Hi
if you don't use lots of adjectives and adverbs it could be that they mean you leave in every action - however sparely written. It's easy at first to think if you want to show a character at work you first have to get them there, so they need to wake up, get dressed, have breakfast, run for the bus, spot a bit of sensory detail on the way. Whereas the scene can start at work. Could it be they mean you need to cut from A to F without BCDE in between?

Yes, but the baroque, ornate style is my guilty pleasure. I like to read it, I like to write it. I don't like 'hoovered' stories, I'm afraid, or ones that rigidly obey the 'rules'. You can smell it a mile off. We can't all be Hemingway.

I like stories that are a little like an overgrown garden. The roses are there, but you have to climb through the brambles to see them.

JB



<Added>

Told you I was purple!

Could it be they mean you need to cut from A to F without BCDE in between?

I once wrote a story that followed an MC through every day of his life over a 3 month period! Talk about over writing! I even followed him to the loo

Yes, too much bald action rather than too much hairy prose could be what they meant (though it's not what I'd think of first, given the term 'over-written). Sometimes, like JB cutting his novel and finding out which words he could do without and which he couldn't, you need to write ABCDEFG first, and only then will you discover that the events the story really needs are A, a bit of C, a totally different G, and then actually it works if you have B after that,

I got much better at cutting (though generally I'm more of an adder) when I realised that it wasn't a waste of time and I hadn't been stupid: I had needed to write DEF and original G, even though in the end they got their throats cut...

Emma

I've also had rejections in the past on the basis of the submitted chapters being over-written & I suspect that while this term does refer to excessive use of adverbs and adjectives (etc), it's also agent-speak for 'the writing's not moving quickly enough', which is a slightly different thing. Also, I think it's one of those terms agents use when the manuscript doesn't quite grab them but they're not sure why.

I think it's one of those terms agents use when the manuscript doesn't quite grab them but they're not sure why.

I'm sure that's true, though perhaps they'd say something else of a not-quite-right MS that was very bare bonesy - 'under-written' maybe?

My agent says it can be the hardest thing to put your finger on: what's wrong with what she calls the 'high competence' manuscripts. Nothing obviously wrong or notably lacking, just doesn't do it for her...

Emma

My feeling is that the use of the word 'over-written' is best avoided altogether. To some it means 'too wordy', to others 'too flowery'. Why not use those descriptions instead according to what is actually required?

Unfortunately, there are many who employ it to deride anything even the tiniest bit more literary than Bridget Jones's Diary. In such cases it perhaps tells us more about the commentators than about the work under review. Would they get beyond the first page of most of the greatest novels of the twentieth century? Remove the 'over-writing' from Joyce, Proust, etc., etc., and what are you left with apart from the dumb and the dreary?

I don't trust the word. It has overtones, and the quantity of postings on this item testifies to the variety of interpretations that can be placed upon it. If its meaning is so imprecise, a more accurate term should be substituted if constructive criticism is what is required. It certainly has been of no more help to LadySarah than the illegible bit that followed.

As Emma said, it's best to see how many other people make a similar comment before reacting.


Chris

Agree with the others that it's really great that you've had some personal feedback - the agent must have seen the positives in your work to have bothered.
I've been a bit of an over-writer myself in the past, but actually, once you realise you're doing it it's a relatively easy habit to break, so that's promising too!

all best

Maria

Very wise JB I'm beginning to like you (i think it was your post on sleepwalkers). we used to have the sa,e problem with fine art titles when i was an agent selling fine art.

Its a great way for authors to condense their over writing i hasten to add (a little secret here).

Look at twenty fine art pictures without knowing the titles - (get a friend to put 20 images from the net on your wp programme one after another or such but dlete the titles)

Now look aat the pictures for 30 seconds then name the pictures - then check against the artists titles.

YOU'LL actually see your problem there and then in front of you. You should be hitting one maybe two word titles for the pictures.

This is how an editor will review your work. He/She will know how much they should have read in about one minute of their time - if they have under half of how many pages they would normally read - OVERWRITTEN.

regards
J

Sorry... is it me? I have no idea what you're trying to say.

No Dee it's not you. I didn't understand it either, even allowing the leeway that in internet posting capitals for 'I' and the like are considered optional.

And I doubt very much if an agent or editor has a clue how much 'they'd read in a minute'. They just know when the words used for any given event are too many, or over-ripe.

Emma

...and in any case 'over-writing' doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the number of words at all (although that can be part of the problem). It more usually refers to the type of words used and indicates an overblown style. But - hang on a minute - 'Overblown' - What does that mean? It only goes to show that these judgments will always be highly subjective.

I don't get the fine arts parallel either. Is it that the commentator finds longer titles pretentious? In my opinion, the most pretentious title around for a picture (used increasingly frequency) is the one-word title 'Untitled'. The only worse ones are 'Untitled II' and 'Untitled III'. Brevity is no guarantee of quality.

Chris

Ok so you see a black and white cat sat on a blue mat in an all white square room.

How do you describe this scene

A - the cat sat on the truncated spongyform lycra looking softy touchy feely mat. ?
B - the cat sat on a blue spongy mat.?

A = overwritten and its taken like 10 seconds longer to read than B WHY beacsue there are too many words -

OVER WRITTEN

TIME IS MONEY .....folks ... now the editor is at least one sentence short of where he should be in his one chapter summation in 10 minutes. NOW YOU UNDERSTAND

A is overwritten AND there are too many words being used .. relative all relative.

I on the other hand am three sentences ahead.

regards
Jules

To be honest Jules, I think you're couple of words short of a full sentence.



<Added>

I, on the other hand, am only one short, 'you're a couple'

Though fortunately I seem to have some awareness of my situation