Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Gisela's Reviews > On Writing: A Memoir

On Writing by Stephen        King
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
20269852
's review

really liked it
bookshelves: writing-and-creativity

"I'm not a big fan of Stephen King's work but this is a fascinating and very readable combination of memoir and 'how to'. Lots of great advice on becoming a better writer. Very inspiring too. "

That's what I thought when I read this book more than a decade ago. I suspect I'd be more reserved and critical in my judgement of the 'writing advice' section(s) if I were to re-read the book now.

I bought King's book because it had been strongly recommended by a close friend, who had just started writing her first novel. Sure enough, I found myself pretty impressed by On Writing but in hindsight, I suspect that was because it was the first 'how to write' book I managed to finish without falling asleep.

Here is a more detailed and updated review of King's book in terms of "the good, bad and the ugly". And beneath those points, I've listed some books on writing that I've either read or started, or want to read because they have been strongly recommended to me by fellow writers.

~~~ THE GOOD ~~~
I think what kept me awake (in the positive sense) was King's own story, which demonstrated that success in writing (as in other areas) is often a matter of sheer persistence: just sitting at your typewriter (or keyboard or writing pad) and actually writing—putting in the hours (and yes, learning some basics of your craft) � with the caveat that some people could persist until the proverbial bovine critters came home and they'd never be good writers. That, dear reader(s), does not include us, right? ;-)

In going back to my copy of the book now, I find some sticky tabs that mark the main 'takeaways' for me at the time:
* I made a note to read Mary Karr's The Liars' Club (on p. 3 of my copy). Oops, haven't done that yet but it's now in my Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ "wanna read" list.
* "This is how it was for me, that's all � a disjointed growth process in which ambition, desire, luck, and a little talent all played a part. Don't bother trying to read between the lines, and don't look for a through-line. There are no lines � only snapshots, most out of focus." (p. 4) I rather liked that last line.
* About the perils of television for the creative spirit: "I am [...] a member of a fairly select group: the final handful of American novelists who learned to read and write before they learned to eat a daily helping of video bullshit. This might not be important. On the other hand, if you're just starting out as as writer, you could do worse than strip your television's electric plug-wire, wrap a spike around it, and then stick it back into the wall. See what blows, and how far. Just an idea." (p. 18)
* Here's one I'd forgotten: write the first draft 'for yourself' (with the door closed) and the second 'for others' (with the door open). (p. 37)
* And this one: "stopping a piece of work just because it's hard, either emotionally or imaginatively, is a bad idea. Sometimes you're doing good work when it feels like all you're managing is to shovel shit from a sitting position." (p. 55) I can vouch for the importance of reminding yourself of this one (and sometimes you need it as ammo in response to others who ask why you keep reworking something instead of moving on to something new).
* Yep, like other reviewers, I noted the bit about adverbs not being my friend (p. 94). In my case this turned/turns out to be excellent advice: I just excised three words from my review—each one a superfluous "---ly" adverb.
* "It is possible to overuse the well-turned fragment (and Kellerman sometimes does), but frags can also work beautifully to streamline narration, create clear images, and create tension as well as to vary the prose line. A series of grammatically proper sentences can stiffen that line, make it less pliable. Purists hate to hear that and will deny it to their dying breath, but it's true. Language does not always have to wear a tie and lace-up shoes. The object of fiction isn't grammatical correctness but to make the reader welcome and then tell a story . . . to make him/her forget, whenever possible, that he/she is reading a story at all. The single-sentence paragraph more closely resembles talk than writing, and that's good. Writing is seduction. Good talk is part of seduction." (p. 102)
* I tagged the section about making sure your second draft is 10% shorter than your first draft (p. 178). I know that, but it doesn't hurt to be reminded of the need to prune (each time you re-read your drafts) to make sure every word, sentence and paragraph is pulling its weight.
* At the end of the book there is a good example of an edited draft, plus a reading list (a bit old now in my year 2000 edition, still ...).
* I finish off my list of good points with a quote that made it to my fridge door: "The scariest moment is always just before you start." (p. 218)

~~~ THE BAD ~~~
For a thorough review of On Writing that offers a fair and balanced critique of the book's shortcomings (as well as excellent coverage of its good points), I strongly recommend Cecily's review.

~~~ AND THE UGLY~~~
Without looking for them, I stumbled across typos that clearly slipped through the spell checker net but should have been picked up by a copy editor (or proof reader). Perhaps they've been corrected in later editions:
* p. xv "One rule of the road not directly stared elsewhere in this book" � Oh dear, so early in the book, in fact in the opening line of the "Third Foreword" leading into the sentence "The editor is always right."
* p. 42 "didn't cop to much". And the same mistake pops up again three lines later.
* p. 178 "when your IR puts yours manuscript down to do something else".

Am I being nit-picky here? Normally I'd skip over typos but (a) in a book about writing (b) by a high profile writer and (c) in a hard copy edition published by a big name like Hodder & Stoughton, it's ... well ... disappointing.

~~~ RECOMMENDED READING ~~~
In no particular order:
* Anne Lamott's Bird by Bird (read and reviewed)
* It's not a 'writing book', but I found Liz Gilbert's Big Magic very inspirational for those moments when you are tempted to think it's all too hard or you just don't have a book/poem/other creative achievement in you.
* Although I haven't finished it, I've been enjoying Ted Kooser's The Poetry Home Repair Manual. Much of Ted's wisdom can be applied to any writing project. He writes so exquisitely and there are many delightful excerpts of poems ...
* Kate Grenville's The Writing Book
* Patti Miller's The Memoir Book and her Writing Your Life
* David Lodge's The Practice of Writing.
* Mark Tredinnick's the little red writing book (ahoot!)
* Sue Woolfe and Kate Grenville's Making Stories
* Sue Woolfe's The Mystery of the Cleaning Lady
* Amos Oz's The Story Begins
* John Yorke Into the Woods

Apologies for the ultra-heavy Australian bias in my list. Feel free to correct that imbalance with recommendations from your end of the world. Does anyone have any hot favourites to share?

Postscript:
* I was going to add Strunk & White's Elements of Style because it was strongly recommended to me in the early '90's (when I first started writing for a living - technical writing, not creative writing), but I now know it needs to be read with the proverbial pinch of salt. Thank you, Cecily, for the following reference: .
* Instead I will add the following recommendations, kindly shared by Steve in his comments below this post: Stein on Writing by Sol Stein and Wallace Stegner's On Teaching and Writing Fiction.
2 likes ·  âˆ� flag

Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read On Writing.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

Started Reading
February 23, 2004 – Finished Reading
March 11, 2014 – Shelved

Comments Showing 1-6 of 6 (6 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

Steve Like you, I don't typically seek out his books. But I remember, too, thinking the memoir portion was quite an inspiration. He's certainly true to his craft.


Gisela Steve wrote: "Like you, I don't typically seek out his books. But I remember, too, thinking the memoir portion was quite an inspiration. He's certainly true to his craft."
Thanks for dropping by, Steve. And for the inspiration. Your comment plus Cecily's (as ever) astonishingly thorough and thought-provoking review have inspired me to dust off my copy of King and flick through it quickly to see if I can stir enough memory cells to flesh out my first attempt at reviewing the book.
Have broken a key King rule: my second draft ended up being "first draft plus 5000%" instead of "minus 10%). :-)


Cecily I really like your amended review. Very fair and balanced (and thanks for the name-check, though my review is not only about the bad).

I didn't notice typos in my copy (a different edition, with different page numbering), and the one in the foreword is definitely not there, so I guess the editor was right... eventually.


Steve Wonderful rewrite, Gisela! You may have added substantially to the content, but did so very judiciously. (Uh oh -- that was two adverbs. I may need King's red marker for a rewrite.)


Gisela Fat wrote: "I like your stated "Good" points, but have no familiarity whatsoever with the term "second draft."

I also enjoy writers who aren't afraid to talk about writing prior to having reached the heights..."


Fat, thank you so much for your long and very thoughtful comment plus the strong recommendation on "Infinite Jest". DFW sounds fantastic! I'm a touch daunted by the book's door-stopper length (especially given that my book pile already toppeleth (sic!) over) but I'm sold by your review (and Steve's). So will bump it up the list of "read ASAP" titles.

I agree with you about Cormac McCarthy being the master of the short sentence. So, like you, I've been trying to cut back sentence length here and there. Adds pace. And tension. I think.

There's lots more in your thoughtful comment that I want to address but don't have enough time now. To quote Arnold S: "I'll be back!"


Gisela Cecily wrote: "I really like your amended review. Very fair and balanced (and thanks for the name-check, though my review is not only about the bad). ... "
Thanks, Cecily. And I should have clarified that your review of the book did not focus purely on the book's shortcomings. Sorry. Will fix that now.


back to top