"Said" as a dialogue tag is better than trying to be fancy. "Said" becomes invisible to the reader, fancy words are distracting. (I recently read a book, finding myself distracted by "queried" instead of "asked".) Simpler is usually better.
I really like the phrase „Clarity with Conviction“. To me it captures perfectly the core conundrum, in that you spend paragraphs explaining the concept in detail, but this phrase conveys most of it to the prepared mind in a way that is more inspiring than a lecture.
I think the problem is that there is some kernel of truth to that rejection of „learned craft“ in that you cannot completely reduce the workings of a story to the sum of its parts. George Saunders said it best in his „Swim in a pond in the rain“ when he said that you have to „let the wisdom of the novel take over“. Some aspects of it will have to come by instinct, because they do not come from your intellect. But I think people take that as „just take your vision and make it happen without much thought“, when instead, the level of detail greatly matters. Writing is in that sense funnily enough exactly like the more physical crafts Faulkner mentions: you chip away at a text until it really becomes great.
I have some feedback, and I don't want it to come off negatively, because I see a lot of value here, and it is because of that value, that I want to include some criticisms.
You have a clear knack for weaving example into theory, illustrating your points clearly and relatively concisely for an academic purpose like this. It flows rather well from start to finish and I didn't catch myself asking if you could be trusted on this subject, though I imagine it is because of our preexisting relationship and my familiarity with your work. So, that might be something to flag for beta readers who do not know your style (heh).
Okay, feedback time:
1. We start off strong with a criticism of an idea, rather harshly I might add. Strong opinions are the cornerstone of what makes someone authoritative and credible (to those who agree with the ideas presented), but they can alienate some who are there to learn. "To hell with Faulkner" is strong, declarative, and you worm respect back in down the page, but I might consider clarifying "what" about Faulkner should go to hell earlier on.
2. Many good texts on "writing" or any other form of education, do well to clarify up front the curriculum of sorts. Right now, we're doing this toward the end and it doesn't feel structured enough to understand the what or when of learning. The pieces are there, and you're doing an excellent job of avoiding boring the reader with lists of things to learn, but in that desire to capture attention, we lose some of the logistics. In my mind as a reader it's: strong opinion, story, example, and what it all means. In that order. This is almost that.
3. More "proof." I've found that the books I've learned the most from were eager to give me definitive examples of their authors skillsets early on. You give us some GREAT info on Hemingway and McCarthy, foillowed by solid analysis. Love everything about it. We could actually use MORE of it for a first chapter. This serves more like a foreword or primer on what to expect, rather than a dive into our first real chapter.
I think the most important part of a successful non-fiction, skills dependent book like this is social proof, followed closely by skills proof. So, including testimonials, commentary on your ideas, is all very beneficial (and not related to this first chapter, I just wanted to mention it).
tl;dr:
Needs more of an outline of what the first chapter will teach, and a short paragraph on how it leads into the following chapters, and finally how those chapters crystallize into something useful.
Give us MORE for a first chapter.
Temper the strength of your opinions IF you want to apply to the widest audience. If you don't care about this, ignore it.
Closing Word:
Obviously, you're an intelligent, thoughtful guy and I'm sure you've given immense consideration to the very points I'm making here, but I include them as a reader, first and foremost. Right now, this feels more like a foreword, which can be easily remedied or clarified based on your goals for a first chapter. I'd take a minute and get some distance from it, make sure it's communicating what you need it to and then go again.
I hope I've given better context to show that my "to hell with..." is mostly tongue-in-cheek. Later on, I say the same of Hemingway, but together they are the basis for most everything I share in the book. I quote other authors, but I trace the conflict between the Faulkner and Hemingway styles as the differences in the prior generation's Herman Melville and Mark Twain. I then see those differences synthesized in the writings of Cormac McCarthy. I also eventually note how other pairings could be similarly studied, but these voices were the central literary argument of 20th-century, American literature.
This is now an expanded version of chapter one.
"Said" as a dialogue tag is better than trying to be fancy. "Said" becomes invisible to the reader, fancy words are distracting. (I recently read a book, finding myself distracted by "queried" instead of "asked".) Simpler is usually better.
I absolutely agree, he said.
I really like the phrase „Clarity with Conviction“. To me it captures perfectly the core conundrum, in that you spend paragraphs explaining the concept in detail, but this phrase conveys most of it to the prepared mind in a way that is more inspiring than a lecture.
I think the problem is that there is some kernel of truth to that rejection of „learned craft“ in that you cannot completely reduce the workings of a story to the sum of its parts. George Saunders said it best in his „Swim in a pond in the rain“ when he said that you have to „let the wisdom of the novel take over“. Some aspects of it will have to come by instinct, because they do not come from your intellect. But I think people take that as „just take your vision and make it happen without much thought“, when instead, the level of detail greatly matters. Writing is in that sense funnily enough exactly like the more physical crafts Faulkner mentions: you chip away at a text until it really becomes great.
I have some feedback, and I don't want it to come off negatively, because I see a lot of value here, and it is because of that value, that I want to include some criticisms.
You have a clear knack for weaving example into theory, illustrating your points clearly and relatively concisely for an academic purpose like this. It flows rather well from start to finish and I didn't catch myself asking if you could be trusted on this subject, though I imagine it is because of our preexisting relationship and my familiarity with your work. So, that might be something to flag for beta readers who do not know your style (heh).
Okay, feedback time:
1. We start off strong with a criticism of an idea, rather harshly I might add. Strong opinions are the cornerstone of what makes someone authoritative and credible (to those who agree with the ideas presented), but they can alienate some who are there to learn. "To hell with Faulkner" is strong, declarative, and you worm respect back in down the page, but I might consider clarifying "what" about Faulkner should go to hell earlier on.
2. Many good texts on "writing" or any other form of education, do well to clarify up front the curriculum of sorts. Right now, we're doing this toward the end and it doesn't feel structured enough to understand the what or when of learning. The pieces are there, and you're doing an excellent job of avoiding boring the reader with lists of things to learn, but in that desire to capture attention, we lose some of the logistics. In my mind as a reader it's: strong opinion, story, example, and what it all means. In that order. This is almost that.
3. More "proof." I've found that the books I've learned the most from were eager to give me definitive examples of their authors skillsets early on. You give us some GREAT info on Hemingway and McCarthy, foillowed by solid analysis. Love everything about it. We could actually use MORE of it for a first chapter. This serves more like a foreword or primer on what to expect, rather than a dive into our first real chapter.
I think the most important part of a successful non-fiction, skills dependent book like this is social proof, followed closely by skills proof. So, including testimonials, commentary on your ideas, is all very beneficial (and not related to this first chapter, I just wanted to mention it).
tl;dr:
Needs more of an outline of what the first chapter will teach, and a short paragraph on how it leads into the following chapters, and finally how those chapters crystallize into something useful.
Give us MORE for a first chapter.
Temper the strength of your opinions IF you want to apply to the widest audience. If you don't care about this, ignore it.
Closing Word:
Obviously, you're an intelligent, thoughtful guy and I'm sure you've given immense consideration to the very points I'm making here, but I include them as a reader, first and foremost. Right now, this feels more like a foreword, which can be easily remedied or clarified based on your goals for a first chapter. I'd take a minute and get some distance from it, make sure it's communicating what you need it to and then go again.
I hope I've given better context to show that my "to hell with..." is mostly tongue-in-cheek. Later on, I say the same of Hemingway, but together they are the basis for most everything I share in the book. I quote other authors, but I trace the conflict between the Faulkner and Hemingway styles as the differences in the prior generation's Herman Melville and Mark Twain. I then see those differences synthesized in the writings of Cormac McCarthy. I also eventually note how other pairings could be similarly studied, but these voices were the central literary argument of 20th-century, American literature.
Yeah, I think any potential issues are remedied and your points are clear.
Very good stuff here. I have an idea...
I made some adjustments inspired by your thoughts, and then adapted another section to be the continuation of chapter one.