McAnally's (The Community Pub) > Author Craft
Not a question of pace but rhythm
Kathleen Dante:
The voice here reminds me of detective noir pulp, which I don't mind. The problem I see is your tendency toward run-on, overly complicated sentences. For example:
--- Quote from: Thub on October 12, 2008, 09:13:29 AM --- The 327 v8 of my 69 Camaro RS rumbled down the streets of Washington DC parting the thick columns of steam billowing from sewer grates at 3:00 AM on a late November night and came to a stop in front of a building constructed on a grand scale with huge white columns and white stone that would have looked more appropriate in ancient Greece than in a modern American city.
--- End quote ---
First problem, it's confusing; from what's written, the V8 is what parts the columns of steam and comes to a stop before the building. Second, this is one long run-on sentence completely devoid of any punctuation besides the period at the end. It would be clearer broken it up into two sentences:
My '69 Camaro RS rumbled down the streets of Washington, DC, at 3:00 AM, parting the thick columns of steam billowing from sewer grates. We came to a stop in front of a building constructed on a grand scale: huge white columns and white stone that would have looked more appropriate in ancient Greece than in a modern American city.
Why those changes? The bit about the V8 engine was excessive detail that distracts the reader. The time bit was moved for clarity (i.e., 3:00 AM is when he drove through DC, not when the sewer grates are scheduled to release steam). Additional punctuation was also added for clarity.
One thing I didn't get when reading your samples, though, is emotional engagement. The writing is breezy and detached--emotionally distant. Now, I don't expect your character to wear his heart on his sleeve, but even Harry Dresden gulps or has his instincts "screaming at [him] to run." The second sample, which you say is near the end, should have rising tension; it's supposed to be building up to an ominous event. He should be fearful of what's at stake, which would remind the reader of why they should care about your character and fear his failure and death. This is missing. You're not engaging your reader. The writing is still breezy: nothing to see here; move along.
Also, you provide conflicting signals: "if I somehow managed to live through the night which at the moment seemed fairly unlikely" and "the equipment I would need for a night of breaking, entering, snooping, and, if it couldn't be avoided, violence." So in the previous paragraph, he expects to die, yet later on, he hints that violence could be avoided. Unless he's set to commit nonviolent suicide, the text is in direct contradiction of itself.
Thub:
--- Quote from: Kathleen Dante on October 16, 2008, 01:28:10 PM ---The voice here reminds me of detective noir pulp, which I don't mind. The problem I see is your tendency toward run-on, overly complicated sentences. For example:
First problem, it's confusing; from what's written, the V8 is what parts the columns of steam and comes to a stop before the building. Second, this is one long run-on sentence completely devoid of any punctuation besides the period at the end. It would be clearer broken it up into two sentences:
My '69 Camaro RS rumbled down the streets of Washington, DC, at 3:00 AM, parting the thick columns of steam billowing from sewer grates. We came to a stop in front of a building constructed on a grand scale: huge white columns and white stone that would have looked more appropriate in ancient Greece than in a modern American city.
Why those changes? The bit about the V8 engine was excessive detail that distracts the reader. The time bit was moved for clarity (i.e., 3:00 AM is when he drove through DC, not when the sewer grates are scheduled to release steam). Additional punctuation was also added for clarity.
One thing I didn't get when reading your samples, though, is emotional engagement. The writing is breezy and detached--emotionally distant. Now, I don't expect your character to wear his heart on his sleeve, but even Harry Dresden gulps or has his instincts "screaming at [him] to run." The second sample, which you say is near the end, should have rising tension; it's supposed to be building up to an ominous event. He should be fearful of what's at stake, which would remind the reader of why they should care about your character and fear his failure and death. This is missing. You're not engaging your reader. The writing is still breezy: nothing to see here; move along.
Also, you provide conflicting signals: "if I somehow managed to live through the night which at the moment seemed fairly unlikely" and "the equipment I would need for a night of breaking, entering, snooping, and, if it couldn't be avoided, violence." So in the previous paragraph, he expects to die, yet later on, he hints that violence could be avoided. Unless he's set to commit nonviolent suicide, the text is in direct contradiction of itself.
--- End quote ---
I know I am taking a long time replying here, but You are wrong about that sentence being a run-on. It isn't. I don't know what you think this colon is doing in the middle of "grand scale: huge white columns", but it isn't doing the grammar of the sentence any favors. Also, needlessly adding commas to a sentence is the way to not make it grammatically correct. I understand that, from time to time, you may need to interject something or join two complete sentences together, and commas can be used to slow down a sentence, for style's sake. Randomly throwing commas at a sentence because it is long, is bad and wrong. It would be different if I had wanted the reader to pause while reading my extremely long sentence. I don't. If you will read the sentence again, you may notice that there is one subject. I could have made several sentences out of that one, but I wanted a single image of a specific car doing two specific things at a specific time in a specific place. I didn't want an image of a car, place, time, and action separately. I know it's long.
You are right about the engine parting the steam. I suppose I could make the sentence even longer, or I could split it into a separate sentence about rumbling V8s. I could trust that the read is smart enough to assume the character hasn't removed the engine from his Camero and is somehow levitating it through the streets of DC. If I had writen "The hard steel handle of my sword, heated by the intensity of my rage, burned my hands as it sliced through my opponents.", would you have assumed it was the handle of my sword that was slicing through my opponents?
Sewer grates are not "scheduled to release steam." The air is cold. The water underground is significantly warmer than the air. It steams, and that steam billows. Technically it isn't even steam. It's vapor, but I figured "...parting the columns of visible water vapor..." was a bit unwieldy.
--- Quote --- One thing I didn't get when reading your samples, though, is emotional engagement.
--- End quote ---
Even Dresden from time to time becomes oddly detached. When the time for being scared or angry is over. it is time to get to work. Dresden is the same way after being tortured nearly to death and having mouse snap the neck of Liver Spots. He is formulating a plan of attack and preparing to do battle with the forces of evil. Granted my character has a maglight and a bat instead of a staff and a 65 million year old zombie beast, but it's the same basic point in the story. Belive me he has reacted plenty at this point.
--- Quote ---Also, you provide conflicting signals: "if I somehow managed to live through the night which at the moment seemed fairly unlikely" and "the equipment I would need for a night of breaking, entering, snooping, and, if it couldn't be avoided, violence." So in the previous paragraph, he expects to die, yet later on, he hints that violence could be avoided. Unless he's set to commit nonviolent suicide, the text is in direct contradiction of itself.
--- End quote ---
He will live through the night if he can avoid violence. It doesn't look likely that he will be able to. In the list of things he would have preferred he have brought with him he mentioned an Uzi and some titanium chainmail. What he has is a cut down Louisville Slugger and a leather jacket. I thought that conveyed the desperation of his equipment situation and the degree to which he was the underdog. I didn't think rementioning how unlikely it was for him to survive was necessary. If you knew what he was up against, this would really be a non-issue. I know you don't know the bad guy or what he is up against so here is the short version. He is going into an unfamiliar building in which his opponent has had ample time to set up. If the bad guy catches the hero, he will shoot, stab, and/or explode him into tiny unidentifiable little bits, and he is trained to do so. The hero has a short piece of wood and some mag lights. Trust me. The situation is desperate.
Suilan:
The sentence starts with 327 V8 of my 69 Camaro RS, then mentions: the streets of Washington DC; thick columns of steam; sewer grates; late November night; a stop; a building; a grand scale; huge white columns; white stone; ancient Greece; a modern American city.
So, err, what exactly is this sentence about? One sentence has room enough for one idea / topic.
BTW, you asked what could be done about the rhythm of your prose, and Kathleen answered (as I did earlier) by describing her reaction to it. It's called "constructive critique." What you do with it is entirely up to you. Try to make the most out of the feedback you get, not reject it out of hand. From experience I know that as a beginning writer, your first reaction to critique is always to defend what you have written, but there's no need to. You will NOT be able to persuade the reviewer to change his opinion of your text, and that shouldn't be your goal anyway. (BTW, it's an opinion of your text, not of you as a person. )
I know it's hard, but you need to take a step backward and try to see WHY the reviewer(s) would think so, and come to your own conclusion about how you could use this to improve your writing. If you don't, you are wasting an important opportunity.
http://www.hollylisle.com/fm/Articles/feature8.html
(There's loads of other useful advice on this website.)
meg_evonne:
--- Quote from: Suilan on October 14, 2008, 07:34:01 PM ---Renni Browne & Dave King -- Self-Editing for Fiction Writers
--- End quote ---
--haven't read the others Suilan mentions but this one is incredible. Memorize it. Check out the section on white space also and the section on expository vs dialog.
I once peeled apart JB's tight descriptive writing style. I'll try to find the link. It'll raise your eyebrows. http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,7225.0.html
Cardinal Rule: Apparently no sentence should be longer than three lines of typing.
Finally, (<-- word used tongue in cheek, as you read the reference above there should be few to nil adverbs with -ly. As one author told me, if you are using -ly, you are probably using the wrong verb. And that goes back to the JB referenced above.) Oh and remove all 'almosts', 'verys', & 'justs'. You really have to break up that exposition there--it's really heavy, especially in action scenes. That's that writer's nimenis (sp) of tell vs show. Example below:
"That was definitely how I would describe the scene if I somehow managed to live through the night which at the moment seemed fairly unlikely."---Hey, count the 44 so beats, syllables! No wonder you noticed it was off... economy of word arrangement, needed there.
VS "If I lived through the night, unlikely, that's how I'd describe it." cut beats equals easier to read, eye & mind of reader moves faster, increases the interest & the tension in a scene.
"The first time I saw her emotionally K.O. a defendant, it kind of spooked me." (tip, you are the writer here, never 'kind of'-- is he or isn't he?) vs "She wrung the defendant's balls off--ouch." okay crude but same point. Although I love 'emotionally K.O. a defendant' its wrapped up in too much stuff. Here's the kind of questions you need to ask for this single question, 'Is first time crucial?' or 'Is this a warning to someone?', in which case first time isn't needed or 'Is him being spooked the important part?'
You really have to get that deep into your sentences and rip out what's extra, un-needed, or what you can let the reader figure out themselves. My crude one has an automatic warning the reader will assume AND assumed 'first time' was un-necessary to the intent of the sentence.
Excercise to try: Take one of your sections above and edit it to 1/3 the current length. To do it, you'll have to let the reader put in their interpretation & you'll ask those questions about what is most important--the rest is 90% fluff. (okay, maybe not fluff--but more than likely un-necessary.)
If you try the excercise post it and see what kind of responses you get back on the new version.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version