On Writing A Memoir Of The Craft By Stephen King

Like the curate's egg, this is good in parts. I can see why writers, and budding writers find this book inspirational, and fans of his oeuvre will enjoy learning how certain stories came to be. But it's several very different books and booklets, within a single set of covers - curious that a book about writing doesn't seem to know what sort of a book it is.

In one of the three forewords, King says "Most books about writing are filled with bullshit". I found a fair bit here, too. But I also found

In one of the three forewords, King says "Most books about writing are filled with bullshit". I found a fair bit here, too. But I also found good things, including a passionate passage about books being a sort of telepathy, culminating with the delicious: "Books are a uniquely portable magic."

This book isn't about how to write in general, it's about how to write like Stephen King, and for that, it may be excellent.

1. C.V. 4* (memoir, 118 pages, or 33% of the book)

This is a charming scattering of snapshots of King's childhood, and snippets of adulthood and advice; the CV of how one writer was formed. I enjoyed a peek into ordinary 1950s small-town USA. He points out that he is one of "the final handful of American novelists who learned to read and write before they learned to eat a daily helping of video bullshit". (He was 11 when the family got their first TV.)

He missed most of first grade because of ear-related health problems, so retreated into comic books and writing stories in a similar vein. His mother always encouraged him, and the importance of encouragement is the strongest message of the book. Conversely, a teacher criticised him for wasting his talent writing junk, and King remained ashamed of what he wrote until his forties. (The "junk" was a novelisation of the film of The Pit and the Pendulum, which he'd been selling at school – unaware that it was originally a short story by Poe!)

His wife, Tabitha, also gets much credit: her belief in his ability and her consequent encouragement, even when they could barely pay the bills. They have much in common, but "What ties us most strongly are the words, the language, and the work of our lives."

The other key message is that there is no repository of great story ideas. They come from nowhere. The writer has to spot, recognise, and polish them, and King gives examples of how he came upon the seeds of many of his stories.

King points out that even the author's perception of his characters may be wrong (I don't disagree, and it may be related to his not realising that he was writing about himself when he penned Jack, in The Shining). But in a foreword, he makes a more extreme generalisation, "The editor is always right". An interesting case study is to compare Raymond Carver's short story collection, What We Talk About When We Talk About Love, in their originally published and heavily edited form with his originals, now published under the title Beginners. Sometimes I think the editor was right, but in several cases, I prefer Carver's version. I've explored the differences a little in my reviews: HERE and HERE, respectively.

2. Toolbox 1* (grammar etc, 34 pages)

"Writing is seduction." Not necessarily. Reading this short section, the only thing that prevented me from throwing the book across the room was that it was borrowed from a friend. It does what most prescriptive guides do: conflates stylistic preference with grammatical rules, and makes sweeping generalisations (such as "the best form of dialogue attribution is 'said'."), largely ignoring the paramount importance of context and audience. It's easy to teach and test rules, but serious writers need to cultivate an intuitive feel for language in a variety of styles, rather than being bogged down analysing parts of speech.

King taught grammar, but gives examples of Tom Swifties that aren't, and keeps talking about the "passive tense", though later correctly says "passive voice". He decries it, using ludicrous, unidiomatic examples ("My first kiss will always be recalled by me"). He decries adverbs by using a convoluted passive (they "seem to have been created with the timid writer in mind") and an adverb (saying writers use them when not expressing themselves "clearly"), and says both passives and adverbs are the resort of "timid writers". He claims, "The road to hell is paved with adverbs." One is OK, but they're like dandelions: prone to multiply. In section 3, he berates pronouns too, using a pronoun "I hate and mistrust pronouns, every one of them as slippery as a fly-by-night personal-injury lawyer"". Why?

Strunk and White's* (in)famous rule 17, "Omit needless words", is lauded. It's hard to disagree with, but it's no help with discerning which words might be needless.

King says this section is short because readers probably know enough grammar already, but he then agrees with Strunk and White, that if readers don't, "It's too late". So much for encouraging timid writers. And yet many find this book helpful. I'm pleased for them, but a little surprised.

There are some good points. He stresses the importance of an extensive vocabulary, and says it should be acquired through reading widely, rather than conscious effort. He describes paragraphs as "maps of intent" and "the basic unit of writing" (rather than sentences). And there is a nod to context, negating much of what precedes it, "Language does not always have to wear a tie and lace-up shoes." Amen to that.

3. On Writing 3* (how he writes, 143 pages, or 40%)

And suddenly it's back to memoir-ish, but with focus on the process of writing, and a smattering of prescriptive absolutes and empty homilies alongside fascinating insights and ideas. King promises "Everything I know about how to write good fiction.", along with encouragement, but with the caveat that you can't make a bad writer a competent one, or a good writer great, but you can make a competent writer good, as long as they master the basics in the previous section: vocabulary, grammar, and style.

King stresses the importance and joy of reading, in all and any situations, developing "an ease and intimacy with the process of writing."

But for writing itself, he says you need good health (though poor health was what got him started, and he was successful when a heavy-drinking alcoholic), a stable relationship (don't many great writers emerge from the opposite?), strict routine, and your own space (no distractions, and a door to close). "Put your desk in the corner… Life isn't a support system for art. It's the other way round."

"Good fiction always begins with story and progresses to theme… Starting with the questions and thematic concerns is a recipe for bad fiction."
The ideas about story and plot were fascinating and liberating - in stark contrast with the straitjacket of the previous section. You need a concrete goal, but "Don't wait for the muse" and " Write what you know".

He lists only three components of a story: narrative, description, and dialogue. Don't worry about plot because our lives are plotless. "Stories are found things, like fossils" and the writer has to give them somewhere to grow (fossils… growing?), thus "My books tend to be based on situation rather than story… The situation comes first… The characters… come next". Then there's narration, and he lets the characters figure things out – not always as he expected.

Ultimately, "The story should always be the boss". The story, not the plot. "Plot is… the good writer's last resort and the dullard's first choice." And "There's a huge difference between story and plot. Story is honorable and trustworthy; plot is shifty and best kept under house arrest." Huh? Fortunately, Bryce came to the rescue in the second comment on her review here:
"Plot is a series of events. But story is about the motivations behind those events."
Her example is that plot is "The king died and then the queen died."
The story is "The king died and then the queen died of grief."

When you've finished the first draft (which you should never show anyone else for comment), you have to step back, to see the wood for the trees, and figure out what the book is about. Work on a second draft, then take a break and let someone else review that.

"Description is what makes the reader a sensory participant in the story", but you must beware of over-describing: "Description begins in the writer's imagination, but should finish in the reader's." That sounds wise and wonderful, but I'm unsure how to apply it. Still less, "The use of simile and other figurative language is one of the chief delights of fiction", when you're supposed to be hunting down adverbs, pronouns and other allegedly needless words.

"It's not about the setting… it's always about the story." Absolutely always? I think not. So many of my favourite works of fiction are about the setting that I have shelves called Landscape Protagonist and Sea, Islands, Coast.

"One of the cardinal rules of good fiction is never to tell us a thing if you can show us." Never? Again, it's the absolutism I object to.

And then… relax: "Try any goddam thing you like… If it works, fine. If it doesn't toss it. Toss it even if you love it." Hooray.

4. On Living 3* (surviving a life-threatening accident, 22 pages)

This is a moving addition to recent editions (and briefer versions have been published separately). King writes of when he was out walking in 1999 and was hit by a driver who could have been from one of his books. It recounts his serious injuries, multiple operations, and slow recovery. "Writing didn't save my live… [but] it makes my life a brighter more pleasant place."

5. And Furthermore 3* (annotated example of first and second drafts)

This has a very short story that King invites readers to edit. It is followed by an annotated version, with explanations of the suggestions. Most of them are cuts (back to "Omit needless words"). King reckons editing should trim at least 10%. The other key thing is follow-through, "If there's a gun on the mantel in Act I, it must go off in Act III", otherwise it will be either pointless or a deus ex machina. See Checkov's Gun.

6. Booklists 3* (books to read, mostly fiction)

There are two fiction booklists, mostly novels, but a few short story collections. It's a varied mix of classics and modern, highbrow and less so: King's first/main list

Notes

I tried to read this with an open mind. I was bored by the only other King I've read (The Shining, my review HERE), and I generally abhor the narrow prescriptivism of "How to write" guides. Most of it defied my fears – except for the

~~grammar~~ stylistic advice. But what do I know? I'm not a published author, let alone one as successful as Stephen King.

*For a strident critique of Strunk and White's Elements of Style (beloved of many US students and largely unknown in the UK), see Prof Geoff Pullum on Elements of Style.

Image source for classic Punch cartoon, "The Curate's egg":
https://sophosnews.files.wordpress.co...