Ed Gorman and others have recently discussed the "don'ts" in attempting a PI novel . The list is so extensive, I have almost always given it a pass. My one foray into it dealt with a retired PI so I could cheat. Having read hundreds of PI novels still doesn't make me an expert on avoiding cliches or employing tropes effectively.
I can more easily enter the arena of suspense where the requirements are less daunting. The thought of trying to pull off a SF novel or SF story is even more challenging. How long would it take to learn the vocabulary alone?
Do you stay away from attempting certain sorts of stories because of the pitfalls in trying to get it right? What is the hardest kind of story for you? Which subgenre is most butchered by amateurs?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
There's not a single vocabulary of sf to worry about, unless you mean, as with PI fiction, a vocabulary of cliches and done-to-death material that will need some hard re-thinking to be made new enough. You're always best off not larding your fiction with insider references unless they're there for a purpose, as opposed to just shibboleths.
Every kind of story is butchered by amateurs, and worse yet by the inattentive pro hacks who can at least get the dynamics of storytelling right while otherwise providing utter bilge (P.D. James, THE CHILDREN OF MEN, anyone?...and, sadly, that was apparently deeply-felt tripe).
Which, of course, doesn't mean that PI fiction with crime fiction and various sorts of science fiction don't build on past work, as might any other schools of fiction or other arts, of which these (often mis-identified as "genres" when other schools are miraculously genre-free...or not) have particularly been aided in acute and even decadent development by continuing strong commercial markets.
I stay away from lists like that, for the most part. Ultimately, you have to find your own way and there are exceptions to almost every rule. Too much of that stuff will drive a person mental.
But if they have such an extensive list (which I've not seen so exhaustively compiled for the other subgenres) perhaps it suggests why many think the PI genre is dead or dying. I'd rather have teeth extracted without anesthesia than try to write something while double-checking an exhaustive list of rules.
I stay away from anything that might make me deal with DNA.
The list, called Thundering Cliches, is intended to start our prospective fiction contributors thinking more creatively. Beginning writers especially tend to think they've come up with scenarios that have never been done before, or they think they must include some convention of the genre (usually a cliche) to pay homage.
The P.I. to me is anyone hired to unravel a mystery. In the hardboiled vein, said person usually has prior professional experience. Beyond these aspects, the P.I. can and should be as distinct as the person writing the story.
I'm going to argue that police procedurals are most often abused by amateurs - they're "easy," thanks to TV cops.
Todd-I think with SF I almost mean understanding it as much as verbalizing it. Sandra R/Gerald-I am drawn to lists yet seldom feel completely bound by them. They're a good jumping off point though. Sandra S. I'm taking a course this winter with two weeks on DNA so maybe I will someday use those initials with some confidence. Christa-I agree. TV has given us all a bit too much confidence with police procedure.
The lists can be useful. Not as rules, but guidelines. Things to watch out for. Part of that writer's toolkit that includes phrases like, "Don't use suddenly.", "Stay away from exclamation points" and so on.
Beyond a sanity check and a teaching aid for people new to a genre they're not very useful. Once you know the rules of the game, you caa play with them and at least be confident in knowing that you're doing it on purpose.
Stephen-I do think most of the pitfalls become evident over time if you read a lot and write a lot.
Which genre is most butchered by amateurs?
Your favorite.
Hey, we never claimed they were iron-clad rules. They're just suggestions, to be taken with at least a few grains of salt. That's pretty obvious to anyone who's bothered to actually read the list.
After all, a good writer can make almost anything work.
A poor writer just bleats.
But only an idiot would totally ignore an editor's suggested guidelines, even if they are offered half in jest.
As for the P.I. genre dying, YAWN.
I hear that all the time -- and have been hearing it for at least thirty years.
Mostly from people (frustrated writers?) who don't know what they're talking about or from people who don't read in the genre. They certainly rarely demonstrate any particular knowledge of or understanding of the genre, its history or where it's going.
Me? I think the genre is going through some of its periodic growing pains, as it evolves once again. But that's a good thing.
With so many P.I. novels regularly making the bestseller lists (let's see where T IS FOR TRESPASS makes its debut) and so many of P.I. books snapping up mystery writing awards and nominations on a regular basis, not to mention the large number of devoted P.I. fans and aspiring P.I. writers. I'm not sure what the doomsayers and toothless drama queens are talking about.
Maybe it's wishful thinking on their part, because they don't write in the genre and they view it as competition.
Hey, don't get me wrong. I'm grateful that someone has given this some thought and put in a lot of work in defining it. No other subgenre has been explicated this thorougly for potential practioners. TTD set the benchmark. The P.I genre is one of the richest, the one with the most history. It really began with police procedurals, a close cousin.
Post a Comment