The Rules of Fiction: What They Are and What They’re Not

Before I get to today’s post on the rules of fiction…

I have to acknowledge the terrible tragedy of the fires in LA this past week. My heart breaks a little more each day. There are so many people affected by this who have impacted my own life in ways large and small. The scale and the effect of what is happening to them and to so many others is beyond words.

If you are one of those who have been affected or whose family or loved ones have been affected, please know that my heart’s prayers are with you right now.

For anyone looking for ways to help, I will share that the charity I chose to donate to was All Hands and Hearts.

And now back to writing—because storytelling is never a frivolous pursuit in times like these. The stories we tell matter. They tell us who we are, how we will face our darkest tragedies, and who we will become as we rise from the ashes.

Before we get to today’s post/podcast, I’m linking to a few pertinent posts from the archives as a reminder of hope and purpose in this moment:

***

Writers tend to have a lot of questions about the rules of fiction—those elusive guidelines that shape our narratives and mold our creative endeavors. Are these rules rigid dictates that threaten creative autonomy? Or do they serve as an underlying structure, providing frameworks that nurture and enhance storytelling prowess? The answers are found in digging down to the true essence of fiction rules—exploring what they are, what they decidedly are not, and to what degree we should adhere to them in crafting stories that work.

Even just a cursory search into the rules of fiction brings up a dizzying array of opinions. Although many studious articles promise to share “the rules of fiction,” many titles are dismissive. As I scrolled through the results, I found a post I had written many years ago, the title of which fit right in: “Writing Rules? We Don’t Need No Rules!

Is this really true? Most articles with titles like these will tell you why art cannot be contained by rules—and then tell you why you should follow the rules after all. This reflects the mixed relationship most writers, particularly those just starting out, have with the rules. Sometimes I get a comment or an email from writers declaring their creative genius is too great to be bound by convention and the rules are just for stupid hacks (notably, these emails often suffer from missing capitalization and punctuation). Other times, I hear from studious new writers who are consumed with worry about learning how to do absolutely everything by the rules.

Obviously, both approaches are extremes. The true value—and caution—of the rules lies somewhere in between.

Can Creativity Follow Rules of Fiction?

So do writers have to follow “the rules”? Depends entirely on how you define rules.

Much of the debate about the value of the rules of fiction comes down to definition. The very idea that something as inherently innovative and chaotic as creativity can or should be contained by rules often has writers panicking and rioting. For many writers, the discovery that there is such a thing as “rules of fiction” creates a feeling of claustrophobia. After all, much of the joy of writing is its pure freedom. Indeed, many people who might have been writers got scared off early on by such mind-numbing school exercises as the dreaded Roman numeral outline.

The word “rules” inevitably triggers our superego’s notion of a stern authoritarian (and perhaps even tyrannical) figure telling us what we are and are not allowed to do and threatening consequences if we don’t fall into line. Not exactly the stuff of inspiration, much less fun.

And creativity needs fun in order to thrive. It needs that attitude of play, of childlike curiosity and wonder. The idea of “rules” can seem antithetical to that.

However, if you stop to think about it, the idea that fiction—or any other art form—can exist without structure is clearly untrue. Even just at the level of spelling and grammar, agreed-upon conventions are necessary to foster communication. At root, that’s really all “the rules” are—conventions recognized for their efficacy in communicating within a common language.

As with any system, balance is necessary. We need a little dose of the newness of Chaos, but we also need Order. We need a liberality that embraces the evolution of innovation, but we also need the conservatism of the old guard passing down the literary legacy. We need Creativity, but we also need Logic. We need freedom, but we also need structure. The former is impossible to sustain without the latter.

The trouble comes either when writers want to throw all the rules out the window in the belief they need to reinvent the form—or when writers feel pressure to conform for the sake of conformity. Really, the whole trouble is that when we speak about the rules of fiction, we’re really not talking about rules at all. We’re not even, as the pirates would have it, talking about guidelines. We’re talking about deeper truths of both the art form and its reflection of reality. Coming to an understanding of what the rules really are can help all writers deepen their comprehension of the art form and their ability to create freely within it.

Today, let’s take a quick overview of what the rules of fiction are and are not.

What the Rules of Fiction Are Not

Guidelines From Some Grim Writer in the Sky

Let’s examine the most fundamental misconception first. The word “rules” tends to bring with it the subconscious idea that someone “out there” must be reinforcing those rules. Sometimes we might assume this is the gatekeepers—agents and editors—but the underlying belief is that the “right way” to create fiction was handed down to us from on high like some literary version of the Ten Commandments. Break the rules, and a lightning bolt is sure to strike your poor little novel and shrivel it into ash.

This belief can also evoke a feeling of resentment and jealousy in unpublished authors who can point out so many successful novels that clearly did not follow the rules. But although certain conventions and archetypes certainly do exist (as we’ll explore in a minute), the idea that they have been passed down by any foundational authority is simply untrue.

Peer-Enforced, Fiddly Little Dictates

Writers may also sometimes sense that the rules will be enforced from the outside-in by peers. After all, everybody’s got an opinion about how to write a book. Especially in the beginning, most new writers will tout “the rules” to fellow writers, insisting on mutual observance. Often, this group accountability can be wonderfully helpful and educative. But writers must recognize that just because someone in their writing group or “everyone” online seems to be touting an unbreakable rule doesn’t mean they a) know what they’re talking about any more than you do or b) have any authority whatsoever over your choices for your story.

Immutable

All writers can breathe a sigh of relief now. Writing rules are not immutable. As such, they clearly aren’t even “rules.” They can be broken. They will be broken. And thank God for that. Creativity demands experimentation and innovation. As my pal Ian Malcolm always says, “Life will find a way.” Any system that errs too heavily toward control (order, logic, etc.) will become tyrannical and destroy itself. This doesn’t belittle the vital importance of Order, but we must remember that its entire function is to recognize and foster the fruits of Creativity.

Arbitrary

With the above in mind, it is equally important to acknowledge that the rules of fiction are not arbitrary. They exist for good reasons, ones that contribute to the deep truths of the art form and of communication. Tongue in cheek, we often say that if there is one rule of writing, it is simply, “Know the rules before you break them.” What this speaks to is the necessity of understanding the deeper meaning upon which any seemingly arbitrary rule is founded. Once you understand that, you can determine whether breaking it is truly the most functional choice for your story.

Genre Tropes

Writers often confuse general rules of fiction with genre tropes. Although genre conventions do guide how particular types of stories are written as a sort of mutual contract between writer and reader, they are not rules. Genre offers archetypal guidelines for how to tell different stories of the human experience (as brilliantly explored in John Truby’s recent book Anatomy of Genres), but despite what newbie writers sometimes think, the individual tropes (e.g., romance‘s “enemies to lovers” or fantasy‘s “chosen one” or mystery‘s “incompetent police”) are not rules and do not have to be followed as such.

Life or Death

THE RULES. They just sound so… serious. So many of us take the rules very seriously (to the point sometimes of a cultural trauma response). Mess up the rules and you’re doomed. Not only will no one ever publish you or read you or take you seriously as a writer, but, actually, this is just proof you’re a horrible person under it all.

Really, I think this is why so many writers experience knee-jerk hatred toward the idea of rules for art. And it just ain’t so. This is the voice of the toxic inner critic, one many writers confront. The toxicity of this voice doesn’t mean “the rules” themselves are toxic, but recognize if this is how you’re interacting with them, so you can move into a more balanced and generative perspective.

What the Rules of Fiction Are

So far, we’ve basically established the rules of fiction are not rules. And yet, it seems they should still generally be observed? Let’s examine what the rules of fiction really are.

Theory

At root, the rules of fiction are simply theory—story theory. They are the collective and emergent theories writers and readers have collected over the past couple millennia about “what makes a good story.” Because of the profound body of work available to us all to study—and because we learn story through osmosis even when we’re not consciously studying—this huge context means these theories are now highly evolved.

However, they’re still theories, and they are still evolving. With every new story added to the larger context, the information that creates these theories increases, allowing for infinite revision and refinement. Nevertheless, at any given point, they offer a tremendous amount of information about our predecessors’ trial and error. From that, we can continuously extrapolate what seems most effective in communicating with readers.

Patterns

Structuring Your Novel IPPY Award 165

Structuring Your Novel (Amazon affiliate link)

At the root of theory is pattern recognition. Story theory is entirely based on examining the patterns that emerge from the large body of recorded storytelling. When we can examine thousands of years of story and recognize that certain plot beats are found consistently all the way back to Homer, we can confidently extrapolate that this is a pattern that has stood the test of time. From there, as story theorists, we get to explore why these patterns of plot structure are so enduring—and why we might do well to apply them in our own stories.

Archetypal Truths

Which came first: the Archetype or the Truth? Certainly, arguments can be made that the patterns of story point straight to the immutable truths of the human experience. But at the least, the patterns themselves have given rise to archetypes that have become truth, or at least representative of truth. As such, most of the rules of fiction point to deeper principles than simply effective communication. Everything from the underlying structure of character arc and theme to dictums such as “write what you know” and “leave out the parts readers tend to skip” point to deeper psychological reasons than may be immediately evident.

Functional Forms

Why follow the rules of fiction? The most convincing argument is simply “because they work.” If you want to write a good book, get published, and sell lots of copies, your best bet is to base that book upon the functional forms represented by the rules. This doesn’t mean you have to (or should) follow every rule (and certainly, as I hope is clear by this point, not slavishly). It also doesn’t mean that any bestseller that broke some obvious rule is somehow proof that all rules are bogus. But start with the rules of spelling, punctuation, and grammar, then work your way up to the rules of dialogue, POV, and narrative, and round out your journey with the rules of plot, character, and theme. Congrats. You’ve just created a functional storyform.

Logic, Functioning as the Handmaiden of Creativity

Because of the false paradox that is often created between Logic and Creativity, writers may balk at the rules of fiction simply because they are logical. The very fact they are based on emergent patterns means they are a recognition of the logic inherent in story. More than that, we are then able to move beyond simply perceiving the patterns to proactively using logic to extrapolate and hypothesize about them. Much of this is in service to simply understanding the patterns/rules. But it is also in service to further innovation, aka creativity. If you understand the rules (the patterns) of good fiction, you have the possibility of getting ahead of the curve by creating the next big innovation in the cycle.

As ever, the caveat here is that Logic and Creativity must exist in balance on their two opposite ends of the polarity. The whole system falls apart if writers overvalue the “logic” of the rules (in fact, this overvaluation is actually illogical). Equally, however, a rejection of the importance of logic is also destructive. At its simplest, to reject logic in storytelling is to reject a true aid. An understanding of the logic of story and the rules of fiction can only help you wrangle all that wild creativity. When you understand story theory and the rules of fiction, you have the opportunity to unburden your creativity and let it fly free with far more confidence and safety.

A Contract Between Writer and Reader

Finally, the rules of fiction can be seen as a contract between writer and reader. Readers (and viewers) enter your story as an act of faith. They are opening their minds and their hearts to you, not to mention committing money and time. As such, they are entitled to expect a good experience. Whether or not that experience is good will depend in no small part upon how well the writer understands the rules of the game.

Note, however, I didn’t say how well the writer follows the rules. You can dot all your i’s and cross all your t’s without having a clue what you’re doing or why. But from the reservoirs of a deeper understanding of the principles that underlie the rules of fiction, you will create an experience that both holds and challenges readers in all the best ways.

***

The debate over the rules of fiction unfolds because writers grapple with whether the rules are stifling constraints or foundational structures. The varied relationships writers have with these rules, from outright defiance to rigid adherence, underscores the need for balance. In essence, the rules of fiction offer a stalwart harmony between creativity and structure, enhancing story by respecting the principles of effective communication.

Wordplayers, tell me your opinions! How do you approach the rules of fiction in your writing? Tell me in the comments!

Click the “Play” button to Listen to Audio Version (or subscribe to the Helping Writers Become Authors podcast in Apple Podcast, Amazon Music, or Spotify).

___

Love Helping Writers Become Authors? You can now become a patron. (Huge thanks to those of you who are already part of my Patreon family!)

Sign Up Today

hwba sidebar pic

Sign up to receive K.M. Weiland’s e-letter and receive her free e-book Crafting Unforgettable Characters: A Hands-On Introduction to Bringing Your Characters to Life.

About K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland

K.M. Weiland is the award-winning and internationally-published author of the acclaimed writing guides Outlining Your Novel, Structuring Your Novel, and Creating Character Arcs. A native of western Nebraska, she writes historical and fantasy novels and mentors authors on her award-winning website Helping Writers Become Authors.

Comments

  1. This is helpful. I constantly see writers saying how important plotting is. I’m not a plotter, although I do appreciate the value of the inciting incidents, plot points etc, and the character arc. When I’ve finished my first draft, I then ‘plot’ it.
    The plotters seem to do far more posting of the value, or even necessity of their way than the pantsers, thus reinforcing the idea that plotting is a ‘rule’.
    I am glad to see that you say that the so-called ‘rules’ are more like convention or guidance.
    Except for punctuation and grammar, that is. The ‘rules’ of that are for clarity and are important, in my opinion. You don’t hear people complaining about good grammar, but you do about poor, and this can impact reviews and sales.

    • K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

      I think plotters learn as much from pantsers (their stories) as anything. It’s just that, by nature, plotting is easier to codify and explain. In fact, plotting is, largely, pantsing that has been recognized and explained as a logical process.

  2. This all boils down to the fact that writing is both an art and a craft. Copying your paragraph from above:

    We need a little dose of the newness of Chaos [ART], but we also need Order [CRAFT]. We need a liberality that embraces the evolution of innovation [ART], but we also need the conservatism of the old guard passing down the literary legacy [CRAFT]. We need Creativity [ART], but we also need Logic [CRAFT]. We need freedom [ART], but we also need structure [CRAFT]. The former is impossible to sustain without the latter.

  3. “Rules” is an awkward word for them, because writing is more like using scientific principles than following laws.
    Laws and other “rules” we think of are cut-off points to limit the consequences: “You probably won’t crash if you drive faster than 65 mph, but we’ll all be better if nobody tries it.”
    Science works out the principles of momentum, reaction time, and other ways driving faster raises the risks, and what you can do about it. It predicts the consequences instead of forbidding them.
    And writing is a science, in that sense — you don’t *have* to show the villain’s motivation, give everyone a viewpoint or give it to only one character, use or avoid flashbacks, have a protagonist change over time, or any other decision you might make. The writing “rules” are simply science-like observations that making one choice or another will have consequences, and they point to how a story might manage those. The writer can handle it one way or another, but the observations are out there to consider.
    In science, these “rules” are how we get from “everything falls down” to building an airplane. In art, Picasso said it best: “Learn the rules like a professional, so you can break them like an artist.”

    • K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

      I agree. I think a lot of the resistance and confusion about “rules” is due simply to that word.

  4. I find having some writing rules to follow is incredibly helpful. If I sit down with the thought that I can write about absolutely anything and my story can go in any direction, the endless choices can be overwhelming. It’s a bit like using a writing prompt or a hashtag game. If I know I have to include the word “inconceivable,” then it’s easier to get going. My brain treats it like a fun puzzle to solve instead of an endless list of options to worry about.

  5. Peter Moore says

    I love your continued insistence that rules serve as a foundation rather than a prison for the stories we strive to move from our minds to the page. One point struck me was the scale you pointed out with logic on one end balanced by creativity on the other. I tend to think of those concepts as logically creative. Feel free to write about dogs sprouting wings to cavort with birds. But you’ll lose your readers, not to mention editors and agents, if it springs out of thin air.

    What do you think? Am I on the right track or have I taken a left turn into oncoming traffic on a one way street?

    • K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

      Successful storytelling is largely about managing (and creating) reader expectations. Readers will follow you just about anywhere, as long as they feel like you know where you’re going and will play fair.

  6. Victoria C Leo says

    I just re-read your earlier post on Hope, just after doing a major rewrite of my first novel. In my SciFi series, my understanding of some of the alien species as well as the tech and the secondary characters evolved over time, got deeper/better. As I worked on it, I could see very clearly how spending two years reading and working through your books on plot made my ideas WORK. My first novel got mostly 5 stars on Amazon despite some stretches of groaner prose because I got the characters, the theme and the plot right. And the latter two elements are 100% Katie-education. Those two years were hard work, retraining my Gemini/INFJ tendencies to leap on my horse and go galloping off in all directions at once. The first novel was really hard work, constantly referring back to the structure – and throwing things out, going back to the last place where the plot worked and Lewis-and-Clarking my way forward again.

    By novel 4, I put all my notes away because the plot beats and basic what-the-human-brain-NEEDS was so part of my unconscious, I had a new inner pilot that no longer steered me into bridges, into shoals, into – disaster. I’m on #9 now and my new challenge with my new protagonist (first one’s sister) is her propensity for family challenges vs. derring-do. But the plot beats are still there, even in short stories.

    I was telling my Shut Up and Write group that I gave up even trying to completely plot anything, that I have solid plot points, theme and characters and then start drafting. THrow a lot out in the early chapters especially, but my creator-brain can’t figure out how to get from A to B until I’m actually on the journey. The battle to completely plot is one I gave up completely in novel 5. My process isnt plotter like real plotters because I have to be in the ‘battle’ before the really cool scenes and secondary plots and how to get A-B emerges. And it seems like pantser to the pure-pantsers (because the only story that works is one with those plot beats our reader-brains need). And the dichotomy is nonsense to me, now.

    Getting back to Hope, well, one of my readers told me last week that she keeps reading because no matter how dark the days my protagonists face, the story ends in hope.

    Katie, thank you is a pale version of the true debt, but thank you plus buying all your books is what I have. THANK YOU for this wonderful gift you gave me, so I can pass it on to others through good stories.

    • K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

      That’s so lovely to hear, Victoria! Very happy for you and very honored to have gotten to share any small part of your journey with you!

      • Hans Dietrich says

        I’ve just read your post and found it very interesting, just don’t know what to do with it. Rules, yes I understand the basics, punctuation and all that, i before e except after c or 🙂 Weiland. But as a non English major, it’s all very interesting, BUT so what? I started writing after an ‘if you think you can do better’ from my wife, I started my first. Now 12 books in, my sister-in-law asked “who are you writing for?” Duh! Me of course. What genre? My questions was, ‘what is genre?’ I had to look it up in a dictionary and I decided Adventure/Action. Big deal! It is not listed on Amazon top 10. Guess if I’m going to sell I will have to try very hard, but then I’m lucky as I am writing for myself. You mention ‘plotting’ I find that didn’t help me much as it’s all in my head, I am the main character so I see where I’m going. I have trouble with what is an ‘arc’ or why I need a theme or tropes? Perhaps I am using them without knowing? I do enjoy reading what writers think and try to pick points I ‘think’ I can use but I probably forget as I scribble away. Cheers.

  7. Usvaldo De Leon says

    Thoughtful as ever, but I couldn’t help but notice you haven’t updated your Writers Digest badge for 2024. You are once again on there; I checked. https://www.writersdigest.com/be-inspired/writers-digest-best-writing-advice-websites-for-writers-2024
    In any discussion of the rules I think of serial and repeated transgressor Pablo Piscasso. What people don’t know (or perhaps forget) is that he had a 10 year career of “normalcy” before he went wild.

    • K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

      You’re right! I shall update that.

      “He had a 10 year career of “normalcy” before he went wild.”

      Something about that phrasing particularly strikes me. I like “normal” art; I like artists in their “normal” period. But I do think it is potentially just the foundation for latent wild genius.

  8. Writers, Rules and Guidelines
    From my perspective, you should know ‘the rules’, but once you’ve got the map down, you use the rules as guidelines, not limitations.
    Know the tropes not to avoid them, but to tweak them, use breaking the rules to illuminate your character and narrative.
    Just as with tropes. Learn to recognize the clichés so you can bend them and shape them into something unique, and they become more distinct and less cliché.

    • K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

      I agree. Knowing the rules doesn’t mean the next step is automatically to break them. But knowing them is foundational to an understanding of how the rules serve the art, rather than the art simply serving the rules.

    • Lew Kaye-Skinner says

      Walker, your note here reminds me of trying to use a literal map to get to a literal place. At first, you don’t need to know that there are alternative routes; you need to know where to turn and where to go straight.

  9. Lew Kaye-Skinner says

    For decades, I have been writing stories, but it wasn’t until I began exploring story theory relatively recently that I turned out much that was worth sharing. That earlier work wasn’t wasted effort, though. It helped me refine my personal skill set so that I can be truly creative. Indulge me for a moment, please.
    READER: That isn’t a complete sentence!
    ME: Ah, you noticed.
    READER: But you’re breaking the rules of good grammar.
    ME: Granted. Have you figured out why?
    READER: Why? You dunder-pated idiot! Go back to kindergarten!
    ME: Actually, I didn’t attend kindergarten. Sometimes my choices to subvert the rules serve as a means to self-select my audience. You might be happier reading a different writer.

  10. I tend to think of the rules of fiction as a map or a GPS. 99% percent of the time you want to follow the route the GPS chooses if you want to get where you want to go. But at other times it’s okay to veer off the beaten path and try a different route. If it doesn’t work out, you can always go back to the original directions. So most of the time I follow the rules, but sometimes I allow myself to try something new or instead obey the spirit of the rule.

  11. Phew, this is probably the best breakdown of ‘Rules’ I’ve read!! I find my perspective on rules changes and evolves all the time (kinda like rules) Writing I think being a relatively technical craft tends to have more, or maybe a wider range of rules. I think knowing as much as possible about the “why” of any rule goes a long way.

    • K.M. Weiland | @KMWeiland says

      My brain needs context to understand anything, so I find “why?” to be one of most powerful questions I can ask. If I understand the bigger picture, I’m able to make better decisions about the details.

  12. This really makes the “rules” less daunting! It’s funny how you said they weren’t so much rules, but more like guidelines. I like that. As a pantser, I find it challenging to plot my books. I’ve really enjoyed reading your posts about story theory, and it’s really helped my writing. By internalizing the rules, I find that I naturally write better books. Plotting, for example, used to scare the creativity out of me. But if I plot just enough to be familiar with the story, I can write the book with pretty accurate plot points. Of course, I have to frequently refresh myself on what the points are, but I don’t feel confined to a strict system this way. Now that I think about it, writing is such a crazy, chaotic art form that we need structure and guidelines to make our results make any sense.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.