The One Writing Rule You Cannot Break

I'm a little under the weather, and my brain is feeling a bit fuzzy, so I wasn't entirely sure what it might come up with if I attempted writing a new post. So I decided it might be best for all of us if I gave you this post I did a while ago--when I could still remember which order words are supposed to be in. I hope you enjoy.

A while ago I signed up for a Webinar devoted to the first few pages of manuscripts, and how to make sure the agent/editor keeps reading. I love online classes. You can sit in your jammies with your coffee and learn all kinds of great stuff. Plus you don't have to devote a semester to it, and honestly, if you decide to get up in the middle and leave, you're not going to get detention.

Since I had signed up early enough, my first page (from LORD MIDNIGHT) was one of those selected to be reviewed in the class. Yay!

I've used my computer for previous WebEx classes, so I have no idea why my computer chose THIS particular class to throw a tantrum, one of those falling-to-the-ground-screeching-and-kicking-the-heels kind. By the time I finally got it settled down, and got me signed in, I saw my page on the screen for 3.5 seconds, and then they went on to the next one.

Nooooooooo!

Fortunately the instructor emailed me the page later, highlighting the opening line, which seemed to do its job of drawing the reader in. She also noted the potentially troublesome part, which was a mini-flashback.

I had debated a lot whether to include that portion. I finally decided it showed my heroine's determination in a hopeless situation, and I believed it would increase reader sympathy for her. And while the "rule" is not to use flashbacks, I felt if I followed that rule, I would break another important rule, which is to make readers care about your characters.

During the class, there were a lot of interesting examples discussed, and it was fun to see what worked, and what didn't, and the reasoning behind it. It's a very fluid concept, though.

Basically, the "rule" seems to be this: It works, unless it doesn't.

Is that an objective standard? Or is it a subjective one?

Ding ding ding! The correct answer is "Subjective". You've just qualified to advance to the Lightning Round.

There are sooooo many rules about writing, and the majority of them are designed to make life easier for the writer. They provide a framework and/or structure to make a story more compelling for the reader. Unfortunately there seems to be so many rules, writers get stuck trying to figure out how to tell their story. It also seems like adhering blindly to rules has a tendency to homogenize writing efforts, creating a bland result that no one wants to read.

The "rule" that I think is the most important, the one that cannot be broken, is this one:

THOU SHALT MAKE THY BOOK IRRESISTIBLE TO READERS

This means you may have to break all kinds of rules and regulations. Maybe the hero and heroine will have to meet in Chapter 2 rather than Chapter 1. Or maybe the hero will have a career that is considered out of the norm. If this lawlessness makes your book irresistible, it doesn't MATTER if you break those rules. If readers can't stop reading, they aren't even aware of the broken rules.

On the flip side, if you DO break the rules, and readers are resisting your book in droves, it doesn't matter what other rules you've broken. No one cares, because they aren't reading your book.

It works, unless it doesn't.

"Don’t chase market trends." "Write the book of your heart, the book YOU want to read."

These are just some of the rules I adore, and try to follow. If you keep these uppermost in your mind, you are more likely to embrace the Rule of Irresistibility. And you won't even realize it.

P.S. The "rule" I broke about flashbacks seems to have worked, at least once. I won a contest with that page. Will it work every time? Maybe not. Will I break that same rule again in the future? Maybe not. It all depends on the story that needs telling, and what will make it simply irresistible.