Dissection
Some writers read with a dissecting approach. They say they learn what works this way, what they like and how to do it in their stories. The only way I can read like that is if I have an assignment. And I rarely have anything assigned to me anymore. For awhile after the “rules of writing” kept blasting across the blogosphere, I “observed” some of them in operation in published novels. I also contended that novels religiously observing said rules became formulaic and dispassionate. In other words: boring.
Some of the no-nos in the “rules” don’t ring true for me. I don’t comply because they bring me no reading pleasure. Others work well but not in tedium. I’m convinced that those writers who mix it up once in awhile within their own styles and voices appeal to me more than those who follow a set method or consistently stick to the so-called rules of writing.
I overcame the observance of the rules when reading, but it’s easy to tell when a writer “lives” by them. It’s also easy to tell when a writer isn’t bound to them. Freedom is a wonderful thing when it’s obvious the writer has opted out of the rules by choice and not out of ignorance.
So how do you read?
Father, you designed us, giving us our talents and giftings. The variety in your world and your people can’t be calculated by the human mind. You surpass all expectation in creation. Help me to follow the designed path you’ve made for me. In the Name of Jesus, Amen.
Into the Fire 
Leave a comment