Techniques of the Selling Writer

Why is this book different?I think people who are capable in any area can generally be separated into two types:Unconsciously competent and consciously competent.The unconsciously competent writer, if she/he tries to teach someone else, can often domore damage than if they had never tried to teach. Why? 1) ) the writer, being unconsciously competent, truly has no idea how she came up with what she does.,and 2) Because teaching is a separate skill.So the only ones who have any business writing a book on writing are the ones who consciously figured out how to solve the weaknesses in their writing.But there are problems here as well. 1) Anyone who had ALL the potential problems a writer might have and figured out how to solve them would be in a nursing home by the time they 'got it down.' Thus any successful writer is going to have blindspots because any person with EVERY writing problem won't keep trying long enough to figure them all out---life is too short. 2) Were the things these writers figured out truly salient?3) Do they truly remember what they did to solve the problem?4) Is their solution idiosyncratic to that particular writer, ("generalizable" to others) or not?5) The writer is instinctively 'good' at other areas, but the beginner may need specific help in that particular area. Finally, the writer has to be able to teach (with all the multitude of problems in any teaching situation.)This is why, in my opinion, many writing books are like nuggets of gold buried in tons of chaff. The 'chaff' represents all the blind-spots described above.To convey an idea of how good this book is, let me use an extended metaphor.Let's say a foundation funded a study to see if 'the average person who reads for fun' can be taught to 'write a reasonably enjoyable short story.'A group of a dozen editors is paid to read through 100 manuscripts. These manuscripts range from the worst examples of writing from a freshman writing class to professionallywritten, publishable stories. The editors rank the manuscripts into piles of "good", "mediocre" and "bad."Any manuscript in which there is a major disagreement is discarded. So the study is left with 30 manuscripts that ALL the editors can agree rank into "good", "mediocre" and "bad." The "mediocre" manuscripts are then dropped, leaving 20 totalmanuscripts: 10 "good," and 10 "bad."The study researchers start with 1000 people who read for fun and have never considered writing as a vocation. The designers of this study need to weed out people who can't recognize a decent piece of writing from bad. In other words they need to weed out people with a 'tin ear' for writing. The 1000 subjects are asked to read 20 manuscripts and to rate them in terms of writing quality.Those subjects who were able to distinguish the "good" ten from the "bad" ten are selected.This leaves a group of 300 people who can recognize decent writing and poor writing, but have no idea "why."Each month the 300 "writer-researchers" sit down and each write out a short story. They then meet and discuss each story in terms of what works and what does not. After much discussion,they start with sentences as a basic unit of analysis. They agree as to what makes for a 'good' sentence. Then they go back and write another story. Now things get very tough, because things are very muddled. They're following the rules for 'good' prose sentences, but some of the manuscripts are barely readable. After a comparison of the 'readable' ones with the 'unreadable' ones, the 300 focus in on motivating stimulus& response units as the next big area of failure.This process of writing, analysis, agreement on new techniques, and writing is repeated for several years until finally each of the 300 people can write a 'reasonably readable and enjoyable story.' Naturally, there is considerable variance in insight into human nature, facility with metaphors, and so forth. But ALL the stories are 'reasonably readable and enjoyable,' even if the characters vary widely in their interest to thereader. In short, they are publishable, though certainly only one or two may be good enough to wind up in the Atlantic.The 'writer-researchers' then collect their techniques and insights into one handbook.Such a handbook would avoid many of the above mentioned pitfalls of writing books. It would focus on letting the writer discover what the "why"s of particular writing problems without didactically saying as most writing books do, "This is MY way ofsolving the problem, it works for me, I'm published, so you should listen to me."In my opinion, "Techniques of the Selling Writer" by Dwight Swain is the closest thing to such a handbook as I've seen. It's amazing, and worth far more than the asking price.

This is probably the single most useful book on writing I've read so far. The skills discussed seem to hold up well and be consistent with what I find in books I enjoy. I'm fond of the way the author reinforces the recurring theme that not all paths are for all people. I would say the single greatest value in this book is how clearly illustrated a knowledge of psychology and sociology can be in character and story development. Everything from high school woes to epic fantasy adventures revolve around the same core elements; understanding how people feel, react, and act in response to external environmental stimuli, other people, and their own thoughts and feelings. As Simon Sinek would put it, "Find Your Why." Not just for every character, but every element. Find a book at the library on human behavior, or go out in the world and observe human behavior, or go out in the world and *experience* human behavior. These are things that will influence your imagination, creativity, and authenticity. What this book does is show you how to structure and organize that information in a simple, practical way, without failing to remind you that it's only a starting point.The book has it's flaws, perceived or real (not 5 stars, after all). Maybe I was reading too much between the lines, but a few things had me question the character of this author. Apparently, whether a "lone Negro teacher" who's "fresh out of college" can prove she's as competent as the other teachers in a white high school use to be a good story question, but whether "Negroes are as good as whites" is "a question that can't be resolved in fiction." Everything about that rubs me the wrong way. I don't like the way it's worded, and I loathe that our not so distant history could make it possible for anyone to consider that a "debate on anthropological or sociological theory".I also raise an eyebrow when I read that the "main function" of a heroine is to be "the hero's reward", and that her "prime characteristic is desirability". Women are often indicated as an objective, a prize, or a catalyst to the hero, but rarely *as* the hero. Again, maybe it's out of context or I'm drawing correlations that aren't there, but I'm annoyed by comments like one suggesting... declaring actually, that many men's pent-up aggression and hate is mostly the result of frustrations created by the females in their lives. Are these innocent examples of story elements out of context, or sharp indicators of the total lack of respect and value this author from a different era had in regards to women? These little comments are few and far between, tiny insignificant nuggets contradicting what I would otherwise describe as valuable insight into the human condition.Other complaints? A coupe chapters have a fair amount of content that feels redundant, possibly attempting to reinforce earlier lessons in new way, but usually in the exact same way. I felt it the most reading Chapter 7, but it wasn't exclusive to that chapter. Also, since it's an older book, countless references (especially to authors and books) were completely irrelevant to me as useful examples.Overall, the book is long and boring like most other instructional books, but it contains more practical foundation skills on writing in one place than any other book or online article I've read. Though generally not very exciting, I was entertained by the author pointing out, at least as I'd describe it, the flawed arrogance and ego of the editor. Without imagining the practical applications of an internet or the shifting landscape of book publishing, it was nice to know there was still a focus on self and finding your own way back in the day, in spite of some stranger telling you your writing wasn't worth paper. I sort of like that nothing in that regard has changed in 50 years. If an editor thinks they know better than you, and can do something you can't, than an editor can obviously be dead wrong. Again, greatly fond of the recurring theme that your story is *your* story. If you like it, you're probably not the only one that likes it. And they'll like it *for* the story, not for your technically masterful writing technique.

Powell's Bookstore in Portland, Oregon, USA, surely made a loss on my order but they've gained a friend for life. 'Techniques of the Selling Writer' winged its way from America a week early, for £10.69 including p & p and in flawless condition. Wow.'Techniques' is a classic, hard-to-find work by an American academic who delves deeply into the constituent parts of good fiction. As such - and because (ironically) the author doesn't always write grammatical sentences - it requires close reading. Speedy readers among us can take this as a heads-up. Grapplers among us - enjoy!Another heads-up, this one for women and progressive men.. Swain imagines and addresses a thoroughly male world of readers and writers, protagonists and antagonists. It's difficult to feel part of Swain's world by quietly substituting "person" or "they" for "man" or "he" because every so often Swain sets his "he" against a random example of a specific woman (who "he" wants to date or have sex with, for example, or who's being chased or been murdered), and knocks us out of our thinking.It's best to understand 'Techniques' as a historical artefact, one we can comb through, like an archaeologist, for timeless advice under a sexist surface. And there's plenty of such advice there - five stars' worth, in my opinion.Five stars, then, with one star reserved until the University of Oklahoma prints a new edition which admits women into its world.

This is a classic. The newer books tend to give you a list of rules or trite formulas. This book explains the WHY which will enable you to develop your own rules and style as you write. It is dated, especially in terms of attitudes towards women, but if you can look past this, the advice is very valuable.

Brilliant really lays our into ideas about a how a story works how it holds together,how the ideas lead to in each other,and how to fix it so it gets the message across

A very helpful book! Loads of ideas for writers to use. Would highly recommend despite one or two chauvinistic examples of story given - the advice given however is as applicable today as when it was first written.

I have a lot of books on technique, but this is by far the best. It's especially good on scene and sequel structure, and the explanations and examples are clear. His writing style also kept me glued to the book to the end. Highly recommend.