Fellow Aspiring Writer chipping away at the Dome

[CrimsonKingAH]

Welcome...
I just pictured in my mind an 'OLD' van... especially in the 'back' of a slimy used car dealership.

 

[Pucker]

I just chocked it up to a small town and that this was a very old early 90's-ish Chevy van that happened to be at the back of Rennie's used car lot. Other than that rather vague part that made me cock an eyebrow as a former lockout locksmith, it's been a fairly consistent story.
-Ben

This will happen, Ben. Most people know a little bit about a lot of things and a lot about only a few things. If you're an aspiring writer, someone besides me has probably told you to "write what you know." That's all fine and good as far as it goes, but if you limit your writing to only what you know you could run into a sturdy rock wall pretty soon. The hot-wiring thing is a good example of something most readers might roll their eyes toward, but will ultimately accept as a convenience necessary to the plot and not a very big deal in the grander scheme of things. But some readers -- locksmiths, for instance -- will be jolted more than most because it's something they know.

Everybody runs into something like this sooner or later. Last time it happened to me was with another author I respect a great deal -- John Connolly -- who put a "journalist" in one of his stories who didn't know the difference between a masthead and a banner, as regards newspapers. It's not a terribly important distinction. It's a mistake quite a lot of people just walking around in the world make all the time, and that's alright. But when a writer puts a writer in his story who doesn't know about writing, another writer is likely to make more of it than your average run-of-the-mill Constant Reader. Me? I just think "Hmmm ... lazy" and I move on with it in the back of my mind until it stops bothering me. It's entirely incidental to the story at large and is really little more than a pet peeve. And it's not even really "lazy." That's just me. Write a novel sometime and you'll see. I don't know how many different people -- line editors, copy editors ... whatever -- have to not know the same thing in order for the niggling error to make it into print, but it's more than just the guy whose name is on the cover.

In the final analysis, it's simply not possible -- or at least awfully damned difficult -- to explain everything and anything in your story in sufficient detail and with demonstrable accuracy to placate every living, breathing soul on this spinning blue rock .... Unless maybe you're Marcel Proust. The problem with Proust is that he didn't seem to know that story itself is what's important. Someone around here -- blunthead, probably -- will know who first said that the devil is in the details, but I like to say it another way. You're likely far too young to know or care who Ricky Nelson was, but he put it like this:

You can't please everyone, so you've got to please yourself.

Welcome to the board, Ben.

Keep writing.

 

[Neesy]

This will happen, Ben. Most people know a little bit about a lot of things and a lot about only a few things. If you're an aspiring writer, someone besides me has probably told you to "write what you know." That's all fine and good as far as it goes, but if you limit your writing to only what you know you could run into a sturdy rock wall pretty soon. The hot-wiring thing is a good example of something most readers might roll their eyes toward, but will ultimately accept as a convenience necessary to the plot and not a very big deal in the grander scheme of things. But some readers -- locksmiths, for instance -- will be jolted more than most because it's something they know.

Everybody runs into something like this sooner or later. Last time it happened to me was with another author I respect a great deal -- John Connolly -- who put a "journalist" in one of his stories who didn't know the difference between a masthead and a banner, as regards newspapers. It's not a terribly important distinction. It's a mistake quite a lot of people just walking around in the world make all the time, and that's alright. But when a writer puts a writer in his story who doesn't know about writing, another writer is likely to make more of it than your average run-of-the-mill Constant Reader. Me? I just think "Hmmm ... lazy" and I move on with it in the back of my mind until it stops bothering me. It's entirely incidental to the story at large and is really little more than a pet peeve. And it's not even really "lazy." That's just me. Write a novel sometime and you'll see. I don't know how many different people -- line editors, copy editors ... whatever -- have to not know the same thing in order for the niggling error to make it into print, but it's more than just the guy whose name is on the cover.

In the final analysis, it's simply not possible -- or at least awfully damned difficult -- to explain everything and anything in your story in sufficient detail and with demonstrable accuracy to placate every living, breathing soul on this spinning blue rock .... Unless maybe you're Marcel Proust. The problem with Proust is that he didn't seem to know that story itself is what's important. Someone around here -- blunthead, probably -- will know who first said that the devil is in the details, but I like to say it another way. You're likely far too young to know or care who Ricky Nelson was, but he put it like this:

You can't please everyone, so you've got to please yourself.

Welcome to the board, Ben.

Keep writing.

You can't please everyone, so you've got to please yourself.