5 Abilities of a Great Writer
During college, I often had to read three plays a week.
Considering most of them were six hours long, hundreds of pages, and
practically the same plot, I often didn’t read three plays a week, if you catch
my drift.
My professor, a 70 year old man obsessed with the “abnormal”
(one of those people who refused to like anything mainstream or modern), would
often give us terrible plays, praising those that deliberately meant nothing
(Ionesco’s early work) and criticized those that tried to be a real metaphor
for something (Ionesco’s later work). He told us very frankly that it is not about whether or not we like it. He
also went on to say that it wasn’t always about what the playwright said it
was.
“The author doesn’t know what it’s about,” he told us.
Well, you can probably see the problem with that. When we
are trying to judge quality, when we are sitting there, trying to understand
why this play is “better” than that one, how disregarding if we like it and
what the author intended on doing pretty much removes any standards we can have
for what is “good” and what isn’t.
So I asked him. “How do I know if it is a well-made play or
not?” A loaded question because I already knew that he was a reputation junky.
He told me that I would learn with time. A copout. He proceeded to explain to
me that he would never give me a bad play to read. Having been under his study
for two years, I distinctly disagreed.
I wanted to impress him. I wanted to show him I was an
experienced playwright and spent the first half of my degree attempting to
understand what he wanted. But I came to realize, after he praised some for
things that he disparaged others for, he was very simply a man about
appearances. He liked works based on who told him to. I could never impress him
because no matter how I changed what I did, being a fan of a student isn’t the
same as being a fan of Kafka.
The hardest part of being a “good” writer is understanding
what good writing is. Generally when asked, people give vague answers, or
worse, so specific ones that it’s almost inane. Anywhere from “writing that
makes me feel,” to “stories that don’t start with the protagonist waking up,”
could be the response. When trying to improve ourselves, it’s a little hard if
we don’t know what improvement is or how to achieve it.
There are many things that a good writer will be able to do.
Here are five.
1. Have the reader doubt the protagonist will succeed (even
though you fully intend him to.)
Aristotle defined tension as doubt of outcome. The problem
with fiction today is that everyone expects the main character to get what he
wants in the end, to live, and to prove himself right. It is easy to defy this
expectation by just having him fail. What is hard, however, is to have the
reader honestly unsure if the protagonist will win until the moment he actually
does. It is important, and harder, to keep the balance. The reader will be most
entertain if he really isn’t sure of the ending, but still has an idea. If he’s
not convinced of failure or success, he’ll keep going to the end.
2. Have foreshadowing that is obvious (but only after the
fact.)
An important element of a story is the foreshadowing. It
gives little hints of the resolution throughout the book, leading the reader to
treat it like a puzzle that could be solved, even if they didn’t.
The hard part of foreshadowing is to make it not look
artificially jammed in there or being too good of a hint and leading the
outcome to be foreseen.
The best kind of hints are the ones the reader doesn’t
recognize until after he knows the answer. Foreshadowing that confuses the
audience, is distracting, or is just too obvious doesn’t really achieve its
goal. It is often best ignored and used more like an alibi: something that seems
unimportant but can be used to prove that it was the author’s intention the
whole time.
3. Have clear reasoning for every action in the story (but
the reader doesn’t notice.)
Take a piece of writing you consider “bad” and look at it.
Is it obvious what the author is trying to do? Bad rhyming is bad because the
only motivation was to rhyme. Descriptions that are transparent—when she
describes his glistening abs, it’s obvious she just wants to say, “look how
sexy”—dialogue that is too on-the-nose, and events that are more useful than
believable, bring the reader out of the world.
When someone dissects a story, it is important that the
writer’s motivation is there. If a person trying to understand why an author
did something can’t figure it out, it looks more like that creator was just
winging it. However, a casual reader shouldn’t be thinking about those things.
He should be absorbed in the world and not considering, “Well, clearly they’re
getting in an argument so that he’ll storm off and be available for capture.”
A great writer has a reason for doing everything that he
does, but doesn’t broadcast it.
4. Prove your point (without the reader realizing you had
one.)
“Your point,” could be anywhere to “solve the problems of
global warming,” to “look how cool India Jones is.” In any case, the writer
wants the reader to understand something about the fictional world, real world,
or character and does his best to illustrate that.
We all have had the concept of the “theme” and “moral
implications” repeatedly smashed into our skulls, but during English classes,
how often was it easy to tell what the author was getting at? Sometimes, very.
And how often did the students ever take that book seriously? (Or any book
seriously?)
People don’t like being hit with the theme stick. People
don’t like being told how they should feel. People don’t like having things
spelled out for them, evidenced now by your current hostility. Writer’s have
lots of points to make, and good ones make it without even informing the reader
they were trying.
5. Give the characters what you want them to have (but make
punish them for it.)
Both the reader and the writer have something in common (if
they like the book): they want the characters to be happy, special, and
victorious. But the author, being like a god, can give him anything they want.
If the writer does this too readily, the reader will
suddenly turn on the character. He will go from relating to or rooting for the
protagonist to feeling in competition with him. The trick to writing an
interesting book is to make the reader want the character to be happy by making
him unhappy.
Characters who seem to be graced by the gods remind the
audience of the god behind it. They are brought back to the memory that they
are reading something fictional. Then there comes the problem of unfair riches.
The same mentality that leads a brother to complain when his sister gets ten
bucks until both get neither, the reader will turn on the protagonist.
It is tricky business because the more we make the
characters miserable, the more the reader is miserable – too miserable, and
they won’t like the book, but too happy and they’ll be bored. So the trick is
to make the protagonist successful and special, but make him miserable for it
until the very end.