***shameless self-promotion***
You can get my latest book, The Frog Prince’s Daughters, for only $1 until mid-August. After that, it still costs less than $4. And it’s DRM-free. Check it out.
***shameless self-promotion***

There’s a writing/grammar rule which says that in writing action, every character gets their own paragraph. I’m not overly familiar with this one, and I think it might be a generational thing. Certainly, it is something my editor likes to do to my work. That’s not to say I don’t write long paragraphs that need breaking up (this one, for example), but he is guided by the strict rule that in the same way each character’s dialogue gets a new paragraph, so should each character’s actions.

I first met it with the editing of my book After the Dragon; the editor would sometimes break up a single paragraph describing several character’s actions into many, very short, paragraphs. He did it again with The Frog Prince’s Daughters, my new release.

Sounds fair in theory. But let’s have a look at it in practice, using a snatch from The Frog Prince’s Daughters.

Here are the original paragraphs [Rana's just given Jannin a justifiable bollicking for being a pain in the arse]:

Jannin hoisted her up, and Rana got a hasty foot into the stirrup and herself into the saddle with a modicum of decorum.

She made to kick him in the face from her suddenly advantageous perch. He dodged with a poked-out tongue and tapped her horse on the flank. It started off with an irritated flick of the ears. She cast up a feather, and it again directed them westwards. As Mascon and Amaryths went past last, she heard Jannin say, ‘She’s right on all but one count,’ and Amaryths reply, ‘Thank you.’

And what the editor wanted to do:

He hoisted her up, and Rana got a hasty foot into the stirrup and herself into the saddle with a modicum of decorum.

She made to kick him in the face from her suddenly advantageous perch.

He dodged with a poked-out tongue and tapped her horse on the flank.

It started off with an irritated flick of the ears.

She cast up a feather, and it again directed them westwards. As Mascon and Amaryths went past last, she heard Jannin say, ‘She’s right on all but one count,’ and Amaryths reply, ‘Thank you.’

Now, to me, and possibly to quite a few readers, short paragraphs imply a fair amount of significance. Certainly, when I write a one-line paragraph, it’s my way of signalling to the reader that I’d like them to pay attention or that the passage has particular meaning to the character or whatever. I really cannot see how the exchange has been improved by uniformly applying the single-character-single-paragraph rule. And I really really can’t approve of the horse getting its own paragraph. The creature doesn’t have a name or a role in the story, I never even give it a sex.

Here’s what I ended up doing as a compromise and even then I think the middle two could be one:

He hoisted her up, and Rana got a hasty foot into the stirrup and herself into the saddle with a modicum of decorum. She made to kick him in the face from her suddenly advantageous perch.

He dodged, poking his tongue at her with infuriating unconcern, and tapped her horse on the flank.

The animal started off with an irritated flick of the ears. Rana cast up a feather, and it again directed them westwards.

As Mascon and Amaryths went past last, she heard Jannin say, ‘She’s right on all but one count,’ and Amaryths reply, ‘Thank you.’

Let’s look at an example from my work in progress, so I can explain my logic further and talk about how I think point of view comes into play. Simon’s just had some news that proves Augusta’s been lying to him for days:

Simon shut the door and turned around grinning. Augusta maintained a bland expression and retreated across to the window. He wasted a moment trying to make her uncomfortable with folded arms and a stern look before giving it up for now; god-chewed girl was too stubborn for that lever.

Blindly using the rule, the three lines above would be broken up into three paragraphs, which not only alters the meaning but also looks stupid. I’m not comfortable with the blunt application of this rule, because of the difference between character and point of view.

The paragraph may describe two characters’ actions, but it’s only one point of view: Simon’s. Really, it should read: ‘Simon shut the door and turned around grinning. He watched as Augusta maintained a bland expression…’

I don’t like to hand-hold my readers. I expect them to understand that when I’m in Simon’s (or whoever’s) POV, I’m in it, and whenever any character does anything at all, it’s mentioned in the text only because Simon has observed the action. I certainly don’t want to have to continually write ‘Simon watched this’ and ‘Simon heard that’; it’s repetitive, boring, and wastes words.

Unfortunately, this attitude brings me into violation of this grammar rule, which personally I think is a touch old-fashioned now anyway.

[As a side note/ps, I may expect readers to understand that I stick very closely to a POV, but they're under no obligation to do so. I've been accused of POV violation for writing, from A's POV, the line 'B didn't much like C.' I'm not writing, 'A knew B didn't much like C'; I'm in A's POV, therefore the reader can trust this is something A knows. Trust the reader? I'm a fan of the concept but I wish readers would trust the writer in return.]