Because I am the expert and I am sharing my hard-earned wisdom đ Youâre welcome!
#1 Daydream!!! This is a great one, because you can literally spend hours doing this without achieving anything (and yet you will feel creative and emotionally fulfilled⌠in your head at least. Donât skip this step- it is essential so that you can hit your procrastination goals!!
#2 ALL THE RESEARCH- especially if it is irrelevant to the book at hand. For instance, are you writing a thriller set in Wales- then itâs the perfect time to look up the weather in Zimbabwe! Or are you writing a historical novel about Maoist China- time to look up the most popular cheeses in the world! Because why not? There is a subreddit for everything and someone has got to read them- it could be you!!
#3 Listen to inspirational music. This will put you in the mood of writing⌠even if you donât actually pick up a pen. At least you got in the right mood!
#4 Watch ALL the Youtube advice videos- particularly samey ones on the same topic. I know I love hearing the same advice over and over (and never following it). I also find they can be really helpful at psyching yourself out of even trying.
#5 Put on the TV to drown out your thoughts (and impending existential crisis).
#6 Call all your family and friends and acquaintances to tell them you have a great new idea for a book- because nothing kills time better than talking about something rather than doing it.
#7 Find all your old stories and stare at them until they dance off the page (no, youâre not going crazy, you are coming up with ways to make them better- I promise⌠though maybe you should see someone at this point).
#8 Make notes on all the things you need to be doing- you can even write this in your planner if youâre feeling extra conscientiously unconscientious. Donât worry if this feels dangerously close to doing some work- you will methodically ignore this plan day by day- just make sure you put your plan somewhere prominent so that it can haunt you for all eternity.
#9 Write pointless blog posts (masquerading as humour) that give bad advice no one really needs⌠like this one!
And thatâs all I have for today! Itâs surprisingly easy to procrastinate and get nothing done- you can do it too if you put your mind to it! And if youâd like to share more stellar advice on how to make no progress, feel free to leave it in the comments! We could all use the help!
Books are not art- theyâre purely commercial. This is the piece of advice Iâve seen more of lately and it cuts right through my soul. Donât get me wrong, there is a commercial aspect to every art form. And my saying books are art doesnât mean writing canât be improved or criticised or anything like that. But wow. I dare say if you actually believe this, youâre in the writing game for the wrong reasons. Feel free to spare the world whatever cash grab fic youâve been writing on your phone and are hoping to foist on us unsuspecting readers- PLEASE! On that topicâŚ
If you want to be a writer, write erotica because it sells– this is the only piece of advice on this list Iâve ever personally received (more than once!) and I had to include it because itâs the worst advice in the world. And also, itâs hilarious. No shade at erotica writers, you do you, but do it cos you actually want to, not cos you think youâre gonna make bank.
Write what you know– which, hello, fantasy writers canât exactly do- unless you happen to know a dragon personally, in which case Iâm very jealous, can you introduce me? đ The other problem is that stories shouldnât just be purely autobiographical, as 
You need to toughen up to be a writer– generally speaking, I think itâs a good idea to toughen up and grow a spine. But⌠the problem I have with this advice is that you kinda need to be sensitive to be an artist. So, my version of this tough love advice would be to say: donât be so tough that you canât write something emotionally compelling. Similarly, I disagree with…
It’s not possible to be the next *insert genius writer here* and no one can write like *insert famous writer here*. Okay, I agree in the sense that you should never be so derivative that you sound like another writer. HOWEVER, you never know who could be the next famous/genius writer in their own right. I mean, genius writers are evidence of this đ Iâve said this before, but I truly believe thereâs real talent out there, striving for greatness. The implication here is you shouldnât even bother to try. My thought is that itâs awful to put people like that off (even if we do have to deal with a bunch of pretentious wannabes searching for them đ)
Writing is hard– well Iâm actually being cheeky with this one because I actually agree in the sense that it is definitely work. BUT every time I hear it I half-nod, half-shake my head, cos I feel like this one should come with a disclaimer (hey, I did say this list would be more nitpicky!). Truth is, there are days when it feels like all the gears are grinding and still nothingâs moving forward, yet there are other days when the words are gliding and new worlds are spinning on the page and I swear thereâs no closer feeling to flying. Nothing compares to being in that zone. Granted itâs the soaring joy of Icarus- but Iâll take it, if only for a moment. So yeah, I would just rephrase this to writing is work, yet itâs the best kind of work, because no other work can give you superpowers! đ
Writing is competitive– now, this is something that could be more of a personality thing, so no judgement if youâre motivated by competition. That said, logically speaking, itâs hard to make this into a competitive sport. As much as traditionally published authors are subject to the whims of the market, for example, the fact is thereâs always room for good writing and good ideas. Someone else getting published doesnât mean you wonât be. Each writer is running to their own finish line- independent of everyone else. And I know some people will point out that you can be beaten to an idea, but *whispers*Â all ideas have been done before anyway, so that race is kinda run. The uniqueness you bring is usually in the telling.
Write in order that one day you wonât have to write so much– kinda coming full circle, but this attitude seems to come back to the people who are in it for the BIG PAYOUT (I feel like there are better fields than this for that, but whatever, some people really believe publishing is a giant money tree). Iâm gonna be real, I donât write to relax. Thatâs never been the point of it for me. And I feel like even if your ambition is to be a full-time writer, the whole point of that isnât so that you get time off⌠itâs actually about aspiring to write MORE. So, yeah, if you have visions of chilling out by the pool with famous authors (as Matthew Wright wrote in a 
Unreliable narrators are those that canât (or wonât) tell story objectively. The term is a relatively new one, as it was coined by Booth in 1961, however the use of such a character actually extends back to the dawn of Western literature. The lord of lies himself, Odysseus, is a great example of a character whose overinflated ego causes him to exaggerate and expand upon his exploits. Little character flaws can be used to manipulate the narrative and distance the reader from the truth of the tale.
Since the evolution of the term, much work has been done in the literary criticism world to explore this technique. This is why unreliable narration works so well. Types of unreliable narrators have been classified by the likes of William Riggan ie in his work: PĂcaros, madmen, naĂŻfs, and clowns (Picaros = boasters, naifs = immature narratures). One way I like to divide it up is into the fault of the narrator and the narrator merely being a victim of circumstance. If we look at a book like Gone Girl, we have two unreliable narrators creating a toxic environment for themselves and consequently causing the drama in their lives (which becomes the plot). On the other end of the spectrum, there are narrators like Pi in The Life of Pi, who, through no fault of their own, experience a severely traumatic event and slant the narrative through that perspective.
Now, for the most part, this centres on first person narration- though there are rare occasions when it could be used for second or third person. The best example of a second person narration where the story is told through an unreliable lens is Stolen, where the narrator addresses her kidnapper and itâs increasingly clear has some form of Stockholm syndrome. Otherwise, unreliable narrators can incorporate some second person to break the fourth wall, such as in Notes from the Underground. Unreliable third person narration is a little trickier to pull off- because the author really has to pull a fast one on their readership. 
This would be something like a twist akin to a Sixth Sense where spoiler alert Bruce Willisâ character is a ghost all along. I rarely see this sort of thing in books, but one example Iâve seen lately was in Safe Haven where, again spoiler alert, her friend was a ghost all along. This part of the book didnât actually work so well for me, because frankly it felt like too much of a curveball. Yet arguably books like A Monster Calls, though more ambiguous in whether they’re unreliable or not, could be a more positive example of how third person unreliable narration in action.
Most obviously, unreliable narration is perfect for creating bold plot twists. Thereâs a reason why itâs very popular in thrillers, for example. A favourite of mine will always be Engleby (a book thatâs seriously underrated nowadays) where the clever characterisation of the main character drives the story forward.
Of course, one of the best things about unreliable narration is its power to create amazing characters. And not just the psychos of storyville, like Humbert Humbert. As previously mentioned, boasters also make up a huge number of unreliable narrators. Perfect for this time of year, Iâd suggest the very atmospheric Name of the Wind. Kvothe, in my opinion, seems to warp some of the narrative to appear larger than life. Strong characterisation, in turn, is a powerful way to create voice.
It can also be used to create another dimension to the story. This is exemplified in Woman in the Window, where itâs evident from the start that the main character has secrets and is slowly revealed through her backstory. We then come to see how parts of the narration were unreliable.
Structurally, this also creates other sides to the story. Books with unreliable narration can often incorporate flashbacks for instance. Or unreliable clues might be given through suspicious characters in the story- such as Mrs Danvers in Rebecca. This can create a fantastic Russian Doll effect of hiding clues within the story. Which leads me onto my main proâŚ
It turns the reader into a detective. It can be brilliant fun trying to figure out where the truth lies and piecing together that oh, hang on a minute, this narrator has been taking me for a ride. Dodgy actions (it dawning on the reader that a character that commits murder isnât to be trusted), unclear accounts (whatâs not included can be a massive hint that somethingâs up) and the reactions of other characters can all help us figure this out (critic Nunning also explores the signs of unreliable narration in more depth). We can also find ourselves to be victims of a savagely dishonest narrator- which lends to a scary feel- such as in Confessions of a Justified Sinner or even Yellow Wallpaper. Yet, whatâs great about both of those, is that we canât be sure that in either of those everything weâve been told was untrue. Which brings me to the fact thatâŚ
Unreliable narrators can create a sense of ambiguity. A lot of the time, we may be left wondering if they were reliable at all, and if they were, how unreliable were they? This can lead to a great deal of uncertainty- which lends to an uncanny feel and can be an excellent way to create mood. The Turn of the Screw is one of the best examples of this technique in action- we never get an answer to whether the book is supernatural or not. Being on uneven ground can be one of the most potent devices for scary stories. Nonetheless, there are some drawbacks to this.
On the flipside, placing the reader on unsure footing can put some readers off. Some people might want clear answers and be dissatisfied if the story is left open-ended. And while it can make some standout characters, it can also make for some truly detestable mcs, like Briony in Atonement. Naturally, unreliable narrators donât belong in every story or genre- readers might dislike being taken advantage of by a peculiar twist. In fact, if it does feel out of place, it can feel cheap.
âFairy-tale city. From the air, red rooftops hug a kink in a dark river, and by night the forested hills appear as spans of black nothing against the dazzle of the lit castle, the spiking Gothic towers, the domes great and small. The river captures all the lights and teases them out, long and wavering, and the side-slashing rain blurs it all to a dreamâ
Austen: âThe anxiety, which in this state of their attachment must be the portion of Henry and Catherine, and of all who loved either, as to its final event, can hardly extend, I fear, to the bosom of my readers, who will see in the tell-tale compression of the pages before them, that we are all hastening together to perfect felicityâ- this is used for humour at the end of Northanger Abbey  and shows self-awareness of the novelâs construct, poking fun at the fact that you can expect a happy ending and actually breaking the fourth wall to tell the reader this.
Charlotte Bronte: âReader I married himâ- I mean, do I even have to tell you why this is good? Itâs a statement as romantic and striking as âI love youâ- thereâs no need to leave it up to ambiguity, especially after all the torment that has gone before.
Steinbeck: âI believe there are monsters born in the world to human parents. Some you can see, misshapen and horrible, with huge heads or tiny bodies. . . . And just as there are physical monsters, can there not be mental or psychic monsters born? The face and body may be perfect, but if a twisted gene or a malformed egg can produce physical monsters, may not the same process produce a malformed soul?â- Steinbeck, in my opinion, is one of the masters of authorial intrusion. This moment is the introduction of his villain Cathy in East of Eden and provides a brilliantly stark moment of characterisation and ruminates over what it means. The authorâs own struggle to find common ground with this character and actually by confessing this confusion shows the reader just how bad she is.
the orang-utan librarian 