A (not so) quick note on writing manuals

There are some things that any aspiring writer has done at some point in their career. We have all imagined ourselves brunching in New York with our super-agents, we have all written a mean, spiteful review (if not online, then in our heads) of someone we were jealous of, and we have all, without exception, read a “How To” book on writing.

Yes, all of us.

If you haven’t, you haven’t experienced writer’s block, and you are a lucky, lucky duck indeed.

An aspiring writer’s process, when reading manuals, goes a little something like this: The first one is GOSPEL and you cite it to everyone you know and it’s ZOMG amazeballs. The second one is great, too, but obviously not as good as the first. The third is okay, the fourth has some interesting points, you keep compiling notes and highlighting exercises you never get around  to doing. Then you come back to the first one, looking for that first amazing hit of inspiration, and you find that it’s not as good as you remember it to be. In fact… compared to the fourth, it’s rather trite.

Do you see where I’m getting at with this?

Literature is, more or less, a subjective field. There’s no exact mathematical formula to make a great book – it all boils down to whether the author can hit on a point of resonance with X amount of readers. So why should writing books be any different?

I will review the books I have read and highlight the things I like and that have worked for me. But remember, y’all – there ain’t no silver bullet in any of this stuff.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s