Starting sentences with 'then'

[Brian G Turner]

I should probably add that Mr Goodkind added himself to the "born writer" category, in case anyone was wondering. Like I say, make of that what you will...

Are you sure he didn't add himself to the "born demi-god" category?

For me I guess I'm not sure what makes Stephen-the ultimate fall before him god of writing over and above all else-King, because online in some writing forums the book seems to have gained almost a biblical status.

I think it's simply because it's an easy accessible book, written by a successful author many aspiring writers (certainly in the sf/f/h genres) will have read.

King's writing can easily be argued to be flawed on many levels - but that's not the point.

As aspiring-to-be-published writers we often yearn for any useful tidbits of information from those who have already made it, that may help us on our own paths.

And there's little competition in that market.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

King's writing can easily be argued to be flawed on many levels - but that's not the point.

As aspiring-to-be-published writers we often yearn for any useful tidbits of information from those who have already made it, that may help us on our own paths.

And there's little competition in that market.

I guess. The ones I haven't understood are the ones that don't like what he writes taking it as gospel. If someone is a horror, suspense etc writer or a massive King fan I get it ... if on the other hand they would rather read Barbara Cartland I really don't understand them being wedded to On Writing.

My favourite writers use then and adverbs. Whilst not flowery my favourite writers aren't sparse either.

 

[Toby Frost]

King may be a workmanlike writer, but as far as explaining how it's done, I think that's a strength. On Writing doesn't tell you (a) that writing is some miraculous butterfly that comes from the heart in a flowery trance; (b) writing can be banged out according to a simple formula to con the public into making you a millionaire; or (c) you have to do it exactly as King says, else you're doing it wrong. There are a lot of people out there saying how writing is done, and a fair few are either talking rubbish or so convinced of their rightness as to tolerate no-one else. Apart from an obscure book by J.N. Williamson, it's the best of its type that I've seen.

Also, and more generally, I think it's probably better to weed out extraneous words and then put them back in where required, rather than to have them in to start with. There is a tendency with quite a few people to try to sound "writerly" when they start out, which as Peter has said elsewhere does lead to unnecessary complexity - words like "utilise" and "situated" can creep in.

 

[Ronald T.]

What about tightening the sentence by eliminating unnecessary words? For example: "He went to the store, bought some eggs, came home and made cookies, and then built a gingerbread house." Just a thought.