4

I am wondering what is the limit, if any, of justifying one's writing style as being creative.

I have often seen the use of a single word or phrase as a 'sentence' for creating impact. Example: "It was a large knife. Sharp and shiny."

Some other examples are starting a sentence with a conjunction (e.g. and) and using one sentence paragraph.

Question: Is it justifiable to disregard grammar rules for a specific creative purpose such as creating impact in the minds of readers?

Note: The above is usually not a problem to a person who does not speak English as his/her first language. English is my fourth language and I can tell you that. However, it may appear incomplete or incorrect to someone whose first language is English.

Monica Cellio
  • 21,459
  • 3
  • 65
  • 109
Javeer Baker
  • 1,430
  • 1
  • 13
  • 24
  • 2
    The first example may violate "grammar rules." But "don't begin a sentence with a conjunction!" is fictitious nonsense, and "don't write a paragraph with only one sentence" is risible. – Evan Harper Jun 15 '13 at 03:12
  • 2
    For what it's worth, I think native speakers will almost always blow past grammatical errors in literature as well. It's not a recent trend by any stretch, we've all grown up with texts that are thoroughly ungrammatical. Grammar is what you use when you're writing an essay for school. Other than that, I can't really think of a case where applies as more than a general guideline. – brianmearns Jun 17 '13 at 12:07
  • 1
    As to the limits of creative abuse of the language: take a look at James Joyce's "Finnegans Wake". Many would argue that it's among the most important literary works of the 20th century and it's all but incomprehensible for its "creative use" of the language. – brianmearns Jun 17 '13 at 12:10
  • 1
    Yes. Perfectly justifiable. – Tannalein Jun 19 '13 at 03:58
  • 1
    @sh1ftst0rm No, I don't think you can say grammar is only required for school and a guideline elsewhere. Grammar is the skeleton, the architecture on which language and thereby communication both hang. You can creatively break the rules if the message or the aesthetic justifies it, but not just randomly because you don't feel like writing correctly. There's a difference between a jazz solo and a preschooler banging on a keyboard. – Lauren-Clear-Monica-Ipsum Jun 20 '13 at 13:34
  • @LaurenIpsum, I think we're both trying to say the same thing. Perhaps I was a bit hyperbolic, but notice I didn't say "throw grammar out the window". Whether it's a skeleton or a guideline, it's still not a rigid set of rules that must always be obeyed. The goal of writing is effective communication: grammar provides hints on how to do that, but I say if you can communicate effectively with your reader without it, then grammar be damned. – brianmearns Jun 21 '13 at 19:41

2 Answers2

12

Grammar "violations" are perfectly fine in fiction, as long as they create the effect you desire in the reader.

Incomplete sentences can (sometimes) pick up the pace, or make the reading choppy and staccato. When you want those effects, use incomplete sentences.

Starting a sentence with a conjunction can (sometimes) make sentences flow together in an almost hypnotic way. They can suggest that the narrator is speaking/writing/thinking informally. When you want those effects, start a sentence with a conjunction.

For me, it's the same with every rule, whether it's a rule of grammar or a so-called rule of writing. What effects does following this rule create in the reader? What effects do "violations" create? Which effects do I want to create?

Dale Hartley Emery
  • 24,117
  • 1
  • 40
  • 83
9

Ask advice in any domain of creativity; art, photography, writing, movies, and you'll hear the same answer:

Learn the rules of the trade, then break them.

Any rule can be violated. Grammar, logic, style, pacing, anything! But you don't just go about writing, forgetting the rules, missing or misunderstanding them. You don't just know the rules perfectly, you also understand consequences of violating them. Then you break them in such a way as to achieve your specific goal, impress a specific effect on the reader. You can achieve the effects stronger and faster than if you just used "proper tools of the trade".

Example: poor grammar is a clear sign of inexperienced writer. The rule is "Use good grammar". But the story has a protagonist who is definitely a poor writer. What better way to show that than to give the reader a sample text written in-story by the protagonist? Then, as you're writing that letter, you make grammar mistakes on purpose, strictly violating that rule - because the consequence is desired.

SF.
  • 15,396
  • 29
  • 64
  • 6
    An obsession with proper grammer at all costs can also be the sign of an inexperienced writer. – Goodbye Stack Exchange Jun 15 '13 at 14:59
  • 1
    @NeilFein I agree — look at "to boldly go." There's a poetry in that split infinitive which can't be achieved if you stick with strict, prescriptive English grammar rules. (However, I still can't decide if your typo is a deliberate wink.) – Lauren-Clear-Monica-Ipsum Jun 16 '13 at 16:01
  • 1
    I'll never tell! – Goodbye Stack Exchange Jun 17 '13 at 01:22
  • One of the examples of learning, then breaking the rules is José Saramago. He's been called "the greatest living novelist" - and his books are one giant wall of text, with sentences longer than a page, no dialogue marks, no punctuation, no nothing. It shows when a writer does those things because he doesn't know any better, or when he knows what he's doing. Of course, there's always the risk you'll fail miserably, in which case it's safer to follow the rules :) – Tannalein Jun 19 '13 at 04:13
  • @LaurenIpsum: I've read somewhere that splitting the infinitive is not incorrect, just like starting a sentence with a conjunction isn't either, but with all the war between British and American English, who can really tell what's right any more? And honestly, I'm not a native speaker and I really don't care. If I need it split, I split it. – Tannalein Jun 19 '13 at 04:19
  • 1
    @Tannalein: Currently it isn't incorrect... at time Star Trek was made it was. English is currently evolving rapidly. All major dictionary makers ceased to try to impose "what is incorrect" and switched from prescriptivist to descriptivist. Structures that were deemed incorrect 20 years ago are accepted mainstream now - and Star Trek was about the most significant contributor to global acceptance of split infinitives. If you want to learn more on this subject, visit English.SE – SF. Jun 19 '13 at 07:37
  • @Tannalein Yes, SF is correct. The rule about not splitting infinitives was a prescriptivist rule left over from Latin, where it's physically impossible to split an infinitive because it's one word. English uses two words (to VERB rather than VERBare), so something can physically go between them. Personally I lean towards not splitting when I can, but sometimes it just sounds better with the intervening words. The Powers That Be in re English were finally convinced of the same thing, in part by "to boldly go." – Lauren-Clear-Monica-Ipsum Jun 19 '13 at 10:15
  • @LaurenIpsum: It's frightening how fast languages change. They're living things. Of course, that's a pain in the ass for all of us that are trying to write. So I've kind of given up on following the things that are on the border, like split infinitives and starting with conjunctions, I have enough troubles with spelling and proper tenses. No matter how much I proofread I can never catch all my mistakes. I do try to avoid splitting as well, and the conjunctions, but sometimes, they just sound right. Even if it is grammatically incorrect, we have the right to some artistic freedom, right? – Tannalein Jun 19 '13 at 23:12
  • 2
    @Tannalein Yep, it's called poetic license. Sometimes you just gotta break the rule. :) – Lauren-Clear-Monica-Ipsum Jun 19 '13 at 23:22
  • @SF.: Thanks, I didn't know the details behind it. It's hard to follow all he changes, and all the fighting about who's right and who isn't. I just concentrate on the obvious things, like spelling :D – Tannalein Jun 19 '13 at 23:24
  • @Tannalein: Don't worry; about all changes are loosening old restraints. If you write according to "old" rules you're sure to be writing correctly. It's violations of these rules that become increasingly legal. – SF. Jun 20 '13 at 10:24