Top 4 Grievances Against Popular Writers . . . Or, How to be More Literary

With a title like this, I'm sure to get some flak.  I mean, who ever heard of a popular writer being literary?  Popular writing is a world apart from literature, I've been told, and never the twain shall meet.  But whenever someone puts "never," or "always" in a sentence, I'm immediately inclined to disagree with them.

The phrases "always are" and "never are" seem to be axiomatic of the unimaginative or the arrogant.  I mean, think about it.  Who are you to tell me what can never occur?  It implies that you are somehow aware of all past events, and clairvoyant enough to perceive all possible futures.  So, as the cartoon mouse once said, "Never say never, Papa."*

With that being said, literary conventions do creep into popular writing, and that is definitely a good thing.  But just to be clear here, when I say "literary" and "popular" I am invoking two worlds of the written word.  "Popular," in its most literal sense, means just that.  These are the works both intended for, and consumed by, the widest possible audience.  Stephen King is a pretty good example.  His works sell millions; they've been made into, and optioned for, movies.  They have literally shaped the way we speak and perceive reality.  (In case you don't believe me, let me ask you:  That big, scary dog over there . . . bet you called him Cujo, didn't you?  Or, if I start a sentence with "All work and no play," you can probably finish it.  That's the power of King.)

Literary works aren't intended for mass consumption.  They probably aren't even intended for consumption, in the modern sense.  They're meant to be savored, pondered, and fought about.  They are ambiguous and difficult and delve into subjects that most of us (thank God) don't have to deal with.  But if all of human experience is the purview of the artist, then these authors use every aspect of human experience as the paint upon their canvas.  Cormac McCarthy comes immediately to mind.  His works are wicked and sharp and rarely pleasant.  Even reading them is a challenge, as he takes convention and stands it on its head.

So what's the big deal?  Popular fiction is that way because its intent, primarily, is to entertain.  But, can we expect, or even hope, that our entertainment also aspires to greatness?  Toward reaching certain levels of aesthetic delight?  I think we can.  And I think that we ought to.  Certainly, Stephen King will never be Dostoyevsky, but that doesn't mean that we can't hold our entertainment to greater intellectual rigor.

Toward that end, here are four points toward popular fiction, which also happen to comprise some of my own literary pet-peeves.

•  Use the active voice!
•  Basically, give your characters agency.  My background emphasizes agency in our writing, so this might be something that's tied to my own personal preferences more than the rest, but I don't think so.  Active voice means that the action is performed by the subject, and not a passive subject being acted upon.  It also means that action is more taut, and the narrative faster paced.  Both of these are things that most writers want in their books, so active is the way to go.  

• Avoid idiomatic or colloquial expressions.
• The expressions that come to mind the most are those that use some form of [verb] + "up."  Speed up, catch up, keep up, brighten up, spice up, etc.  These are probably some of the more egregious examples that I regularly see, but they're hardly unique.  Just consider sentence level editing more often, and take care with your choice of words.  Economy of writing is a big step toward fine writing.
   
• Also, avoid "there is," and "there are."  Often, a sentence can be rewritten to omit the construction entirely and is rarely necessary.  Often, this construction signals that you're about to write a sentence in the passive tense, so by fixing one problem you fix the second as well.  Give it a shot: "There are five students in the room waiting for class to start," turns into, "Five students waited in the room for class to start."
  
  
• Avoid repetition of same (or similar) words or expressions in the same sentence.
• This is similar to the above, in that I tend to see "speed up" and "catch up" often used in the same paragraph, perhaps even the same sentence.  Better ways can be found to express the same thought.
   
• Similarly, some words are so perfectly evocative of a particular idea that you're tempted to use it over and over again.  It is also probably an unusual word that jumps off the page and grabs the reader's attention.  Try to avoid using unfamiliar or unusual words very often.  Their novelty makes for economy but it also becomes glaring when it creeps into the narrative too many times. 
  
  How much is too much?  That's a very delicate decision but as a general rule of thumb, consider how often you hear it used in conversation with people you think of as your audience.  If it's used daily then it's probably not a novelty and you can sprinkle it throughout the book. 
  
  If it's used once or twice a week, use it no more than once per 25,000 words or so. 
  
  If you hear it once every few months, perhaps no more than three times in the entire book. 
  
  If you've never heard the word used in conversation, but you've seen it in print elsewhere, once per book. 
  
  If, however, you have never heard it used in conversation, and have never seen it in print (if it is just something you found in your thesaurus) DON'T use it.  More likely than not you're misusing the word.  Find something else.
  
   
• Differentiate characters' voices.
• This one is tough because it depends to a large degree on your talent as both a writer and a listener.  However, any competent writer should be able to distinguish his characters dialogue by something other than tag lines--"he said," and "she said," or some variation thereof.
  
  More often than not, characters' voices betray the same rhythms and cadence as one another.  Perhaps you've heard someone criticize a work because the tough-as-nails biker chick "sounds" just like the sheltered nerd.  That's because the author him or herself cannot hear the difference.
  
  Listen to how people talk in real life.  Certainly, I'm not arguing that written dialogue is an accurate reproduction of how people speak, but you can mimic how people talk. 
  
  For instance, a friend of mine begins almost every sentence with "Well," and often interrupts himself.  The rhythm of his dialogue would be quick and somewhat choppy, interspersed with reversals and self-interruption.  "Well, it's sort of like this.  In 1920 the Soviet Union started this thing where they'd put cars in every driveway and--oh my god this is so crazy--actually put gas in the tank." 
  
  Mimicry is hard, but you can do it.  Or at the very least, you can teach yourself handy shortcuts so that you can mimic that you're mimicking.  It's not hard, but that's why good writing takes so much effort.

On that note, let's talk about the difference between good storytelling and good writing.  It's self-evident that popular writers are good storytellers.  The numbers back up the fact that people like to read what they're writing.  But just like Jerry Bruckheimer would never be confused with Martin Scorsese, Stephen King will never be confused with McCarthy.

Storytelling is about being entertained.  Good writing is all about the aesthetic quality of the material you're presenting.  A fine piece of writing engages the intellect and moves the reader with the grandeur of the prose and the delicacy of the craft.  My hope is that popular authors can provide not only satisfaction of the spectacular thrill, but also engage the intellect.

Let me know what you think in the comments section.




*The movie mentioned at the beginning is "An American Tail."  Love that movie.