41. The only way you can write the truth is to assume that what you set down will never be read. This sounds like fake deep word salad to me. I’ve never heard this advice before in my life and I disagree with the statement: truth isn’t a monolith that you own, it’s a spectrum of facets that are told and, more importantly, interpreted several times over by both writer and reader. There is no singular “the truth,” really, as far as writing goes.  42. Write your first draft by hand. No. What a silly thing to say.  43. Challenge yourself. I don’t think this is advice. There is nothing wrong with writing for pleasure or entertainment. It doesn’t have to be competitive, or ambitious, or a constant search for self-improvement: you can do it because you like doing it. Not everything in life needs to be a hustle. If you want to challenge yourself, you can, but it’s not obligatory.  44. Everyone has a book in them. I disagree with this one. People don’t suggest everyone has a four-year oil painting in them, because people typically recognise the level of skill and the time investment involved in that undertaking is well beyond what many people could do or would even attempt. Likewise, most people recognise that being a carpenter is more complicated than picking up a hammer, some nails, and a plank of wood: you need to learn how to use those tools with enough finesse to be able to create what you’ve imagined. But a lot of people devalue the effort and skill involved in writing. 

A story idea is not the same thing as a book. A book is thousands of words and often months or years of ongoing work, and a good book is additional years of developing and honing one’s writing skills to a high level. I think probably everyone has story ideas and imaginative thoughts and comes up with concepts that they’d like to turn into a book, but I don’t think that counts for anything unless you put your money where your mouth is and actually write the book. I can imagine a cool table, but that doesn’t make me a carpenter.  45. Dialogue should be rhythmic. I disagree with the “should” in this piece of advice: I think dialogue can be rhythmic, but I don’t think it has to be to be good dialogue. Some stories a vibrant and feel real because they capture a more grounded, believable (if still stylised) style of speech, where characters say “um” occasionally, or speak ungrammatically or in a specifically dialect, or have an uncomfortable or grating register. Writing doesn’t have to fluid and musical to be good. 46. Dialogue should be natural. Counterpart to the above: I don’t agree with the “should” here either. Some stories are gorgeous and captivating because they embrace a poetic style of dialogue, with pretty phrasing and “unrealistically” eloquent characters. I personally adore Pushing Daisies in large part because of its dialogue, which is exactly this better-than-real style. I don’t think fiction has any obligation to be “realistic” and I definitely don’t think the success of every creative work should be based on how well it imitates the real world.