Is Proper Grammar More Important Than Good Fiction?

Submitted by gracepub on March 13, 2006 - 5:56pm.

One question has been floating around our office for a week. Is good grammar more important than a great story? Of course, the perfectionist will claim that you can have both, but in reality, this is not true.

Let's even avoid the fact that the Chicago style of grammar used by fiction writer contradicts the AP style of grammar used by journalists. Oh and of course, we have to forget the difference between literary and mass market fiction.

But, once these are eliminated, is it more important to have a well written novel, or one that draws a deep, emotional impact from a reader?

Is it okay to use poor grammar when writing internal monologue, if the momologue matches the character's emotions?

Is it okay to shorten sentences and use fragments, to speed up the reader and increase their stress levels, building suspense?

Is it okay to have poorly constructed paragraphs, if those same paragraphs cause the reader to catch their breath and feel a bit stunned?

Here is a big one.... Let's forget what Mark Twain did for American grammar... is it okay to consider flawwed grammar a writer's style or voice?

Is the purpose of fiction or creative writing, to impress the reader, or give them an emotional experience?

Why Do Fiction Novels Have Grammar Mistakes?

Writing a Bestseller

What is your opinion?

This blog lists some work at home opportunities with no fees, but some still might be scams
****
Make more money from your web site than Google will pay. You can have pay per click adds, and when your site is successful, choose who will advertise on your site, and how much they will pay. As much as $100 a week.

High Quality, Low Cost Online Courses

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

It's OK

#51870 On March 13, 2006 6:29pm Tottie said,
Tottie's picture

- but would probably limit your success. The purists and the reviewers might slate the author which might mean an increase in sales, or the opposite. For me, I'd rather attempt to get the grammar right - with the help of a good editor perhaps, and make it a good story. But we see examples of poor grammer so much more these days.

It (shudder) depends

#51874 On March 13, 2006 6:55pm o ceallaigh said,
o ceallaigh's picture

I look at it this way. Creative thought is the project, grammar is a tool. There's no point to tools if you don't have a project, and you can't accomplish the project if you don't have the tools. Bad grammar is as much a tool as good grammar. But you have to convince the customer that it's the right tool for the job, and not a case of using a hammer as a saw. Or using the hammer wrong end up.

If you're rich or well respected enough, you can hire a contractor to wield the tools. Do I remember rightly that it was Thomas Wolfe who had such bad command of grammar and syntax that everything he wrote had to be heavily edited by someone else? Of course that editor went mostly uncredited ... The rest of us have to learn how to use the tools ourselves.

What is Good Fiction Grammar?

#52003 On March 14, 2006 6:38pm gracepub said,
gracepub's picture

I was going to comment to this here, but I think I will write a blog about it. A friend had a beautiful short story published, but I have had several people pull it apart, because it was written by a British writer, who used a poetic/literary style, including clauses and phrases.

There was no grammar mistakes, even by a USA grammar style, but the 'complainers' were accustom to reading anything that required thought or speculation.

Should all grammar be written in a grade seven style? Should every story in the world fit the basic, primary sentence structure? Should all writing 'spoon feed' readers?

Tom Wolfe and Mark Twain both had horrific grammar styles, but their work is respected, and in many cases, their bad grammar changed the 'style' of today's grammar.

Good fiction grammar is ...

#52063 On March 14, 2006 10:39pm o ceallaigh said,
o ceallaigh's picture

... anything you can get away with. :) Seriously, fashions change, styles change, what worked yesterday in Chicago won't necessarily work in Edinburgh today, or Chicago tomorrow. Also, audiences differ. The Readers Digest audience isn't P. J. O'Rourke's audience.

If you can get a copy of James Thurber's The Owl in the Attic and Other Perplexities, which contains a series of essays collectively titled Ladies' and Gentlemen's Guide to Modern English Usage, I highly recommend it. I think you'd enjoy its take on issues of grammar and syntax. And it's even enlightening - Thurber does a great job of describing the transition from the Late Victorian flowery phrases of Henry James to the terse, unornamented statements of Ernest Hemingway in terms of a lesser writer caught in a "which" mire.

Look forward to seeing that blog.

Oh I hate this ...

#61399 On November 9, 2006 6:58pm gracepub said,
gracepub's picture

I myself am a British writer, and I hate people who believe their method of grammar and spelling is the ONLY right way. So, I trained in the Chicago Style of grammar, and do you know what? Most of the people pull my grammar apart because it is not the New York style - or the AP style.

Yes, I have sat in several classes and learned how 'bad grammar' changed the industry's writing style.

Well Said

#52344 On March 17, 2006 12:11pm gracepub said,
gracepub's picture

I have been in the English labs of more than 10 Universities in the USA and Canada, and it amazes me that they all have major points on which they differ, like when to use colons and semi-colons (which the AP and Chicago style disagree on!) and passive writing, and clauses and phrases.

If the major educational institutions of our continent cannot make up their mind...who are we to critique another writer's grammar?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.