The use of literary theory in writing fiction is an often overlooked or completely disregarded aspect of writing in today’s world of “packaged artist” writers—often wrapped up and sold like McDonald’s cheeseburgers to kids inundated with commercialization and pop-culture. Is this good or bad? Does it really even matter?
What Is Theory?
For simplification, lets look at musical theory. I’ve been playing guitar all my life and have come across three basic archetypes of guitar players:
- Plays by ear or feel
- Plays what is written (as in classical guitar)
- Plays Jazz or progressive types of music (using ear, feel, reading and theory)
Some blues guitarists scoff at the idea of learning theory (like the names and functions of scales, chords, arpeggios, scale modes, etc.), believing it will ruin their raw heartfelt emotion. Classical guitarists often only play what is written but cannot improvise or freely “jam” with other musicians. Jazz oriented players (many of whom play classical, blues and rock) do it all: read music, know the mathematical theory of music, and can improvise music off the top of their heads.
Basically, music theory is a descriptive language or technical system to understand how and why things work.
The same thing is true of literary theory, and if studied, can give you a sophisticated understanding of literature and wider scope of imagination. Most writers—even if they know nothing about literary theory—apply some aspect of it in their writing without thinking about it. Reading about or studying literary theory can be arduous and make you feel nonplussed because of its dry technical format. If a musician learns the lydian augmented scale, nobody would want to hear them play or practice it because it’s not music—it’s a scale found in music. But without knowing that scale and how it fits with certain chords in a song, they could never express the certain vibe and texture of that scale’s mood and sound. The goal is to learn the scale and how to apply it in the real world without sounding like you’re just playing a scale. You learn it and forget it—enabling you to break the rules and still sound correct.
Basic Literary Theory
To avoid writing something dry, theoretical and philosophical—I’ll try to keep everything in layman’s terms. Here are two examples with explanations:
- Intertextuality: a term coined by Julia Kristeva to designate the various relationships that a given text may have with other texts. These intertextual relationships include anagram, allusion, adaptation, translation, parody, pastiche, imitation, and other kinds of transformation. In the literary theories of structuralism and post‐structuralism, texts are seen to refer to other texts (or to themselves as texts) rather than to an external reality.

Writing Fiction: Using Literary Theory
This is much simpler than the above description would have you believe. Basically,when a writer borrows ideas from other books, movies, TV or even a painting—it is in a sense intertextual; meaning it has an interrelationship or intertwines with other texts. A parody of something is highly intertextual. If you write your own version of Dante’s Inferno—which has been done numerous times by many authors—it is intertextual. It seems simple on the exterior, but there is no end to the extent you can apply this idea in your own writing. I suggest reading about it and you’ll begin seeing examples of it everywhere. The greatest example of intertextuality is in the Bible. This begs the question: is intertextuality a form of plagiarism or a way of paying homage?
- Defamiliarization: the artistic technique of forcing the audience to see common things in an unfamiliar or strange way, in order to enhance perception of the familiar. A basic satirical tactic, it is a central concept of 20th century art, ranging over movements including Dada, postmodernism, epic theatre, and science fiction.
Defamiliarization is a personal favorite theory of mine and I use it extensively in almost everything I write (though I really don’t think about it). It is the essence of literariness. In simple terms, it’s a way of breaking all known convention and expectation. Many readers of literature at some point in their lives grow to like certain things and dislike others, while I generally do not. I like pretty much any and all literature as it all has something to offer. Some people like happy endings in stories while I prefer to kill the person you’re cheering for and let the abomination live on.
An example of defamiliarization would be a story like this:
A woman skins her newborn baby with a straight razor. Now, the reader would expect other characters in the story to be appalled or mortified. The police would surely come and toss the mother in jail or have her executed. This is what is expected. To apply the theory of defamiliarization: what if the baby murdering mother was not criticized? What if her friends celebrated the killing? What if the media branded her a hero? What if her husband—who should be sickened—is instead joyous, helping her cook and eat the baby? What if he made a hat out of the baby’s skin and the pope labeled him moralist of the decade?
While my example may be sinister and extremely disgusting, it certainly breaks expectation and takes the reader into unfamiliar territory. In my upcoming novel, the main antagonist is a 22 year old woman who rapes, beats, and brutally murders men. It’s not something you read everyday and is quite offensive. Just wait until you read the fallout from her rapes and how the men react. I leave nothing to the imagination and describe in spectacular detail, every nuance of the rapes. I’m sure your ideas are different than mine, but that makes life interesting.
Final Word
Learning literary theory in and of itself will not make you a better writer; however, if you really learn some theory and more importantly, learn to use it naturally in a story—it can open a whole new universe of ideas. Here’s a great site listing many elements of literary theory from the University of Toronto English Library: Glossary of Literary Theory. I suggest learning a few at a time and perhaps reading a few books about it. Then apply the concepts in your own writing or learn to identify them in your favorite novels. The point is not to think theoretically, but to be aware of the theories and how they work. Knowledge is a powerful tool.
Leaning literary theory is not about bogging down your thoughts with unusable technical concepts; it’s about freeing your mind to write beyond genre and develop more powerful levels of expression. It’s like having a thousand new colors on your palette.



#1 by Kate Yowein at May 6th, 2009
| Quote
I learned literary theory in class and found it really exciting. I liked diving down deep to discover how everything works. But it hinders me when I write if I think about it too much. I’d like to be free and let passion take over. Then when the first draft is done, then thinking about the theories takes over and I start to put the pieces back together again to form a more tighter symphony.
I also do like defamiliarization where you get the unexpected. break the norms. conventions are boring. Weird scenarios rule like a man drilling a hole into his head to insert a candle stick in and walking in the middle of the night looking for the elixir of life.
#2 by Revellian at May 6th, 2009
| Quote
Hey Kate! I actually don’t think about anything when I write, but I am unconsciously aware of theory. Yes, conventions are boring. I often read popular books and think this could be good if it weren’t so restrained, suffocated by morals, or offered something spectacular. I like the candle stick idea and especially the drilled skull. It’s too bad that really wild stories are often regarded as worthless. I’m sure many folks will think my novel is putrid smut (it’s actually much worse than that)
#3 by JC at May 6th, 2009
| Quote
The problem with literary theory is, if you try to dig too deep, like French postmodernist did, you will probably end up in a black hole. It is too sad to see how this movement has destructed the whole French intellectual scene. In my view, literary theory is just another form of art. What I find more exiting on today’s intellectual market are writers of popular science books as Harris, Dawkins, Hitchens and many more.
Cheers!
#4 by Revellian at May 6th, 2009
| Quote
Hi J.C., yeah I agree. I don’t get into too much analysis or application–but many of today’s fiction writers don’t even know what literary theory is. I certainly don’t write “intellectual” fiction haha!
#5 by Miss Moneypenny at May 7th, 2009
| Quote
Hi Bobby!
@ Intertextuality: no esoteric deceptions to keep the masses happy and content as they obey their Puppet Masters?
Speaking of theories, it is always interesting to read how the mind of a serial killer works… was their mind altered by drugs, missing vital DNA, brain tumor, or did they experience some other traumatic influence? I wonder what influences and inspires serial killer authors to write their bloody stories?
#6 by Revellian at May 7th, 2009
| Quote
Hi Debbie, unfortunately for me, not many people want to discuss literary theory haha! When I comment on sites that write about such things, they don’t reply or visit me because I’m not a famous author or something.
Personally, I write about violence because it’s fun. I watch violent movies because they’re thrilling and quite a blast; however, in real life, I’m sweet like cinnamon sugar LOL
#7 by dwacon at May 8th, 2009
| Quote
Bobby… good stuff, as usual. You never disappoint.
Peace!
#8 by Zen Lill at May 8th, 2009
| Quote
Hi Bobby! hey, thanks for stopping by my site and leaving your ‘two’ (cents, that is) and I addressed yo and few other commenters today. I love to read your writes, often someone else has beat me to making the same point that I would make so I hesitate to be redundant : ) but I’ll just say ‘hey’ every here and there, how’s that? I hope all is well in the life of…
Caio, Zen Lill
#9 by Svasti at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
Thanks for this post, Bobby. I’ve never studied writing or literature (maybe I will some day?) so this is an interesting window for me into such things.
Sounds an awful lot like dance or martial arts too, where you learn certain movements by rote, repetitively. But you would never dance/fight like that. However, the practice/theory you put in can help support you when you do.
In effect, any discipline you apply to any of your efforts, allows you more freedom to act spontaneously. And in writing, I find I’m looking for that moment (even though I’m never really looking if you know what I mean) where I’m almost channelling something – my surface level mind gets out of the way and the words come together almost by themselves.
#10 by Revellian at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
@Dwacon: Thanks so much! Peace:)
@Lill: Thank you! I’m doing great and hope you are too:)
@Svasti: Thanks for reading! As to the martial arts/dance analogy, I’ll say this: in martial arts, I have eliminated learning any physical movement that cannot in a precise manner help me in an actual life/death fight or that 95% of all martial arts techniques are actually ineffective and useless in real life. This is my approach to literary theory. Most literary theory actually has more to do with a person’s understanding and ability to discuss different schools of philosophical thought and in my opinion, most philosophy is pretty much useless and has nothing to do with real life—it’s just intellectual gymnastics to be used in arguments. But you know this already and when you can “channel something” it simply means you know it and it’s time to learn or experience more—increasing your scope of expression—and literary theory or philosophical understanding can help with that. There’s nothing of depth in literary theory as there’s really nothing of depth in living life—it’s all about love and living in the moment isn’t it?
#11 by Eric "Speedcat Hollydale" at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
I never though I would see your blog with a re-vamped template!
Watching you progress as a blogger, and a writer has been very interesting Bobby. You have adapted and created a new directive so many times. With your gaining passion for writting as a topic here ar Revellian dot com my eyes see a very interesting format, and one that challenges my own creative mind. You are one of the BEST at conveying thoughts and ideas to words anywhere on the net. A “thinking tank”, if you will, for writers at any level.
#12 by Revellian at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
Thanks Eric! I looked at my blog today and on a whim changed it . . . finally. I just wanted a simple typography based look with brighter colors. I can’t seem to write about popular subjects anymore, so I’ll just go somewhere new. You really brightened my day
#13 by Eric "Speedcat Hollydale" at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
ohh … hot photo too
Ha haaaaa !!!!!!!
#14 by Revellian at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
That’s Tatiana, she’s Russian and just turned 18
#15 by Eric "Speedcat Hollydale" at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
18 … life was so COOL at 18 !!!!!!!!!
Saturday nights are now for blogging (after my nap). If young self could only see me now
#16 by Revellian at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
We’re all young forever, we just gradually look older on the surface!
#17 by Miss Moneypenny at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
This is best looking professional WordPress theme I have seen!
Now, we can read your dark ‘tails’ in a brown-bow of color!
If Moneypenny CPU could make enough money to support a hosted WordPress Blog, digitalnature had a similar cool blue theme and Obama wasn’t President… at least, we can dream of a brighter future!
#18 by Revellian at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
Thanks Debbie! I’ve been looking for a theme for over a year and this is the only one I liked. I thought maybe the pink was too feminine but it adds a little brightness. Oh yeah, I have threaded comments now, just hover your cursor over the colored bar and it pops up. You know, I’d freaking love Obama if he hadn’t done all the big stimulus. It’s so funny that only 4% of the stimulus has actually been used by any corporation or bank he’s given it to, so when we recover, the stimulus will have nothing to do with it—it’s only hindering the recovery. Other than that, I like him.
#19 by Miss Moneypenny at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
Do U freaking Love Obama because he will change the combat mission in Iraq after Aug 31, 2010, he deployed more troops to Afghanistan (almost 9-years there), he called to cut $100 million in the budget on April 20th, and 8 days later, Obama requested $1.5 billion from Congress to fight the Swine Flu Outbreak?
P.S. love the threaded comment option!
#20 by Revellian at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
No I do not love Obama and he’s made many mistakes, but I do like him. I am hopeful that the republican party will become smart and find a good leader. I’m not worried about Obama, and if anything, we’ll end up with a good republican party because of him. No more negativity from me
.
This is like having a new house!
#21 by Miss Moneypenny at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
@ U freaking Love Obama: sometimes, I can’t help messin’ with U!
Based on Obama’s technique, looks like the Republicans only need to find a teflon coated man who says one thing and does another for real change you can believe in.
#22 by Revellian at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
Read my new post Debbie, it’s about politics!
#23 by Miss Moneypenny at May 9th, 2009
| Quote
My eyes are very sleepy… will read your new post tomorrow after my Mother’s Day surprises… Goodnight, my friend!
#24 by Revellian at May 10th, 2009
| Quote
How my literary theory post turned into a political conversation I’ll never know, but it was fun. Happy mother’s day Debbie!
#25 by meleah rebeccah at May 11th, 2009
| Quote
well, I have never taken any writing class or course or even read any book ON writing, so…for me, this is a GREAT post and something I look forward to learning. Thank you!
#26 by Bobby Revell at May 11th, 2009
| Quote
Hey Meleah! Honestly, though I have taken classes on writing and read several books on it, I never learned anything useful from most of them. My philosophy is you can’t learn to write from a how to book, but must write a book yourself—just like you’re doing now. Some theory can help, but writing & reading helps the most. Just think about how much you’ve learned writing your book. Nothing beats the act of writing. Thanks so much and you keep up the effort, I have faith in your abilities
#27 by Justin Airsoft at May 13th, 2009
| Quote
Very nice introduction to literary theory. I especially liked how you explained defamiliarization; quite an interesting example, ha.
#28 by Bobby Revell at May 13th, 2009
| Quote
Thanks Justin, I liked the example too
#29 by Jennifer at May 13th, 2009
| Quote
I admit that I’ve stayed away from literary theory in part because I am afraid that if I think about things too much (something that I have a tendency to do) I’ll never produce a thing worth reading. At the same time, being aware of this stuff is part of the preparation for writing.
Your music metaphors always work so well, though now I am trying to figure out if there would be a musical equivalent to a mother skinning a baby and being applauded for it!
#30 by Bobby Revell at May 13th, 2009
| Quote
Hey Jennifer, I spent a few weeks reading articles about writing and publishing and now I never want to read another article about either subject again—not even my own. I think nearly all writing advice is useless, especially if it’s from a famous writer.
There is a musical equivalent, it’s called pop music!
#31 by teeni at May 16th, 2009
| Quote
I like when you take the time to explain things like this. I almost feel as though I understand it now.
Hi Bobby!!!!!!! (<- I learned this from Speedcat – it always makes me smile when he says hi after a comment so I’m passing it on).
#32 by Bobby Revell at May 17th, 2009
| Quote
Hi Teeni!!!!!!! Enough exclamation points for you? Haha, you would need earplugs to bear the bellowing volume if standing near me when I said hi. If you listen close, you can hear the screaming hellos of Speedy echo across the entire world
#33 by Eric "Speedcat Hollydale" at May 17th, 2009
| Quote
Ha haaaaa !
“H E L L O” !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
#34 by Bobby Revell at May 19th, 2009
| Quote
Ouch Eric, that was LOUD!
#35 by Jena Isle at May 19th, 2009
| Quote
Hi Bobby,
You do have quite a following. I’ve read your posts and they do have lots of information. You’re generous to share them. Keep writing!
#36 by Bobby Revell at May 20th, 2009
| Quote
Thanks Jena, I don’t really have a following, I am a follower of them!