(Plot+Characters)*Voice^2=Literature?

[Lalwendë]

What, than, should be done to this coarse and uneducated person (that is, me), who never ever learned any English grammar whatsoever? For truly, my native is Georgian, my mother (and books I've read) tought me Russian, and French was foreign language of my choice when I've been visiting school

Words, darn words! I hope I did not come across as rude when I made my point about Grammar! I did intend my comments to cover any language - basically I mean children should learn the grammar of their mother tongue as early as possible; this then makes it easier not only to use that mother tongue but also to learn other languages. It helped me when I cam to learn German - though I'm idle (and being English, I suffer from the same thing a lot of other people suffer, and that's assuming everyone else knows English - shameful ) and haven't practised it in a long time so I've forgotten much of it.

Think of writing as being like Art. Any artist needs to know how to draw at the least - this why art schools insist on drawing classes. If you then go on to dissecting cows and displaying them in perspex tanks filled with formaldehyde, then that is where you put your theory into practice. Though why you should not be allowed some time to simply enjoy writing at school, I don't know - isn't learning supposed to be fun?

[Encaitare]

tar-ancalime said:

Well, I think that quite a lot of them probably were. One of the wonderful things about fiction (as opposed to journalism) is that in a work of fiction, absolutely everything is there because the author put it there. The author has total control over his/her world--if the main character has red hair, it's because the author wanted it that way. S/he's not bound by some external reality of blond or brown hair, and doesn't in fact have to tell the reader anything about hair color at all. So I think that we must approach literature with the assumption that anything the author chose to include is in the story on purpose, because that author always had the option of working any element in an infinite number of different ways, or of leaving it out altogether.

I agree that the author's total control over the story does mean that virtually nothing is accidental. The point I was trying to make was that an author does not exactly sit there with a checklist of all the literary element he or she ought to include (I could, of course, be wrong). If something doesn't seem right or match up with the ideas or images the author had in his/her mind, then s/he will change it, almost instinctively, you could say. S/he might just think, "I'd better change this bit of dialogue here, since this character would never say that," or something to that effect, and then fix the problem. To sum it up, I meant that the insertion of the literary elements/techniques are done more subconsciously, just by the author's judgement, than as a rigid set of rules to be followed.

Am I making any sense?

[Lindolirian]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Just to be clear, I am most certainly not saying that these rules should not be taught (double negative, anyone). But it should also be acknowledged in doing so that there is scope for flexibility in their application.

Yes, I probably should have said something to this effect at the close of my post because I heartily agree.

Lush, I don't know... even our potential valedictorian is asking that.

But love the subject you write about with passion, believe it to be 'the Truth', write to communicate the subject, not for writing's sake, but for the sake of the subject and for the sake of 'the Truth', and - lo and behold! - if you are even moderately good with language, the piece of work produced will be praised and loved.

Heren, I think I'll show that to my teacher, that's awesome!
Lalwendë, thank-you, it's nice to have another teacher's input!

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Another thing that gets me in trouble is spelling. I'm always writing "grey" instead of "gray", "colour"- "color", "armour"- "armor", "theatre"- "theater", "defence"- "defense", etc....

My goodness! And here I thought it was just me doing that. My teacher handed me back a paper a few weeks back coated with red pen-marks, with comments such as "These archaic spellings give the impression that you are a haughty snob. Fix your spell-checker to change those automatically before I start taking points off." Grouchy old man... I say that in the most affectionate sense of the words.

I must say though, I heartily agree with Rimbaud about rule-breaking. It applies to every aspect of life. Learn the rules before you break them.

Fea

[tar-ancalime]

Encaitare,

Ah, I see what you're after now, and I think we've been in agreement all along. As it so often is, it was a matter of defining our terms. Sorry if I offended with my swashbuckling contradiction.

[Encaitare]

Oh, fear not, I took no offense. It seems that we have been in agreement after all.

[Boromir88]

My goodness! And here I thought it was just me doing that. My teacher handed me back a paper a few weeks back coated with red pen-marks, with comments such as "These archaic spellings give the impression that you are a haughty snob.

I sit here, rub my chin, and think interesting....reminds me of my math teachers "there's always one way of doing this! No shortcuts! Let me see your work! You didn't do every step!....etc" But somehow I would get the right answers, and I think that is the key also in writing.

Also...what's that famous saying in Pirates of the Carribean:

What about the code?
Geoffrey Rush (one of my favorite actors): They are more like Guidelines.