Following Grammatical Rules

Here's a passage from something I'm working on:

"It's got to be a crime to be that beautiful and flirtatious," Harvey sighed.

"Oh, I'm sorry," Sam apologized, taking out his earphones. "You need help with something?"

Harvey shook his head no. "I'm just talking to myself. I'll bother you when I need to."

Sam raised an eyebrow and turned around to where Harvey was ostensibly staring. Did Sam know who?

Now, I know the last sentence should technically be "Did Sam know whom?"

But I think you would agree that the correct way just sounds terrible, and it interrupts the flow.

So I posit the question: in creative writing, when is it OK to break the rules, and when is it not?

Depends on what style of creative writing you are using. As the narrator, are you more casual when describing or more formal? How flowery are you?

whenever you want? especially when the rules are arbitrary (a la who/m) i say all the time! your story is meant to be enjoyed not pored over by grammar nazis. and even if they catch you at something they will invent a complex creative reason for it, making you out to be a genius. so ya, go for it.

At 4/12/2010 10:02:54 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
So I posit the question: in creative writing, when is it OK to break the rules, and when is it not?

whenever what you're saying makes sense.

In fact...

It's best not to learn the rules as such, but rather just as tools you can use if and when there is apparent necessity.

At 4/12/2010 10:02:54 PM, PoeJoe wrote:

"It's got to be a crime to be that beautiful and flirtatious," Harvey sighed.

"Oh, I'm sorry," Sam apologized, taking out his earphones. "You need help with something?"

Harvey shook his head no. "I'm just talking to myself. I'll bother you when I need to."

Sam raised an eyebrow and turned around to where Harvey was ostensibly staring. Did Sam know who?

Now, I know the last sentence should technically be "Did Sam know whom?"

To me, it makes no sense either way. Did Sam know who what?

In *creative* writing, there are no rules, as such.

At 4/13/2010 6:14:39 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
you can use if>,< and when>,< there is apparent necessity.

lol is that right

If you are making it a point to sound formal in your creative piece, go with "whom." If you are being casual in your creative piece, go with "who."

At 4/13/2010 7:23:38 AM, feverish wrote:
To me, it makes no sense either way. Did Sam know who what?

It's more apparent in context. Did Sam know whom Harvey was staring at?

In any case, I'm going with "who." Thanks.

I'm pretty sure certain rules can be broken in creative writing. I do it quite a bit in my writing.

At 4/13/2010 3:47:56 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I'm pretty sure certain rules can be broken in creative writing. I do it quite a bit in my writing.

certain rules can be broken all the time!!!

At 4/13/2010 4:17:31 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

At 4/13/2010 3:47:56 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I'm pretty sure certain rules can be broken in creative writing. I do it quite a bit in my writing.

certain rules can be broken all the time!!!

Apples the eat boy.

At 4/13/2010 5:30:42 PM, PoeJoe wrote:

At 4/13/2010 4:17:31 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

At 4/13/2010 3:47:56 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I'm pretty sure certain rules can be broken in creative writing. I do it quite a bit in my writing.

certain rules can be broken all the time!!!

Apples the eat boy.

luckily he didn't say all rules :P

but still given what we know about apples, boys, and eating we can still parse that sentence. it just sounds awkward as hell.

a real problem would be something like loves jill jack. who loves who?

thats why we need more cases, like in latin. would make poetry easier too!

At 4/13/2010 5:30:42 PM, PoeJoe wrote:

At 4/13/2010 4:17:31 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

At 4/13/2010 3:47:56 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I'm pretty sure certain rules can be broken in creative writing. I do it quite a bit in my writing.

certain rules can be broken all the time!!!

mmm... I did say certain rules

so long as something is clear and makes perfect sense... Grammar really doesn't matter one whit.

loves jill jack?

would prolly with proper emphasis mean: does jack love jill?

loves jill jack.

I guess would prolly be stating that jack loves jill.

on "jack and jill" I think the emphasis is really the key, so it can be tough to write... but still ok to speak... RULES CANNOT CAPTURE IT :)

loves jill.... Jack?

or loves..... Jill jack

At 4/13/2010 5:36:45 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
so long as something is clear and makes perfect sense... Grammar really doesn't matter one whit.

The fact that, and I'm assuming here you know what I mean, "mean" meaning "interpret," though, as if by paradox I'm not making sense, I'm using "mean" to define "mean," which, and, yes, I know "which" cannot be used to represent an entire idea, just an obvious, single word, is confusing, you can be confusing negates the idea that grammar doesn't matter one whit.

Parse that, motherfvcker!

At 4/13/2010 5:46:38 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
on "jack and jill" I think the emphasis is really the key, so it can be tough to write... but still ok to speak... RULES CANNOT CAPTURE IT :)

loves jill.... Jack?

or loves..... Jill jack

lol give it up. its completely ambiguous in written form. unless you want to try to signify cases with bolding or emphasis so it becomes obvious which is the subject and which is the direct object.

even if its not a question it could mean "loves jill" jack as in loving jill is something that jack does or loves jill jack as in loving jack is something that jill does.

At 4/13/2010 5:52:08 PM, PoeJoe wrote:

At 4/13/2010 5:36:45 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
so long as something is clear and makes perfect sense... Grammar really doesn't matter one whit.

The fact that, and I'm assuming here you know what I mean, "mean" meaning "interpret," though, as if by paradox I'm not making sense, I'm using "mean" to define "mean," which, and, yes, I know "which" cannot be used to represent an entire idea, just an obvious, single word, is confusing, you can be confusing negates the idea that grammar doesn't matter one whit.

Parse that, motherfvcker!

the fact that you can ignore the first half of matt's sentence and refute something he never argued doesn't mean that you've made a good point. although your twisty sentence was pleasant to read so not completely worthless.

I hold that in creative writing, as long as the meaning is understood, the grammar can go to hell.

Grammar is like any other literary device within the context of creative writing. It should only be discarded in exchange for some sort of meaning. Otherwise, the result is lazy writing. For example, in the front of one of my favorite novels, The Bluest Eye (Toni Morrison), repeats the same passage several times. Each time, she removes a piece of grammar, like punctuation or spaces between words. She did this for a reason.

However, if she'd chosen to write the entire book without punctuation just b/c "in creative writing you can do that," I would call it lazy writing. It's an excuse to stop trying. If grammar can "go to hell," we wouldn't need editors :P

The original concern, who vs. whom, is a much smaller issue. In that case, either one is just as acceptable. I don't like the phrasing in the first place (the narrative question is just weird), but with regards to who vs. whom, either one will suffice. :)