From: yoshi@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (D M Yoshikami)
Newsgroups: misc.writing
Subject: Re: It, as a subject.
Date: 14 Oct 92 12:35:23 GMT
Organization: National Naval Medical Center

In article <92287.091501KVJLC@ASUACAD.BITNET> KVJLC@ASUACAD.BITNET (Jon L. Campbell) writes:

>[Some stuff omitted] Why should the public
>be subjected to writing that wouldn't pass the grade in a freshman
>english class?
>
>For example, how many english teachers would suggest that the subject
>of a sentence start with 'it'?  Not many I suspect.  But if you read
>what King has written and how he constructs his sentences, I think
>you'll begin to see that he perfers to use 'it' as a subject instead
>of a (proper) noun or even an adjective.  What is a run on sentence?
>How many has King written?  Count them closely and let me know later.
>I have spouted the rules of fiction and received a lot of flak for my
>efforts.  Not to say that several people didn't agree with me and even
>offered their own ideas on the subject.

Well, if the novel you're reading is _It_, then there is no trouble :-)

>These rules that I keep referring to are easy to identify and can be
>found in several text and industry publications.  But what really are
>the rules of fiction?
>
>Could one of them be:  Well written fiction should embody the same rules
>                       of grammer as any other written form of communication.

One thing that people often misunderstand is that there is a subtle but 
important difference between good grammar and good rhetoric.  Imagine thus:

     Letter  -  Word (Spelling) - Grammar  -   Rhetoric

Good spelling does not necessarily mean good grammar, just as good
grammar does not mean good rhetoric.  Many of the most effective
speakers and writers today may make simple grammatical mistakes from
oversight or ignorance, but that does not necessarily detract from
their rhetorical abilities.

The rules for grammar and for rhetoric are not rules in the hard and fast
sense.  This is because rhetoric and grammar are not a-prior sciences; rather
someone observed the patterns in use, and from that, formulated rules which
covered the circumstances.  Understand therefore, that the meta-level is 
first derived from the available data; and that the available data is not
generated from the meta-level at first.  Once someone starts applying the rules
from the meta-level to his own speaking, then we have an almost chicken and 
eggish problem where the actual usage influences the rules as the rules
influence actual usage.  

Now Fiction, like any other form of verbal communication, will wind up
following the same basic principles as any other form of communication
but that does not mean that it will follow the principles exactly.
Rhetoric has quite a bit of flexibility.  In general, authors will
follow the guidelines but that is only in general.  In specific cases,
the authors may not follow the guidelines.  That is not a problem.

Now until someone actually has read enough and written enough so that the
guidelines are internal and second nature, he is better off sticking to
the guidelines.  You can still get in trouble following guidelines, so
use them with discretion and caution.

Then again, King's writings sell -- which shows you how effective some of
the guidelines (such as grammatical rules) are when they are violated.

>I suspect that there will be some of you who disagree with me and I look
>forward to your defensible discussions.

>Jon - It isn't the proper way to say it.  Is it?

DY :-)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
D M Yoshikami  :-) ;-) :-) | Internet: yoshikami@usuhsb.ucc.usuhs.nnmc.navy.mil
     +1 (301) 295-3304     | Bitnet  : yoshikami@usuhsb.bitnet
***  !!xob X*NU V METSYS T&TA eht ni renosirp dleh gnieb m`I  !pleH  !pleH  ***
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: misc.writing