# Choice of improving



## Pelwrath (Nov 14, 2017)

I’ve had advice that falls into two basic groups:

*A)*Perfect spelling, grammar and punctuation is your only concern. No story can survive without it.


*B)* Story trumps all. A good story can have its technical issues corrected.  Adding spice to the meal after it’s cooked is hard.

I’m not implying that these aren’t important but where should I spend my time? A note about me, SP&G is not very good.


----------



## Jack of all trades (Nov 14, 2017)

Both SPaG and story are important. Typos, poor grammar, etc make an author look like an amateur. Flat characters do the same, though some get away with it somewhat. Boring or unbelievable / inconsistent story, kills it, in my opinion.

Having said that, there's a time and place for everything. Story and characters are most important during the draft/editing phases. At the end, SPaG is most important. Sending off or publishing a manuscript with SPaG issues is pretty deadly to your career.


----------



## Terry D (Nov 14, 2017)

Pelwrah said:


> I’ve had advice that falls into two basic groups:
> 
> *A)*Perfect spelling, grammar and punctuation is your only concern. No story can survive without it.
> 
> ...



I'm always trying to improve my SPaG. Even when posting here I try to use correct punctuation and (mostly) proper grammar. The same hold true when I work on my books and stories. I try to get the SPaG right from the jump, but I don't paralyze myself by obsessing about it. In the first draft story is king. In the second I'm looking for ways to strengthen, tighten, enhance the story. But, if I see SPaG issues during the rewrite, I don't hesitate to fix them. Later drafts are for the final polish in which the roles of story and SPaG get reversed. I'm most concerned with SPaG at that stage, but I'll fix any story issues that pop up. I wish I could be more like some writers on this site who can write pretty clean copy the first time through, but I'm not.


----------



## SueC (Nov 14, 2017)

I think whenever you are asking someone to read your work, and provide a critique, you should do all you can to make it look professional before you even submit it. Poor SP&G is very distracting and sometimes it makes it difficult to even determine what the story is about. My downfall is tense, so I am really grateful when someone points it out to me when I slip up. Anyway, take your time with your work. When I write, I usually go full steam on the story line, and then go back and re-read to find all the errors. I don't think you can do both at the same time. Good luck and keep on with it. Develop your style and technique and before you know it, you will be telling another newbie how it's done.


----------



## bdcharles (Nov 14, 2017)

I think probably both. Me personally, I edit as I go because the style is a major part of it; plot can (mine can, at any rate) be summed up by synopsis, or a few lines' worth of chapter summaries, or is subject to change etc., and when I reread a section, as I do before writing the next bit, I need to be taken back into the voice in order to continue, and poor SPaG would compromise that. So both - but which one you do first depends on individual preference, in my view.


----------



## Pelwrath (Nov 15, 2017)

Thanks all for your comments. I obsess with SP&G because I'm so bad. A high school English teacher said I was close to a functional illiterate with my grammar skill. I know my SP&G detracts from my stories, makes them less appealing and even terrible. It clouds  and hides the story.  
My two editor friends argue about.  One says give me a very good story and I'll have it edited, the talent to write a story is a talent not a skill. My other editor friend disagrees.  I see both sides and try to walk the border between them.


----------



## Jack of all trades (Nov 16, 2017)

I don't see poor SPaG in your posts, so it can't be too bad.

Let me tell you a piece of advice I was given here. You won't be a writer if you spend all your time hanging out and talking about writing. You have to write. That's paraphrased, but close to the actual words.

Don't let your friends get you down. Write.


----------



## Phil Istine (Nov 16, 2017)

Even if a story is good, multiple SPaG errors jolt me out of it. Even finished copies occasionally arrive with one or two that aren't picked up.
My SPaG is pretty reasonable at the first attempt so I guess I'm one of the lucky ones (comma Nazism excepted). However, it's far easier to fix SPaG than to fix plot holes in a story. So I would suggest focusing on the stories and ask for help with the SPaG once it's complete.


----------



## Sam (Nov 16, 2017)

It's a combination of both. 

A good story is only as good as the framework holding it up, and good writing means nothing if there's no story behind it.


----------



## Jack of all trades (Nov 16, 2017)

Sam said:


> It's a combination of both.
> 
> A good story is only as good as the framework holding it up, and good writing means nothing if there's no story behind it.




I disagree with this analogy. You are implying the writing is the framework, whereas I feel the story is the structure of a house. The writing is the paint and shingles.


----------



## Sam (Nov 16, 2017)

A house won't hold up very well without a foundation.


----------



## bdcharles (Nov 16, 2017)

The writing is the bricks, the grammar the mortar. The story is the design of the building - the architectural vision. The driveway is the front cover and the chimney and the waste pipes and the skips out the front show us the glorious effluent, the syntactic deluge that hints at the editing process. Each room is its own chapter; the pieces of furniture artfully-arranged paragraphs - a feng shui of fixtures and fittings bestowing semantics and meaning and voice. Font choices are window boxes positively brimming with the season's newest serifs, just blooming. See the child's play room, a veritable toy jumble in life-affirming 14pt comic sans. 

Gardens? Subplots. A flat, a condo or an apartment is a piece of flash fiction, a self-contained unit in a wider presumed backstory of common areas and service elevators - and we assemble it all over a wooden 2-by-4 framework of writerly craftsmanship sat manfully atop a solid foundation of reinforced linguistic competency (or is it competence, I'm drawing a blank).

I thought everybody knew that. Watch Grand Designs if you don't believe me.


----------



## Jack of all trades (Nov 16, 2017)

Sam said:


> A house won't hold up very well without a foundation.



That would be realistic, 3D characters.


----------



## Jack of all trades (Nov 16, 2017)

bdcharles said:


> The writing is the bricks, the grammar the mortar. The story is the design of the building - the architectural vision. The driveway is the front cover and the chimney and the waste pipes and the skips out the front show us the glorious effluent, the syntactic deluge that hints at the editing process. Each room is its own chapter; the pieces of furniture artfully-arranged paragraphs - a feng shui of fixtures and fittings bestowing semantics and meaning and voice. Font choices are window boxes positively brimming with the season's newest serifs, just blooming. See the child's play room, a veritable toy jumble in life-affirming 14pt comic sans.
> 
> Gardens? Subplots. A flat, a condo or an apartment is a piece of flash fiction, a self-contained unit in a wider presumed backstory of common areas and service elevators - and we assemble it all over a wooden 2-by-4 framework of writerly craftsmanship sat manfully atop a solid foundation of reinforced linguistic competency (or is it competence, I'm drawing a blank).
> 
> I thought everybody knew that. Watch Grand Designs if you don't believe me.



Cute. Flawed, but cute.


----------



## bdcharles (Nov 16, 2017)

Jack of all trades said:


> Cute. Flawed, but cute.



Well, yeah ... anything that mentions, invokes, or allows for the existence of comic sans can never be perfect.


----------



## Terry D (Nov 16, 2017)

There's a third consideration that was left out of the OP, IMO. It's an aspect which has been touched upon and even called out by name in this thread; the writing.

SPaG isn't 'the writing'. It's a part of it. SPaG is part of what gives our writing its feel and texture, but only a part. What I call 'the writing' is made up of voice, tone, rhythm and pace -- not the pace of the story, that's different, but the pace and flow of the language. It's authorial voice and style.

SPaG is a large component of 'the writing'. If you don't believe that just pick up a copy of anything written by Cormac McCarthy, or, even closer to home, look up something written by our own Jon M. But it's not SPaG, or story that really separates Hemingway from Tolkien, Poe from Palahniuk, or Clarke from Wells, it's 'the writing'. Each author's own unique voice.

You can have a great idea with terrific characters, have every comma in just the right spot, and every word spelled correctly and still have a terrible (or bland) story if it's not told well, and that's something that can be worked on too.


----------



## moderan (Nov 17, 2017)

[OT]Spencerport! Home of the best bookstore ever![/OT]

What Terry's writing about is the persona that the writer projects, that makes you want to read the rest of the words, to trust that you're in good hands as you begin your journey. To me, that's the biggest part. And you can tell right away: YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO.


----------



## Pelwrath (Nov 17, 2017)

When I rush, my SP&G goes south.  I'd love  to have a story with the a couple of SP&G issues. I have that in 100 words. Well That's what I'm getting in a 100 word story place I'm on.  So, thanks to all for your comments, they're appreciated and enjoyed.


----------



## EmmaSohan (Nov 18, 2017)

Pelwrah said:


> I’ve had advice that falls into two basic groups:
> 
> *A)*Perfect spelling, grammar and punctuation is your only concern. No story can survive without it.
> 
> ...



I'll vote for B. Frankly, I thing PaG is 30% of writing. But if your SPaG is horrible -- and some people have such bad SPaG that it jolts people out of the story -- then you probably can't fix it. Finish your story, then someone else will have to fix it. If you don't have a story, you have nothing.

I don't know what you mean by "perfect". If there is such a thing, no one does it and no one cares. PaG is the bones that your story sits on, and it adds life. So effective PaG is very useful. But lots of things are useful, and no one has it all. Write the story.


----------



## moderan (Nov 18, 2017)

B has my vote, too. Copy-editors can handle A if you can't.


----------



## VonBradstein (Nov 24, 2017)

Really it's both, however you can pay (rather a lot, probably) to have the work edited. You cannot pay to have a good story.

It's in your interests to work diligently at both and there's no reason why you can't.


----------



## Fine_Man42 (May 14, 2018)

Which do you feel you can do better? Judging from what you've said, maybe focus on SPaG more. If you can plot out a story pretty well and can convey theme but you think your grammar's not good, then that's a good indicator on what you need to focus on.


----------



## Jing Joy (Apr 29, 2019)

I agree that spelling and grammar is secondary.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (May 1, 2019)

Writing is the craft of effectively telling a story.  Everyone has a story to tell, but the thing that sets the greats apart from the rest is how well they use the tools available to them.  Yes, spelling and grammar are the most basic of those tools, but the way you construct paragraphs, portray dialogue, handle pace, and all the rest is far more technical (and far more important) than just the plot you're trying to tell.

In short, a story isn't a story unless it has the proper technical foundation.


----------



## Aquilo (May 7, 2019)

Gamer_2k4 said:


> Writing is the craft of effectively telling a story. Everyone has a story to tell, but the thing that sets the greats apart from the rest is how well they use the tools available to them. Yes, spelling and grammar are the most basic of those tools, but the way you construct paragraphs, portray dialogue, handle pace, and all the rest is far more technical (and far more important) than just the plot you're trying to tell.
> 
> In short, a story isn't a story unless it has the proper technical foundation.



It's why there's no such thing as show and tell, only degrees of telling.

But it's not just the tools, but the sociocultural aspect too that needs mastering. Dickens' "Marley was dead" uses a relational clause and portrays the most basic method of telling. To the inexperienced, summary instances like that will be an example of 'bad telling', yet tie into the next part "to begin with", he shifts schema-reinforcing material (what's known to the reader) into schema-refreshing (what's unknown): Marley was dead... to begin with. He turns everything about death on its head with a very good example of when to use basic telling. Hauntings aren't so huge for our time, but back when it was written...? Perfection. One sentence, just _one_ opening sentence, and Dickens has the reader in his palm. And it's this twist of schema-reinforcing v schema-refreshing and other tools that most times makes a classic novel: Wells and _War of the Worlds _(English superiority being turned on its head at the height of British power), _Animal Farm_... _Nineteen Eighty-Four_...


----------



## Rojack79 (May 13, 2019)

Personally I can plow through a poorly written book if the plot and story are good enough. I would say focus on plot, story, and characters first. A well written story can always fall flat do to cardboard cutouts being passed off as 'characters'. A poorly written story with great characters can truly shine with a little polish and elbow grease.


----------



## LaughTrack (Jul 11, 2019)

I'd say it all comes down to what stage your story is in and what steps you're taking. The draft phase varies for everyone, but I pressure myself to avoid becoming distracted. I commonly impair myself by spending a ton of time on the same scene or chapter of what I intended to be a quick rough copy. Not even so much as far as SGaP goes because it comes naturally to me, and it's a habit I think most people can pick up. More so, I try to work out all my story flaws in the moment only to realize one... or seven... "perfected" chapters later and against my "perfected" outline, there's a plot hole or my story would be well off taking another route. This is why I'm just an aspiring alcoholic- author...

If you're working on your draft I'd tell you to focus on content because it's easier to solve SGaP issues than plot issues. For future's sake, keep SGaP in mind as you work. If you've realized any plot holes or you'd like to implement changes, move forward solving those as soon as possible, but unless it's absolutely game changing, rewrite things in previous chapters later on. 

If you're talking about a piece of work you want to declare completely finished, both are equally important in my opinion. Even in the process of finalizing- say you're sending it to a copy editor, it's courteous to have cleaned up your manuscript to the best of your ability. But it's not just courteous because cleaning it up yourself will help you develop your SGaP skills. There are writers who solely rely on proofreaders and editors to do that aspect of their work for them, but I don't see value in it personally. I see a professional editor as someone who adds a final layer of polish to an already fairly clean piece.

Now, if you go sending an unedited piece of work which has SGaP problems and plot holes in to a publishing company and expect their editors to solve it before they hand you a book deal, or for them to look past those errors and see only diamond in the rough, hidden genius... good luck.


----------



## seigfried007 (Jul 16, 2019)

Rojack79 said:


> Personally I can plow through a poorly written book if the plot and story are good enough. I would say focus on plot, story, and characters first. A well written story can always fall flat do to cardboard cutouts being passed off as 'characters'. A poorly written story with great characters can truly shine with a little polish and elbow grease.



I wish I could read poorly edited, awful SPaG stories... but I just can't. Closest I'm going to get is when the bad writing is in-character--like in Flowers for Algernon. Otherwise... I just can't. It physically, mentally drains me to suffer through a _really_ poorly written manuscript. Nits here and there aren't so bad. I'm not a true blue grammarian--especially with nitpicky things like "Should a hyphen/parenthesis/comma be used to set off this particular phrase?" I play with wiggle room on that sort of stuff. 

Although, if a person has such a poorly written story, and still needs heaps of story advice, the best thing is to post a synopsis (as detailed as it needs to be to get the question answered). Much easier to proofread one post


----------

