Conformation and a Bow to the KING of Modern Fiction

I am a pretty avid reader.

I average about a book a week--a habit that was only perpetuated in undergrad where I basically had to  read a novel a week, if not more. To me there's no better way to end the day or pass time that would otherwise be wasted in other pursuits--which has gotten me in trouble in the past. In grade and high school, I used to put a book inside my text book, lean back in my chair and pretend I was intently listening to my teacher lecture or reading the latest chapter in Spanish class. In reality, I was miles away, totally engrossed in whatever story I happened to be reading at the moment. I almost consistently had books taken away from me--the one I remember quite clearly was The Diary of Anne Frank during Spanish class in 8th grade.I argued with Senora for 15 minutes, explaining that no, I could not translate the verbs she had just explained to the class but I could summarize the daily life of the Frank family in Poland.

She didn't find it funny.

 I didn't get my book back for a week.

All this to say, I read quite a bit. I always carry a book with me (and a notebook of course) and try to squeeze in as much reading time as I can a day. I usually have a book or two "waiting in the wings" for me to pick up as soon as I finish one. But imagine my surprise when I finished Tim O'Brien's Tomcat in Love (which if you haven't read O'Brien please do! He is AMAZING and the writer I want to be.He has a pretty large portfolio but I'd start with If I Die in a Combat Zone, his memoir on Vietnam.) and had no "wingman" the next day. I felt lost and utterly perplexed.

Lucky for me, my best friend has the same mentality with reading and we pretty consistently trade books back and forth--because we trust each others judgement and know we will get the borrowed books back once finished (I do not trust people with my library). On my way home from work, I dropped by her house to drop off a few things and she handed me a stack of four books to read. I was almost giddy and couldn't wait to get home to start. "Oh wait! There's one more," she told me and ran upstairs. She came back down and handed me Stephen King's On Writing, A Memoir of the Craft.  I followed this with a look of "Really?"


Ok two things;
As a writer, I think it is the most egotistical thing for a writer to write a book on writing. Like come on now! Is your head the size of a watermelon or something? Are you that perfect to think you can actually teach someone, something that is unteachable? No one can teach someone to write--it is a craft, like a predisposition to music or languages. Someone who has never written a thing in their life cannot wake up one day and say "Today I will write the next Great American Novel," just because they happened to pick your book up. It doesn't happen! I truly believe people are born knowing they will be a writer--trust me, I've known since the age of 5. Writing is not like medicine, where you can memorize answers out of a textbook and then perform brain surgery. Instructional books are bull shit and are obviously geared towards non-writers--because writers would never waste their money on them.

And secondly, I avoid Stephen King like the plague. Horror is not my thing. Gore, blood and serial killers? No thanks. Not to mention that the majority of his book-turned movies scared the shit out of me when I was little. Case in point:

I can barely look at this picture!

If you don't know, the above is Pennywise the Clown from Stephen King's IT. I saw IT for the first time when I was 9 years old and as a result, didn't sleep for weeks and stayed away from drainage grates. This one movie turned me off from the genre in its entirety. Haven't seen a horror movie since. And don't get me wrong, some of King's work I do like--like Stand By Me and Shawshank Redemption. Loved them! Have I read the print versions? No, because I was scared away at the age of 9. The movie adaptations were enough and my memory is still assualted by those images of horror. Truly, I'd rather not give King a dime of my money. Without reading his work, I pretty much believe he was a hack, one-trick pony who had no literary clout. In my eyes, Stephen King was not a good writer.

So when she handed me his memoir, I was secretly planning on never reading it. "Seriously Penny, it's one of the best books I picked up. It made me want to write!" She's never steered me wrong in the past--she turned me on to The Hunger Games and Geraldine Brooks and they were complete home runs. So I took it, deciding to read it first--but  if it sucked in 5 pages, I'd return it the next day.

Welp.

I stand corrected.

 And I apologize to you, Mr. Stephen King.

Within those aforementioned 5 pages, I was completely hooked and understood what the hype was about--Stephen King is a damn good writer!

Seriously, On Writing is probably one of the best books I have read in a very long time. It should be a prerequisite for all writers--a bible even! Part memoir, part instructional (which is actually pretty funny because he flat out says the instructional part is bullshit and he's just regurgitating the standard stuff because he has to, not because any it actually adheres to true writers. All writers have their own mannerisms, tricks and techniques when it comes to writing. No technique are the same and will work for everyone), he talks about his life in writing and how he got to where he is now. It was inspiring to read about his past and see that his insane passion for writing kept him going, even when things were really bad. I had a preconceived notion on him--that he had it easy, broke into the "biz" overnight at a young age and it's been nothing but rainbows and unicorns since. In reality he struggled for the majority of his life. He came from a broken home, his mother moved him and his brother from relative to relative looking for work. But from a young age, his mother was his biggest supporter and champion in the field (except when she suggested he get a teachers certification just in case "this writing thing" doesn't work out. Which I can definitely relate to). He went to college, met his wife (who, shockingly, he is still married to) and worked menial jobs just to put food on the table. He was broke and living in a trailer with a wife and two kids for the majority of his 20's. He was a college grad but worked in an industrial laundromat or cleaned high school locker rooms for years--this is actually where he got much of his inspiration. But he never stopped writing and dreaming big. His first big break, Carrie, came from cleaning a girls locker room one day. He went home and wrote an entire first draft, but thought it was shit so crumpled it up and threw it away. Lucky for him that his wife saw it when emptying the trashcans, read it and pushed him to finish it. Can you imagine if she hadn't? Images of blood soaked prom queens would never haunt high school gymnasiums!

Truly amazing when you think about it!

After this, he dives right into the fact that reading his book will not make you a writer, to actually stop reading if that's what you intend. Freaking brilliant! Most books I have read (for school of course) use all this flowery language, call themselves experts in the craft of tutoring young authors, and try to "encourage all to write." King doesn't do that. He doesn't claim to be a master of the craft. He is not God--although some would disagree. He cannot make a miracle happen out of nothing. HE CANNOT MAKE YOU A WRITER. As I have already stated and King agrees, writers are not made out of the blue. It is a talent you need to be born with. Sure, all writers need polish and will get a lot out of writers groups, but sitting down and trying to teach someone who has never written is impossible. Give up! It won't happen if it already hasn't! A writer knows they are a writer because they actually write.

Perfect example.
My junior year of college, I took a Creative Non-fiction class. The majority of my classmates were "majors" as we liked to call it--English or creative writing affiliated. But this class was considered a humanities course so anyone could take it. We had a sprinkling of communication and business majors who could in fact write. But then there was one girl--I believe she was a Biology major--who should've dropped the course from day one. This class encompassed a lot of writing obviously, and it was about topics that were personal and needed to be told--Creative NonFiction is the truth, turned up. Every week we had a writing assignment--basically a theme that we had to cover in our writing--and once completed we had to bring copies to the class and pass them out in a small group to be peer edited.Pretty standard in a writing course. This girl was in my editing group a few times and when I say she couldn't write, she couldn't write. Not even a paragraph. There was no style, no story, no writing dynamics. Her "stories" consisted of a mish-mash of thoughts that were pointless. I remember reading them and thinking "How the hell can I critique this? I have to basically tell her how to write a paragraph." It was bad. The edits I handed back were full of the "red marks of death", and I really couldn't look at her while discussing her "writing." And if you don't believe me, one of my followers can attest to this--I remember him turning to me and saying, "Thanks for warning me about that one," after she was in his group for one session.

Obviously this girl thought because she excelled in one aspect of academics, she could succeed in everything. "A stupid writing class will be a breeze." No, not the case.Writing is actual work and not everyone can do it.

This girl had no business writing or being in that class.Harsh, yes. Truth? Yes.

King also says that most writers know they should write when they read something and think "I could've written this better." It takes being able to see flaws and knowing how they should have been corrected. He did this frequently as a child. He was a huge fan of sci-fi and horror obviously, but the majority of prints out there were seedy and not written to par. So, he'd take the stories, rewrite them and sell them to friends at school. It's actually a great writing tip and helps build skill.

Case in point:
Twilight.

Stephenie Meyer's phenomenon that set young girls flocking to stores and dreaming about vampires. It has sold millions of copies worldwide and has successfully dawned 4 (soon to be 5) blockbuster movies.

Twilight is the biggest piece of shit fiction that has graced the shelves of bookstores in recent years. I'm sorry but it's the truth and anyone who wants to argue with me about its validity will be talking to deaf ears. I truly shutter at the fact that its a New York Times BestSeller, simply because it shows the degradation of our society. Young readers couldn't see a bad book if it slapped them in the face, especially if it involves a dreamy male lead. I'll admit I have read all 4 books--which was pretty painful, especially with the 4th one. I truly tried to see the merit in it, especially since it was written by a female in a heavily male-dominated genre. But shit is shit, no matter how you dress it.

Meyers had a good story--original, no, but good. We've seen it how many times; a pair of star-crossed lovers faced with adversity as result of their love. But even comparing Twilight to Romeo and Juliet or Wuthering Heights (which Meyers does in Twilight) is a travesty. Shakespeare is probably rolling in his grave. Where Meyers fell short is her story-telling. All fiction follows a certain pattern--problem is introduced, characters go through trial and adversity, a climax of action occurs where everything comes to a head in a spectacular scene, the problem resolves, story ends. Pretty simple. Meyers started her story out fine, she built up her conflict in the normal matter and even brings the story to a climax. But just when you expect a huge altercation, the story flat lines. The reader expects something huge to happen because of how it is built up, only to turn the page and see that everything very neatly resolves itself in one sentence. She did this in each book and left me scratching my head.

And please, its pretty obvious the woman can't write a love scene. She is a Mormon after all.

If you disagree, follow the link below to see what Stephen King thinks about Ms. Stephenie Meyers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zb72V_4N5ko&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL9F56C22AEECD5E6E

It's actually hilarious to think Twi-hearts actually accuse Stephen King of being jealous of Twilight. HILARIOUS!

Back to writing now....

King also says that you should never write with the industry or a mass public response in mind. It will blurr your vision and take away from the story. Never ever write because you want to be on the Bestseller list. Honestly it probably will never happen. Write for one person--an Ideal Reader, or IR as he calls it. This IR is the one person in your life who you want to impress at all costs. You write with them in mind--jokes you write are meant to make that person laugh, mysteries are supposed to stump them.Everything you do is for their enjoyment. You write simply to see the look on their face once they have placed the manuscript down.Their opinions of your writing is the only thing that matters. For King, his IR is his wife Tabatha. She is the first person to read every story he has written and her opinion is the only one that matters. He talks about how he likes to sneak peeks at her while she is reading one of his manuscript, just to see her reaction. If she doesn't laugh or gasp at certain moments, he knows it's back to the drawing board. According to King, your spouse or someone you love is the best IR as you know an unbiased opinion is on the way.

Ideal Readers are important to all writers. I know who mine is, but I highly doubt they know....

Wrapping this up here, don't worry.

Seriously, if you want a good read pick up Stephen King's On Writing. You won't be disappointed. It has inspired me to write, once again. And to pick up a few of King's other novels.

Just not IT .