If there's one thing that comes nearest to a 'rule of technique' for me, it's that you oughtn't to start too many sentences the same way, or have a series of sentences with the same construction. It's something I avoid scupulously in my own work, and have pointed out when I've been critting other people's, because I always thought it made the writing sound unmusical and the rhythms intrusive.

But reading A Spot of Bother has shown me once again that there's no such thing as a 'rule' when it comes to technique. Haddon has sections where, for example, five or six consectutive sentences begin He + verb, and have the same basic structure. The device is employed several times, and its main effect is to convey a sense of the character's disbelief at his own actions, as though he's watching himself from a distance. But Haddon also uses the technique to show a character's distress, or an impression of slow-motion action, or that sense of 'dawning realisation' we all go through from time to time.

It's a good novel in its own right, an accessible black comedy whose momentum gets faster and faster until the action seems out of control (almost reminded me of Tom Sharpe towards the end). But I'd say writers should take a look at it for what it shows about the construction of sentences. Really interesting, I thought.

Lammi, that's so interesting, and so true. I so agree with you about varying sentences - I think we all have particular styles we default to - and then you realise even that rule was made to be broken for the right reasons...

The book sounds great - I do think he's an interesting writer.

Emma

I'm reading it atm and I'm enjoying it, and there's no doubt that he knows what he's doing, but he does have a curious style - almost a naive style if you know what I mean. Perhaps it comes from having written a lot for children?

(Not that I'm in any way suggesting that writing for children is easy - far from it! But that writing for children might cause a writer to avoid over-complicating things which are inherently simple.)

There is a pleasing simplicity in his style but mixed with the occasional deep insight and occasional laugh out loud. Definitely pleasing to read but IMV hard to categorise.

Deb

Varying structure and vocab is the 'elegant diversity' approach, or something like that, elegant something (see David Lodge The Art of Fiction) which Hemingway famously and brilliantly chucked out the window way back when. I bet it's hard to do it well, so respect to Haddon...

Pete

<Added>

Elegant variety?

I think variety - elegant or otherwise - should probably be one's default, though. Repeating the same effect is a high-risk strategy, which I guess Haddon is a good enough writer to pull off. But you only have to read a few wannabe Hemingways (i.e. most of the blokes on any creative writing course ) to realise that it's much, much harder to get right than it appears to be.

Emma

<Added>

Pete - realise we're saying much the same thing...

Wondering what the female reciprocal is of the Hemingway wannabe...

<Added>

I don't think it's Virginia Woolf

Katherine Mansfield? Another wonderful but deceptively simple-seeming writer.

Emma

<Added>

Or maybe Alice Munro.