Another workshop I attended at RWA was called Breaking Rules to Break In or Break Out.

Hop around the blogosphere (including this very blog) or flip through the writing craft books at your local bookstore and you'll be hit with what? A whole lot of rules.

Don't use adverbs, don't open with weather, make sure your hero and heroine meet on page one (romance), don't kill off a beloved character because readers will hate you, etc. All the advice is often overwhelming and at times, contradictory (as we demonstrated on Monday with the debate of whether are not to list your genre at the top or bottom of a query letter.)

But we're all so focused on getting published that we want to follow every rule to make sure we give no one a reason to reject us. However, what that can result in is perfectly correct, lifeless prose.

The editor on the panel said that she often judges contests where the person hits all the right points on the scoresheet/checklist and gets a high score, but the story has no life, no magic. Writing is not paint-by-numbers and when it becomes that, readers can tell.

However, having said that, when you break the rules, you need to do so consciously (hence the blog title). Know the rules before you break them and know WHY you are breaking them. If you ignore all the rules willy-nilly and send in something that's full of passive verbs, long chunks of flowery descriptions, and replaces every s with a z like the LOL cats, you'll probably get rejected. Rules are there for a reason. But when done right, rule-breaking can be spectacular and make your book stand out.

I remember when I first picked up Perfect Chemistry by Simone Elkeles, I was like--oh wait, alternating first person POVs? This is going to drive me crazy. (I think I was still scarred from that technique in New Moon.) But it worked so well and turned out to be a terrific book--not to mention it just won the RITA award at RWAs for best young adult romance of 2010.

So don't be afraid to do something that's considered rebellious. My little acts of rebellion so far: I've been told that writing about rockstars is a no-no, especially if you're writing a Harlequin, because rockstars have those notorious lifestyles and a stigma attached. But I love rock music and think rockstars are swoon-worthy, so I wrote it anyway. Now, Harlequin hasn't given me an answer on my full yet, but Wanderlust has won first place in two contest so far, so hopefully the risk was worth it.

Then, in this latest manuscript, I took a bigger risk. I wrote a dual-timeline story. Each chapter alternates from present to ten years ago, basically two story arcs that eventually merge. Admittedly, I tried NOT to take this risk because it made me nervous. But you know, some stories just demand to be written a certain way and this one refused to give in. So I did it. Now, I'm not the first to do this, but I can only think of two other recent novels that have done this Megan Hart's Deeper and Private Arrangements by Sherry Thomas. So I'm praying I didn't shoot myself in the foot trying this. We'll just have to see.

So, what rules have you broken? Which books have you read that broke the rules in a totally effective way? Which rule do you hear all the time that you would like to overturn?

**Today's Theme Song**

"Rebel Yell" - Billy Idol

(player in sidebar, take a listen)

Lately, in an attempt to stretch my pantser self, I have been trying to outline my new WIP before writing it. I made it to chapter six before getting itchy and starting to write a bit, but that's okay, right? Right? Alright, so I cheated a bit, but it's progress at least. :)

So anyway, part of this process involved fleshing out the characters' backstories. Backstory is one of my favorite things to come up with. It may be because of my psychology background, but digging deep into what makes a character who he/she is fascinates me. So I'm used to having a pretty extensive backstory and accept that only about 10% will make it into the actual story.

However, this time, the backstory started to take on a life of its own. My story is going to have a major suspense/mystery thread, and I found that the crime that happened in the past ties to the crime that happens in the present. My romance thread also has story in both times because my hero and heroine had a relationship ten years before and now are thrown back together in the present. SO, I started to get this urge to write a story with a dual time line.

This means I would have "two nows" as author Charlotte Rains describes it. I would have chapters take place in the year 2000 and then chapters that happen in the present. All would be told in real time--meaning, the past chapters would not have that hindsight perspective coloring it.

I've read a few books that use this structure, including Deeper by Megan Hart, which I reviewed a while back, and I've enjoyed the style. However, I have to say I'm a bit intimidated by it. I'd basically have to have two complete stories that eventually weave together.

Each storyline has a distinct narrative arc, with its own conflicts, disasters, and troubles for the characters, and its own forward movement and mounting action.--Charlotte Rains

That seems like a lot to keep a handle on, especially when this is my virgin attempt at suspense. But what good is being a pantser if you don't take a risk every now and again? And I kinda love the idea of writing my character as an 18-year-old and then as a 28-year-old because I can play with the voice a bit. So, as of right now, I'm going to give it a shot and see how it goes.

But I wanted to ask you guys. What do you think of books with dual timelines/story lines? Have you read any that used this structure? Is it distracting? Should I just suck it up and try to figure out how to slip in this vital backstory in flashbacks? Let me know your thoughts.