24 DEC 2019
Howdy all. As year's end is fast approaching, it seems fitting to finish the decade with another wonderful article by Dave. A decade denouement if you will. Sage wisdom and advice he always has in abundance. This time his inspiration comes from the good people over at Writer's Digest. Personally, I take away from this article my own struggle with never being satisfied with my writing, as he mentions just above the anecdote. I'm currently in the throes of battle with a story now light-years ahead of where it was months ago (see what I did there, movie-goers?). In other news, I am of two minds about trying my hand at some poetry, just so I can say my writing has gone from bad to verse...
Happy Holiday!
~*~
The “Had Horrors” Redux
David Alan Owens
In 1927 Laurence O’Dorsay wrote an
article for “The Writer’s Digest Guide to Good Writing.” I rediscovered the
article “The Had Horrors,” in November 2019. The 1994 Edition of “Guide To Good
Writing,” languished in my attic for fifteen years. I dusted the cover and
began to read again this wonderful compilation of WD articles. Fine advice from
seventy-five years inspired me again — but I read D’Orsay’s article with a
renewed interest.
In D’Orsay’s article (page 25), he
wrote about when he, in 1927 found himself at the feet of Gamaliel, one of the
most famous fiction magazine editors of the day (I researched but found little
about this mysterious Gamaliel, and I am not sure whether D’Orsay referred to
the rabbinical legend, or the Jewish teacher of the same name, I think the name
is an allusion and honors the editor by comparison to the great Gamaliel).
In those days, editors often took
it upon themselves to develop writers. Editors and agents do not today reach
out to writers with obvious talent and help those new writers develop into the
professionals they might become. The concept demonstrates the writing and
publishing world’s decline.
Today the object is money and fame
where the self-publishing world cranks out millions, yes millions, of poorly
written stories, stories without noticeable merit, and they are filled with
nothing but trope and cliché. Fame comes not often, and is a rare event in the
self-publishing world. Fame is also rare in traditional publishing.
D’Orsay sat in his office with
Gamaliel when a young “editor in training” entered the office and placed a
manuscript on the table. The young man voiced his complaints about the story.
“Something’s still wrong with it. You’ve sent it back to him five or six times.
He’s got a good opening now, and a good finish, but somehow it just doesn’t
register. It’s a good story, but he seems to take too long to get to the meat
of the thing after his dramatic start.”
Gamaliel peeked into the manuscript
and announced, “It’s as plain as day. Snifkins (the author) has a bad attack of
the had horrors.”
When questioned about this
“disease,” he replied, “Most of them have ‘em young. Just like children with
measles, best to have them young. They think they must stop the story for a
time and tell the reader what the hero and his heroine and the villain had
been doing before the reader ever saw them. Causes the reader to start
guessing, right from the beginning. Snifkins leaves ‘em hung up in the air
until page four. He starts his puppets working, and then drops the strings
while he lectures about their past lives. Look at this damn thing! Hads
and had beens scattered all over his
pages. He has the makings of a good writer, but we must cure him of his had
horrors.”
If a story is strong and contains
well-sustained entertainment value, an editor might overlook a few technical
flaws, but one thing he will not
overlook is a bad attack of the had horrors, Gamaliel observed.
D’Orsay relates how hads
are like a stodgy lump of cold greasy fat served when you’ve finished the
appetizers. He explains how to solve the mess and produce better work (page
26). “The thing to do with this irreducible minimum of explanatory matter about
antecedent happenings is to link it with your moving story. Use action,
with dialogue, and with thoughts running through the minds of characters. In
this way, you can weave the whole thing into one pattern, connect the past with
what is present, and future, and turn the thing into entertainment. Keep the
dramatic conflict in the forefront and let your characters solve the eternal
problem — what happens and why. The process focuses upon the concept of writing
for the reader.”
A
true writer is never satisfied with his writing. John Dusfresne, professor in
the Master of Fine Arts Writing Program of the English Department of Florida
International University said, “Show me a writer who is satisfied with their
work, and I’ll show you an amateur.”
Anecdote
In the same 1994 Writer’s Digest 75th
anniversary issue, this short anecdote appears on page 30:
Fred Kelly, the humorist and author
of the dog’s only book of philosophy, You and Your Dog, sat with the
famous writer Booth Tarkington, in Tarkington’s Indianapolis home. Tarkington
related how discouraged he often became when writing.
“Are you ever conscious right at
the time of doing something good,” Kelly asked.
“No,” Tarkington chuckled, “it all
seems fairly bad. You know, writing is about the most discouraging job of all.
One knows so well what he is trying to express, but all the words aren’t
available. This afternoon I tried to write a paragraph or two to describe a
scene in northern Africa but the words weren’t available. I tried to write
vivid description for my readers, but when I groped for the crystals all I
could pick up were a few smeary words — a meaningless mess. Yet all the time I
knew the right words were somewhere if I could only find them. It’ll never suit
me, I’ll still feel that I could do it better.”
Kelly later said, “When I came
away, I thought: So long as he has that attitude toward his work, no wonder
it’s good.” (Dufresne’s wisdom)
References: Writer’s Digest Guide
To Good Writing.
Copyright © 1994, by Writer’s
Digest Books - Edited by Thomas Clark
Library of Congress ISBN
0-89879-640-7
~*~
