No response. Disappointing. Too long?

No, just busy!

I agree, that first opener is terrific, isn't it. Says so much, so economically.

The second one's a different kind of writing. And, yes, maybe in a novel things can take more time. But for my taste it's over-written, not because there are words in there which aren't earning their keep - as a piece of description it is brilliant - but because the writing's out of scale with pace of the moment. It's writing-quality winning out over the demands of narrative, if you like.

Emma

Fair enough! Sorry for my impatience, thought I'd waffled on and driven everyone away!

Is it brilliant? For me, and I'm pulling what I think is the worst bit out of context, but:

The pain seemed to be displacing with its own hair segments his heart and lungs; as its grip swelled in his throat he felt he was holding his brain like a morsel on a platter high out of a hungry reach.

is almost indecipherable to me. But maybe that's my fault, maybe I'm not bright enough to appreciate it.

I get why he wants to draw attention to this wound - he is drawing a parallel between this man and a centaur from Greek mythology who was wounded by a poisoned arrow (I only know this from a quote at the front of the book, I haven't read the novel). But it is desperately over-written. Maybe the parallel just needed too much forcing? I don't know.

Maybe it all comes down to taste, after all!

Would it be fair to say that the first would stand more chance than the second of publication today?

Thank you for continuing to comment, Emma, it's much appreciated.

You need to interweave both. Each is an integral part of the other whilst having seperate functions

[Edited by david bruce at 17:56:00 on 19 August 2009
Reason: commercial link removed]

You need to interweave both. Each is an integral part of the other whilst having seperate functions

Well, yes. I think my initial query was really about emphasis, rather than one at the expense of the other. I feel much clearer about this now.

It's a shame no-one has commented on the Updike I pulled out in my last post. It seems I really have outstayed my welcome now!

is almost indecipherable to me. But maybe that's my fault, maybe I'm not bright enough to appreciate it.

As far as I'm concerned, your quoted line is a clear example of a writer in need of a bloody-minded editor. Make your readers work, but on a story level, not a "re-editing" level.

It seems I really have outstayed my welcome now!

Or alternatively, that the forums are a bit slow at the moment... though feel free to believe we all hate you if it fuels your creativity.

The forums are quiet at the moment - I think a lot of people are on holiday.

Emma

Having said that, there's always more going on in the members-only forums, Private Members and Lounge.

Emma

Things are pretty quiet at the moment. Also because this is a community of writers, rather than readers (ie, it's not a bookclub or an MA in English Literature), members tend to chat about problems they encounter in their own work, rather than critique extracts from the works of well known writers.


- NaomiM

<Added>

I shouldn't give the impression that no-one reads here, though, as the very long thread of 'what are you reading now' in PM is testiment to.

As far as I'm concerned, your quoted line is a clear example of a writer in need of a bloody-minded editor. Make your readers work, but on a story level, not a "re-editing" level.

Quite - and thanks for commenting.

I've now finished reading all the Maples stories, from which the first excerpt was taken and have started reading 'The Centaur'. Updike really is a fantastic writer, but I do think, as you say, he needed pruning now and then.

feel free to believe we all hate you if it fuels your creativity.

Ha! I did sound a bit paranoid, didn't I?

because this is a community of writers, rather than readers (ie, it's not a bookclub or an MA in English Literature), members tend to chat about problems they encounter in their own work, rather than critique extracts from the works of well known writers.

OK, but I was quoting a writer in order to help myself understand, and get others' opinions on, what constitutes good writing and what does not. In that sense, surely critiquing extracts from the works of well known writers is a valid exercise for writers, not just readers?

I was quoting a writer in order to help myself understand, and get others' opinions

It works for me! I've done the same myself to try to get a discussion going before.

Ha! I did sound a bit paranoid, didn't I?

If you notice, I didn't specifically rule out the possibility that you were correct!

surely critiquing extracts from the works of well known writers is a valid exercise

A few points on that:

Firstly, that's like saying "auditing is a good thing for business". Well, yes, obviously, but that doesn't mean that going into work every day and starting a new audit will get you promoted or make your company more profitable... Do it when you need to and when you find a specific (and limited) point of interest where you have some controversial point of view to argue the case for and you'll get a better response.

Secondly, what the hell is "well known"? I know the name "Doris Lessing" but couldn't tell you what she writes, I know of John Updike, but not sure I've ever read any, I could tell you loads about the stories behind Tolkien, Pratchett, Orwell, Kurkev and a number of others, but can only really talk about the writing style of Hemingway based on the fact that I read For Whom The Bell Tolls very very recently... I read a bit of Dostoyevsky, got into Nabokov for a while, but now can remember absolutely nothing other than that Dostoyevsky seemed a bit long... But while that may tell you a thing or two about me, I don't think it tells me _anything_ useful about writing!

Thirdly, the quote you had was badly written, OTT and utterly purple to the point it should have been burned, but does it have anything to do with a debate on character-driven fiction? I doubt it.

surely critiquing extracts from the works of well known writers is a valid exercise for writers,

Well there are hundreds of Eng. Lit. degree courses that would agree with you, but for a writer it's a moot point because these are extracts from a published author, so presumably their agent and editor has deemed the prose to be of a publishable standard.

I do think it is important to deconstruct novels to see how they tick, and feed that through into one's own work, but deconstructing an Updike novel is not going to be much use to someone writing Childrens Fiction or SF or Horror, or in any other genre that sits outside of Updike's work.
It's also important to find one's own 'voice' for one's novel, not try to borrow someone else's. Updike, Fitzgerald, Tolkein, Austen, Dickens, and may other famous authors, have highly original prose styles which one could parody, but which are unlikely to be seen again - and why would the publishers bother, when they are still reprinting the originals.


- NaomiM

that's like saying "auditing is a good thing for business".

Is it? I don't see the parallel between checking the books (essentially) and studying others' writing in order to improve your own. Not copying, just learning. I have often read (on here, and elsewhere) that reading is GOOD FOR ONE (alright, that's from 'Educating Rita' and that a writer of fiction should read as much fiction as possible. Presumably, the thinking behind this is that examining what works in published fiction is useful for the aspiring writer.

what the hell is "well known"?

It was Naomi who used this description, not myself.

the quote you had was badly written, OTT and utterly purple to the point it should have been burned, but does it have anything to do with a debate on character-driven fiction? I doubt it.

When I started this thread, I was somewhat confused about character- and plot-driven narratives. I was, as I think I've said, thinking out loud and, perhaps, I should have kept my thoughts to myself. But this passage does concern character- v. plot-driven fiction, as this passage comes entirely from the character, albeit in external terms, and not from the plot. It is, I think, the equivalent of a car chase, a battle scene, a sex scene, inasmuch as it revels in the moment, but does not advance the story.

deconstructing an Updike novel is not going to be much use to someone writing Childrens Fiction or SF or Horror, or in any other genre that sits outside of Updike's work.

Naomi, I'm posting in the Technique section of the general forum, not a specific group so I feel your criticism is unjustified.

It's also important to find one's own 'voice' for one's novel, not try to borrow someone else's.

Of course it is - when did I say otherwise? But does that mean we ignore the masters of the past? Or are 21st century fiction writers all creating in a bubble, unable or unwilling to learn from those who have gone before? That would certainly explain some of the drivel on today's bookstands.

It is disappointing that EmmaD, when challenged on her assessment of Updike's passage as 'brilliant', has not come back to defend her statement.

I have clearly crossed a line, albeit inadvertently.

<Added>

That last bit, again, sounds somewhat paranoid. But this time, I really feel the hostility.

reading is GOOD FOR ONE

Yes, it is.

But...

I don't personally believe that one can write good fiction without losing yourself in the world you've conjured. Right now, I am finding it very difficult to count the number of lengths I swim at the gym because my mind is usually on the island of my WIP long before the second stroke... It is not possible for me to complete reading a book right now (I have a very good one by the side of my bed that has been untouched for several weeks) because writing one is more important to me and I don't want to break out of the particular creative seam that I am in.

The type of analysis you are talking about, like the type of thread posting I am doing now, is an interesting diversion that is worthwhile in the abstract and for non-writing periods. And I think that's what Naomi is getting at.

My parallel with a company audit is essentially the same thing. So I'll draw another parallel to try to make the point in a different way:

Doctors train for years in an academic facility. This is worthwhile and essential professional development. But I would prefer to be treated by a doctor with twenty years of good experience than a doctor who has twenty good degrees and has never met a patient.

Or to put it another way, yes, it is a technique forum, but given that we are all busily writing in some form or another, it should be looked at more in terms of practical advice for practical problems that you are encountering right now rather than an academic centre of excellence.

A bit like the difference between consulting an encyclopedia of building techniques or a work-a-day brickie when you can't get your garden wall straight.

Oh and ps:

Despite all the discussion about different techniques, viewpoints, grammar and god knows what else, from the POV of actually writing a damned good book, the most practical and useful info I have got from anywhere has been the three questions Emma continually drops into conversation... You need to know all the techniques on some level, and the better you do the better for you, but at the end of the day, it all comes down to having something to say.