I came
across an essay on writing that I found very inspiring. It’s written by Chuck
Palahniuk and it’s about using – or rather not using – ‘thought’ verbs in
fiction writing. I recognised myself as
the worst transgressor of his rule and immediately set out to improve my
writing.
Palahniuk
starts by stating that in six seconds you’ll hate him and he’s right. But he also promises
that you’ll become a better writer for listening to him. Since it’ll take
considerably longer than six seconds to learn to be a better writer, I can’t vouch
for that yet. But I’m working on it.
What, then,
are thought verbs and why you should avoid them? According to Palahniuk,
thinking is abstract, and knowing and believing are intangible. You should
allow your readers do the thinking and knowing and concentrate instead on
showing the physical actions and details of your characters to your readers.
Verbs like
think, know, understand, realise, believe, want, remember, imagine, desire and
love are among those you should avoid. According to Palahniuk, writers most
often use these verbs to open a paragraph and then use the rest of the paragraph explaining the thought. He finds it
a lazy way of writing. Having tried his method for less than two weeks, I can
assure his right. It’s so much easier to compose paragraphs around thought
verbs.
I didn’t
even have to read my published books to come up with dozens of sentences that I
have formulated around one or more of these verbs. My characters know things,
they suddenly realise something, they love and they hate. Sentences like that
are easy to write, but they don’t necessarily make very interesting reading.
Palahniuk’s
method sounds simple enough: instead of having your character think of an action, you should un-pack it, step by step. For that, you are allowed to use specific
sensory detail: action, smell, taste, sound and feeling.
In reality,
his method is extremely difficult to follow, especially in the middle of a
writing flow. It’s easier to compose paragraphs that begin with something like
“he wanted to growl in annoyance for her attitude” and then explain why that is
the case. It’s much more difficult to take the sentiment apart and explain the
same without using the thought verb: “Her attitude irritated him; he had faced
it so often, yet from her it felt worse. His anger chafed him, demanding
relief, so he growled.” The sentence isn’t that much longer than the original,
but it took many times longer to write.
My decision to not use thought verbs has slowed my writing process
considerably, so much so that I feared that the book I’m currently writing
would never be finished. So I’ve compromised. While on a flow, I let the
thought verbs come if they want to and compose paragraphs around them just to
get my own thoughts written down. Next day, I go through everything I’ve
written and edit it according to Palahniuk’s rule; a slow job.
I’m not entirely sure my writing has yet improved. The technique has,
however, forced me to think of every paragraph and sentence more thoroughly
than I otherwise would have, weighing each action and word against each other
and the whole. No short-cuts are allowed, no easy ways out. And that can only
be good.
Palahniuk’s essay is great. I recommend you read the original yourselves to
learn everything he has to say. I recommend, too, that you try his method
yourselves. If nothing else, it will keep your brain nimble. Who knows, maybe
you’ll find it as exciting as I do and adopt it in your writing too.