Grammar vs writing

Some of us on the Erotic Romance Writers' Forum have been having a really interesting discussion about the benefits or otherwise of sticking rigidly to formal grammar when writing creatively.

It's a fascinating topic. Obviously all writing needs a certain amount of grammar otherwise the readers simply wouldn't understand it. And I believe a writer needs to understand and use good grammar first before choosing whether or not to discard it, otherwise they won't really understand what it is they're getting wrong and why.

But after that, I'm not sure that good writing is just about enforcing the rules of grammar. In its strictest sense, grammar can be very inflexible - to the point where it stifles creativity and stops anything new or original in its tracks. You only have to look at some of the wonderful fiction being published, particularly in Britain, these days to see that good writing doesn't necessarily have to include perfect grammar. The novel 'Dancer' by Colum McCann, for instance, contains one sentence that is THIRTY TWO PAGES long, with no punctuation other than commas and line breaks. It's terrible grammar, and yet in the context of that novel it works wonderfully because McCann is using it for a particular reason. The style of prose reflects the nature of the character whose point of view that chapter is written from. He's a social butterfly, flitting from one situation to the next, one lover to the next, and the breathless style of the narrative brings that to life far more vividly than any straightforward description could.

Myself, I love to bend the rules. *grins* I think British English has developed into a more fluid and less inflexible language than its American cousin and I enjoy experimenting with new ways of saying things, and new ways of getting an impression of my characters across. I don't suppose I'll ever be as good at it as McCann, but I can always dream!