chip in on this.
Do: a character’s words should describe the attitude.
Don’t: Use adverbs in dialogue attribution. “she said, coldly.”
Do: Describe interesting looking life forms succinctly. “If a cat could be described as looking like a hillbilly, this guy was it. I named him Roy.”
Don’t: just, don’t “He had green eyes, a crooked smile and a sixpack.”
Do: use strong adjectives.
Don’t: use fad adjectives. “Ginormous” comes to mind.
Leila
LikeLike
Hi Leila,
Both you and Diane have given excellent advice (I can’t comment on Diane’s comment as I have commented on her previous one and the site doesn’t like anyone getting too chatty!)
I don’t think I’d ever use ‘ginormous’. An enormous Gin on the otherhand…
Hugh
LikeLike
Hugh-
I believe you located the only situation in which Ginormous is acceptable!
Leila
LikeLike