Violations of "show don't tell"
Roy
Time" series, but it completely, utterly violates the modern literary
doctrine of show-dont-tell. Jordan tells. He tells A LOT. In fact, I
would guess that only about 10-20% of his 13 novels is actually action
and dialogue. The rest is straight exposition. It's horrendous. You
can literarily skip entire chapters and miss nothing.
Now, first and foremost, his editor was his wife, so I can see how why
he wasn't shot down before publication. What really galls me though is
how his books are best-sellers! This demonstrates to me that there are
clearly markets for all forms of written material.
I'm not sure that I have a point here, I just felt like venting. :)
Thoughts, if any?
P.S.---If his crap made it to print, there is no reason anyone here
shouldn't be published.
Anopheles
"Roy" wrot.
I'm getting this same observatiion from a novels group I'm in, Roy, and it
drips of indignation. So it's no surprise that I'm not too popular when I
stand on a rock and howl at the moon, "It's all bullshit!"
It isn't ony Jordan who has had a free ride, pick up almost any of the mega
sellers and see how they should have been rejected if it was a level playing
field. But it ain't level, for you and these other hopefuls have forgottem
one ingredient in a successful book, the only one that matters.
Is it going to make money?
or
Is it an edge of the seat read?
Pick up any of these prize winning literary novels where every word has
been agonised over and all the 'rules' have been carefully adhered to, and
it was probably the the remaindered tray you picked it up from.
The awful truth that no one wants to hear is 99% of all books written are
dead boring and publishers would rather eat dog vomit that spend a cent on
them.
Here endeth the lesson
Barry
Alaric McDermott
present tense, always use said - is that they become sticks to beat people
with. I agree with all of them (er - except the present tense one - I hardly
ever write in anything else - no, hang on, I hardly ever write - well,
whatever) but I'm also a great believer in exceptions proving the rule. But
I do agree about Jordan - there was a time when I loved fantasy (I was
young, I was drunk a lot, I - no, I admit it - my name is Alaric McDermott
and I used to enjoy fantasy - hate it now). I went through Thomas Covenant
(428,000 pages in small type) in mere days, the whole Eddings bunch, Adams -
then I saw "The Wheel Of Time", read the blurb, thought "That'll do". It's
still in my bookshelf. Tried a few times and my eyes just drooped. 50 pages
in at best. The man is worse than Dan Brown, and that's a sentence I never
thought I'd write.
I disagree that good books don't sell, but good writers have to hide good
writing behind a saleable plot.
Show not tell is the biggest no-no for me. Just personally. Pages of past
history just mean the writer started in the wrong place. And it's lazy,
because the option is always there to present in flashback or use dialogue.
I don't recall seeing much of it in your writing, Barry.
"Anopheles" <anoph...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:7le3f4F...@mid.individual.net...
Anopheles
I just love these arguments where we present the same opinion expressed
differently yet still seem to be arguing? My premise was books need an
exciting story with huge sales potential. You countered with;
"I disagree that good books don't sell, but good writers have to hide good
writing behind a saleable plot."
huge sales, I believe it is checkmate/
I'm not arguing against good writing. I'm saying to the millions of would be
writers out there, they won't make it unless they are great story tellers.
That is the key. You'd be surprised that many can't tell a story. Some have
no story at all and that applies to some of these literary books. It is dead
easy to get into print these days and that is not necessarily a good thing.
Because garbage can be printed and put on sale at Amazon, the buying public
have learned to be wary.
And with books on the endangered list, publishers are far less likely to
give a book a go for its excellent writing alone. Books are on their way to
electronic forms via Kindle at al. That will send the language and writing
downwards.
It's all rather depressing and exciting at the same time.
"Alaric McDermott" wrote:.
Roy
> Is it going to make money?
>
> or
>
> Is it an edge of the seat read?
I have a dare for you Barry. I dare you to pick up any of the Jordan
novels at random and start reading. If you can make it 50 pages deep
(keep in mind each one is typically around 1000-1200 pages long) and
can tell me that any sane editor would think that these novels would
make money or be an "edge of the seat" read, I will send
you...uh...hmmm...a free copy of my first novel. hahaha
>
> Pick up any of these prize winning literary novels where every word has
> been agonised over and all the 'rules' have been carefully adhered to, and
> it was probably the the remaindered tray you picked it up from.
>
I don't think "show don't tell" is formulaic. I think it's simply good
writing. Very, very few novels that are mostly exposition are worthy
of reading in my opinion. I would rank "show don't tell" right up
there with "don't write your story using crayons."
Anopheles
"Roy" <roy.an...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cc5ea540-9d81-4b3b...@h2g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...
Anopheles
OK, you and many other writers rank it as important. And as for your dare,
it doesn't matter what I think. Here is what matters.
Jordon has sold over 14 million copies of the dreadful books and you were
one of the buyers. That's the one fact that over rides all your arguments.
14 million readers bought the book. Why did they buy the book if it was
lousy writing? Because the didn't bloody care about the writing and wouldn't
know 'show and tell' if it grabbed them by the testicles and took a bite out
of them. I've heard this same argument put up over different writers three
times in the last month or so. In each case it was the same scenario. Would
be writer sees best seller and throws hands up in horror at bad writing. In
each case, said writer had huge sales. Would be writer asks, "How did he get
published?"
To many people, good writing is very important, but to the great unwashed,
good writing simply means keeping them interested.
Roy
> Jordon has sold over 14 million copies of the dreadful books and you were
> one of the buyers. That's the one fact that over rides all your arguments.
> 14 million readers bought the book. Why did they buy the book if it was
> lousy writing? Because the didn't bloody care about the writing and wouldn't
> know 'show and tell' if it grabbed them by the testicles and took a bite out
> of them. I've heard this same argument put up over different writers three
> times in the last month or so. In each case it was the same scenario. Would
> be writer sees best seller and throws hands up in horror at bad writing. In
> each case, said writer had huge sales. Would be writer asks, "How did he get
> published?"
>
> To many people, good writing is very important, but to the great unwashed,
> good writing simply means keeping them interested.
I think I misunderstood your points. I agree with everything you
wrote. The only caveat here is that I still think the only way Jordan
got published is because his wife was the editor. After that, I think
he got lucky. The only good part of Jordan's works is his rich
backstory. I give him credit for that.
P.S.---I downloaded his audio books for my frequent long trips from a
Russian site.
P.P.S.---To anyone with an mp3 player, in Russia they sell mp3's for 5
American cents and entire albums for 50 cents. Dirt cheap! In Jordan's
case I'm glad. That's about what the books are worth. A nickel.
Alaric McDermott
Wot, you pay for your mp3s?
I didn't say that.
Anopheles
"Alaric McDermott" <wrote
S'funny, someone did.
Should I send the guy a URL?
Anopheles
"Roy" wrote:.
I love it. You envy Jordon yet YOU are making frequent long trips to a
Russian site. That's the sort of irony of a best seller.
Amanda
> The man is worse than Dan Brown, and that's a sentence I never
> thought I'd write.
Perhaps the best description of bad writing that I've seen.
I have read some bestsellers that I considered poorly written. I've
read some thrillers where the relationships between characters were so
shallow I couldn't believe anyone could suspend disbelief enough to
care about the plot. I've read wooden dialog. I've encountered plots
so simplistic I knew the end within the first couple chapters.
But I finished those books and probably found something to enjoy in
them*. I even read up until book 8 or 9 in the Wheel of Time**. But
after finishing that Da Vinci Code drivel, I couldn't imagine reading
Angels and Demons.
* I used to have a lot of free time...
** Yes, a LOT of free time...
Amanda
> I'm not sure if anyone here has read any of Robert Jordan's "Wheel of
> Time" series, but it completely, utterly violates the modern literary
> doctrine of show-dont-tell. Jordan tells. He tells A LOT. In fact, I
> would guess that only about 10-20% of his 13 novels is actually action
> and dialogue. The rest is straight exposition. It's horrendous. You
> can literarily skip entire chapters and miss nothing.
>
> Now, first and foremost, his editor was his wife, so I can see how why
> he wasn't shot down before publication. What really galls me though is
> how his books are best-sellers! This demonstrates to me that there are
> clearly markets for all forms of written material.
>
> I'm not sure that I have a point here, I just felt like venting. :)
> Thoughts, if any?
I know so many people that love Robert Jordan and I really don't get
it. I read fantasy sometimes and even enjoy the world building and
*some of* the extra descriptions that necessarily accompany that. But
gads, I got to the point that I thought if I had to hear one more time
about how the wind blew out of the mountains, down over hundreds of
miles of landscape (with each mile lovingly described), and into the
town of Three Rivers where it ruffled the fur on a lonely housecat,
I'd go on a book burning binge.
Anopheles
"Amanda" wrote:...
Yeah, yeah.
Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code = 20 million copies = Royalties + Over
^S$20,000,000.00
Dear God, send me a book on how to write real bad.
Amanda
> Yeah, yeah.
>
> Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code = 20 million copies = Royalties + Over
> ^S$20,000,000.00
>
> Dear God, send me a book on how to write real bad.
I know. In the case of this guy, what I wish I could do is see what
other people see in the book. I don't think I'm a snob.. at least,
looking at my bookshelf I'd wager most people wouldn't consider me
that. I read a lot of junk! But man, I just couldn't stand Dan
Brown...
Alaric McDermott
But, y'know, it depends on what you want from your writing. I've never been
interested in writing for sale. I hardly ever submit. I put books down that
are badly written. I'm number 20 million and 1. I'm me.
Anopheles
"Alaric McDermott" wrote:.
And -- oh god I hope my shrink doesn't hear this -- I'm like you.
Bwhahahahahaha!
Roy
hahahaha Before I describe why I liked it, I'd be interested in
hearing why you all did not like it.
Roy
> Wot, you pay for your mp3s?
>
> I didn't say that
Until 2 months ago, I'd been downloading bootleg mp3's since the 90s.
It's just that the foreign sites make it so dirt cheap I mean...why
not?
Roy
> I love it. You envy Jordon yet YOU are making frequent long trips to a
> Russian site. That's the sort of irony of a best seller.
Now, now. Don't put words in my mouth. Broadly speaking, my points
are: Jordan sucks. There is clearly a market for sucky books.
I never mentioned anything about jealousy (not that I'm NOT, but I
made no mention). ;)
Alaric McDermott
> I...uh...I...gulp...really like The DaVinci Code. There, I said it!
>
> hahahaha Before I describe why I liked it, I'd be interested in
> hearing why you all did not like it.
You're barred.
Roy
wrote:
> "Roy" <roy.ander...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > I...uh...I...gulp...really like The DaVinci Code. There, I said it!
>
> > hahahaha Before I describe why I liked it, I'd be interested in
> > hearing why you all did not like it.
>
> You're barred.
OK fine. I'll go first. ;)
First off, since I listened to the first half in audio book format
whilst on a long trip, it's entirely possible that I forged through
boring chunks because my attention was focused on the road. With that
caveat said, grammatically, the novel was sound. It wasn't sloppily
written. But that's not why I like it. I like it because it caught me
up in the mystery of ancient secrets and arcane riddles. I wanted to
know who was doing what and why they did it. I wanted to have answers.
In short, the plot had an engaging conflict.
Alaric McDermott
From: "Alaric McDermott" <alar...@btinternet.com>
To: "Roy" <roy.an...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Violations of "show don't tell"
Date: 05 November 2009 16:33
One word.
Spotify.
Roy
wrote:
> From: "Alaric McDermott" <alari...@btinternet.com>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roy" <roy.ander...@gmail.com>
>
> > Until 2 months ago, I'd been downloading bootleg mp3's since the 90s.
> It's just that the foreign sites make it so dirt cheap I mean...why
> not?
>
> One word.
>
> Spotify.
That and Pandora.com are really cool, but they don't let me save the
muzak to my mp3 player...
Alaric McDermott
characters were stock. The plot was predictable at best and stolen at worst.
The duialogue was leading and painful. Other than that, it was fine.
"Roy" <roy.an...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:64d22bac-932e-43c3...@a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
Alaric McDermott
Spotify does now if you pay.
Roy
wrote:
> The prose was awful. Gluey, hokey, infodumping, self-referential. The
> characters were stock. The plot was predictable at best and stolen at worst.
> The duialogue was leading and painful. Other than that, it was fine.
hahahaha
Reading this...I can't help but wonder if you're a very frequent
reader of adult fiction (the category itself. i.e., not romances,
fantasy, etc..). The reason I say that is because I never, EVER am
found in the fiction aisle of any given bookstore. I'm in fantasy, sci-
fi, mystery, horror, non-fiction...actually, almost everywhere but
"adult fiction." To me, it's the most fantastically boring garbage. I
also never watch similar TV shows. When I read or watch entertainment,
I want it to be truly escapist, not just stuff pulled from the front
page of the daily news.
Back to the DaVinci Code. Perhaps he didn't so much win over frequent
readers of adult fiction (to whom his subject material may be old hat)
but rather won over readers from other genres, to whom reading
something set in the modern day (that doesn't involve fantasy, horror,
etc...) is itself a novelty and to whom his hokeyness is an
undiscovered gem.
Alaric McDermott
> hahahaha
You're on tippy toes, Roy.
Stretching.....
Crap is crap. I like Greg Rucka, Stephen King, Stephen Donaldson, Tom Wolfe,
Joseph Heller - I think they make the big shelves. Heh.
You might - or might not - enjoy this from a UK newspaper:
"If Dan Brown's new novel The Lost Symbol is anything like his previous
works, it will not go down well with the critics. Famously, comedian Stewart
Lee mocked him for using the sentence "The famous man looked at the red cup"
in his bestselling The Da Vinci Code.
In fact, Lee was making that up - the sentence never appears in the book. So
are the critics unfair on Brown?
They're certainly harsh. Edinburgh professor of linguistics Geoffrey Pullum
says "Brown's writing is not just bad; it is staggeringly, clumsily,
thoughtlessly, almost ingeniously bad." He picks out some excerpts for
special criticism. The female lead in Angels and Demons learns of the death
of her scientist father: "Genius, she thought. My father . . . Dad. Dead." A
member of the Vatican Guard in the same book becomes annoyed by something,
and we learn that "his eyes went white, like a shark about to attack."
Below we have selected 20 phrases that may grate on the ear. It's not a
definitive list. It couldn't be: he has published five novels, each around
500 pages long, and the arguments over which are the worst bits will go on
for a while. But it's our list. Add your own in the comment box below.
20. Angels and Demons, chapter 1: Although not overly handsome in a
classical sense, the forty-year-old Langdon had what his female colleagues
referred to as an 'erudite' appeal - wisp of gray in his thick brown hair,
probing blue eyes, an arrestingly deep voice, and the strong, carefree smile
of a collegiate athlete.
They say the first rule of fiction is "show, don't tell". This fails that
rule.
19. The Da Vinci Code, chapter 83: "The Knights Templar were warriors,"
Teabing reminded, the sound of his aluminum crutches echoing in this
reverberant space.
"Remind" is a transitive verb - you need to remind someone of something. You
can't just remind. And if the crutches echo, we know the space is
reverberant.
18. The Da Vinci Code, chapter 4: He could taste the familiar tang of museum
air - an arid, deionized essence that carried a faint hint of carbon - the
product of industrial, coal-filter dehumidifiers that ran around the clock
to counteract the corrosive carbon dioxide exhaled by visitors.
Ah, that familiar tang of deionised essence.
17. Deception Point, chapter 8: Overhanging her precarious body was a
jaundiced face whose skin resembled a sheet of parchment paper punctured by
two emotionless eyes.
It's not clear what Brown thinks 'precarious' means here.
16. The Da Vinci Code, chapter 4: A voice spoke, chillingly close. "Do not
move." On his hands and knees, the curator froze, turning his head slowly.
Only fifteen feet away, outside the sealed gate, the mountainous silhouette
of his attacker stared through the iron bars. He was broad and tall, with
ghost-pale skin and thinning white hair. His irises were pink with dark red
pupils.
A silhouette with white hair and pink irises stood chillingly close but 15
feet away. What's wrong with this picture?
15. The Da Vinci Code, chapter 4: As a boy, Langdon had fallen down an
abandoned well shaft and almost died treading water in the narrow space for
hours before being rescued. Since then, he'd suffered a haunting phobia of
enclosed spaces - elevators, subways, squash courts.
Other enclosed spaces include toilet cubicles, phone boxes and dog kennels.
14. Angels and Demons, chapter 100: Bernini's Fountain of the Four Rivers
glorified the four major rivers of the Old World - The Nile, Ganges, Danube,
and Rio Plata.
The Rio de la Plata. Between Argentina and Uruguay. One of the major rivers
of the Old World. Apparently.
The Da Vinci Code, chapter 5: Only those with a keen eye would notice his
14-karat gold bishop's ring with purple amethyst, large diamonds, and
hand-tooled mitre-crozier appliqu�.
A keen eye indeed.
13 and 12. The Lost Symbol, chapter 1: He was sitting all alone in the
enormous cabin of a Falcon 2000EX corporate jet as it bounced its way
through turbulence. In the background, the dual Pratt & Whitney engines
hummed evenly.
The Da Vinci Code, chapter 17: Yanking his Manurhin MR-93 revolver from his
shoulder holster, the captain dashed out of the office.
Oh - the Falcon 2000EX with the Pratt & Whitneys? And the Manurhin MR-93?
Not the MR-92? You're sure? Thanks.
11. The Da Vinci Code, chapter 4: Captain Bezu Fache carried himself like an
angry ox, with his wide shoulders thrown back and his chin tucked hard into
his chest. His dark hair was slicked back with oil, accentuating an
arrow-like widow's peak that divided his jutting brow and preceded him like
the prow of a battleship. As he advanced, his dark eyes seemed to scorch the
earth before him, radiating a fiery clarity that forecast his reputation for
unblinking severity in all matters.
Do angry oxen throw their shoulders back and tuck their chins into their
chest?
What precisely is a fiery clarity and how does it forecast anything? Once
again, it is not clear whether Brown knows what 'forecast' means.
10. The Da Vinci Code, chapter 4: Five months ago, the kaleidoscope of power
had been shaken, and Aringarosa was still reeling from the blow.
Did they hit him with the kaleidoscope?
9. The Da Vinci Code, chapter 32: The vehicle was easily the smallest car
Langdon had ever seen. "SmartCar," she said. "A hundred kilometers to the
liter."
Pro tip: when fleeing from the police, take a moment to boast about your
getaway vehicle's fuel efficiency. And get it wrong by a factor of five.
SmartCars do about 20km (12 miles) to the litre.
8. The Da Vinci Code, chapter 3: My French stinks, Langdon thought, but my
zodiac iconography is pretty good.
And they say the schools are dumbing down.
7 and 6. The Da Vinci Code, chapter 33: Pulling back the sleeve of his
jacket, he checked his watch - a vintage, collector's-edition Mickey Mouse
wristwatch that had been a gift from his parents on his tenth birthday.
The Da Vinci Code, chapter 6: His last correspondence from Vittoria had been
in December - a postcard saying she was headed to the Java Sea to continue
her research in entanglement physics... something about using satellites to
track manta ray migrations.
In the words of Professor Pullum: "It has the ring of utter ineptitude. The
details have no relevance to what is being narrated."
5. Angels and Demons, chapter 4: learning the ropes in the trenches
Learning the ropes (of a naval ship) while in the trenches (with the army in
the First World War). It's a military education, certainly.
4, 3, and 2. The Da Vinci Code, opening sentence: Renowned curator Jacques
Sauni�re staggered through the vaulted archway of the museum's Grand
Gallery.
Angels and Demons, opening sentence: Physicist Leonardo Vetra smelled
burning flesh, and he knew it was his own.
Deception Point, opening sentences: Death, in this forsaken place, could
come in countless forms. Geologist Charles Brophy had endured the savage
splendor of this terrain for years, and yet nothing could prepare him for a
fate as barbarous and unnatural as the one about to befall him.
Professor Pullum: "Renowned author Dan Brown staggered through his formulaic
opening sentence".
1. The Da Vinci Code: Title. The Da Vinci Code.
Leonardo's surname was not Da Vinci. He was from Vinci, or of Vinci. As many
critics have pointed out, calling it The Da Vinci Code is like saying Mr Of
Arabia or asking What Would Of Nazareth Do?"
Roy
wrote:
> You're on tippy toes, Roy.
>
> Stretching.....
>
> Crap is crap. I like Greg Rucka, Stephen King, Stephen Donaldson, Tom Wolfe,
> Joseph Heller - I think they make the big shelves. Heh.
His writing was good. It wasn't a literary masterpiece, but it was
good. That critical drivel is standard issue (just read the reviews
for any given novel in the NY Times). I'm a picky reader and I enjoyed
it. Then again, I never read contemporary fiction like that, so I came
at it from a different angle.
Anopheles
"Roy" <wrote.
hahahaha
If you're not in adult fiction, you're in children's fiction with other
names.
I don't mean this is a nasty way -- well, not my type of nasty -- but
seriously. With some exceptions, real scifi for example, most of these
genres are extensions of the wonder of a child's mind, children's books for
adults. Children love fairy stories but give up belief in fairies when the
mature. But for many, that child-like love of fairy the story clings and so
it becomes fantasy of horror, etc.
Now you would probably take that as an insult, I'm guessing Alaric is
already girding his loins. Actually, it is a compliment. To retain a
child-like imaginaion into adulthood is to be able to imagine a world of
make-believe, someting a writer must have to be a true storyteller.
Just Me
> "Roy" <wrote.
> When I read or watch entertainment,
> I want it to be truly escapist, not just stuff pulled from the front
> page of the daily news.
>
> If you're not in adult fiction, you're in children's fiction with other
> names.
Now ain't that just the truth?
>
> I don't mean this is a nasty way -- well, not my type of nasty --
Then try mine. ;-) I mean it in the nastiest way possible, as nasty
begets nasty . . .
> Reading this...I can't help but wonder if you're a very frequent
> reader of adult fiction (the category itself. i.e., not romances,
> fantasy, etc..). The reason I say that is because I never, EVER am
> found in the fiction aisle of any given bookstore. I'm in fantasy, sci-
> fi, mystery, horror, non-fiction...actually, almost everywhere but
> "adult fiction." To me, it's the most fantastically boring garbage.
He just dumped into the 'garbage' every major, critically recognized
author of mature, quality prose since the invention of the printing
press! THAT is nasty. I could go on to get just as nasty about the
manner of garbage he takes for ambrosia but why compound the
felony? ;-)
Let everyone revel in their garbage of choice!
--
JM
http://jpdavid.blogspot.com/
Roy
fiction as one grows out of child's clothes. ;) To me, contemporary
fiction (bereft of some other genre, such as horror) is formulaic. 9
times out of 10, you know exactly how any given "adult" fiction novel
is going to end, and to me that's an unforgiveable crime. I live for
the twist. I live for the surprise, for not knowing what's going on.
That's why DaVinci Code worked for me. I had no clue how the ending
was going to play out.
Contrast that with "adult" fiction that includes fantasy, for
instance. In Robin Mckinley's "Sunshine" or Neil Gaiman's "Neverwhere"
there are many times where you are caught off guard. You have no idea
how it'll end, and you certainly have no clue what path the journey
there is going to take. With fantasy, anything could very well happen
(and frequently does).
Having said all that, I've just sent out a mass-email to all the
readers I know and I'll ask the same question here. Convince me
otherwise. Give me a non-formulaic, plot-driven "adult" fiction novel
that doesn't incorporate other genres. I'll give it a go.
Someone recommended "The Keep" via email. We'll see.
Tina Hall
> I'm not sure if anyone here has read any of Robert Jordan's
> "Wheel of Time" series, but it completely, utterly violates the
> modern literary doctrine of show-dont-tell. Jordan tells. He
> tells A LOT. In fact, I would guess that only about 10-20% of his
> 13 novels is actually action and dialogue. The rest is straight
> exposition. It's horrendous. You can literarily skip entire
> chapters and miss nothing.
Tell me about it.
> Now, first and foremost, his editor was his wife, so I can see
> how why he wasn't shot down before publication. What really galls
> me though is how his books are best-sellers! This demonstrates to
> me that there are clearly markets for all forms of written
> material.
I bought them when I didn't know better. I stopped once I did.
> I'm not sure that I have a point here, I just felt like venting.
> :) Thoughts, if any?
Agreement.
Well, apart from implying there's any doctrine. There are no rules.
Anything can be done, if done interesting. But while 'interesting'
is subjective, you're right in saying that RJ didn't write very
well. (I used to think that the series should be rewritten by
another author - who many accuse of copying Jordan's stuff, not that
I see what they see, but he's got a more concise style in any case.
Not that I read his series any longer. The last book of that I read
was nearly ruined by the main characters turning up - the only time
in the whole book - at the end.)
> P.S.---If his crap made it to print, there is no reason anyone
> here shouldn't be published.
Yeah.
Except I wouldn't want to be published. I just want a betareader to
help me learn to write better. If I were sewing clothes (it's a
plan), I wouldn't want to become a famous designer, either. I'd just
not want all the seams to fall apart (and if I didn't know how,
would like help in learning that).
--
(Chaeron) "I'll see whether I can't get Chastan to bargain a little with me."
(Ghareg) "Be sure she leaves you your clothes, the people here seem to think
not wearing any mighty odd." -- Seasons & Elements II: Controlling the Magic
Excerpts at: <http://home.htp-tel.de/fkoerper/ath/athintro.htm>
Roy
> otherwise. Give me a non-formulaic, plot-driven "adult" fiction novel
> that doesn't incorporate other genres. I'll give it a go.
P.S.--To clarify: by "plot-driven" I simply mean a novel that is not
overwhelmingly character-driven. I can't abide novels where you spend
90% of the time loitering in other people's minds.
P.P.S.--And just to stop some smart alec from pointing this out, yes,
I know that reading a novel is, in effect, loitering about in someone
else's mind. ;)
Alaric McDermott
From: "Alaric McDermott" <alar...@btinternet.com>
To: "Roy" <roy.an...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Violations of "show don't tell"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roy" <roy.an...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fiction.original
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: Violations of "show don't tell"
> Ironically, I think it's fairer to say I grew out of contemporary
> fiction as one grows out of child's clothes. ;) To me, contemporary
> fiction (bereft of some other genre, such as horror) is formulaic. 9
> times out of 10, you know exactly how any given "adult" fiction novel
> is going to end, and to me that's an unforgiveable crime. I live for
> the twist. I live for the surprise, for not knowing what's going on.
> That's why DaVinci Code worked for me. I had no clue how the ending
> was going to play out.
>
> Contrast that with "adult" fiction that includes fantasy, for
> instance. In Robin Mckinley's "Sunshine" or Neil Gaiman's "Neverwhere"
> there are many times where you are caught off guard. You have no idea
> how it'll end, and you certainly have no clue what path the journey
> there is going to take. With fantasy, anything could very well happen
> (and frequently does).
>
> Having said all that, I've just sent out a mass-email to all the
> readers I know and I'll ask the same question here. Convince me
> otherwise. Give me a non-formulaic, plot-driven "adult" fiction novel
> that doesn't incorporate other genres. I'll give it a go.
>
> Someone recommended "The Keep" via email. We'll see.
Modern? Ignoring the classics (of which of course I could give you a
hundred):-
Bonfire Of The Vanities
Catch 22
A Gentleman's Game
Non-horror/fantasy/SF Stephen King
That's just without looking at my bookshelves.
You'd enjoy these, Roy.
Roy
wrote:
> Modern? Ignoring the classics (of which of course I could give you a
> hundred):-
>
> Bonfire Of The Vanities
>
> Catch 22
>
> A Gentleman's Game
>
> Non-horror/fantasy/SF Stephen King
I'm about to be difficult. ;)
I just read the lil' blurbs for them on Amazon and I'm not sure I
would enjoy them. Let me explain. I think that Fahrenheit 451 and 1984
are excellent novels. They're engaging, well-written, mind-opening,
etc. If I had my way, they'd be mandatory reading for everyone. Having
said that, I would never read them for enjoyment or entertainment
purposes.
Reading the synopsis's of the novels you recommended tells me they're
probably similar. I'm sure they're well-written, engaging, etc., but I
highly doubt I would find them entertaining. In asking for some novels
to read, I'm looking for entertainment. I'm looking for something that
would make me reconsider my notion that non-genre fiction is dull.
Something that would make me think that it's not the literary
equivalent of easy listening muzak.
Here's a flip side of the coin. I've explained what I find
entertaining about novels I like. What do you find enjoyable or
entertaining about the novels you mentioned?
P.S.--I've read many of the classics. Many I found very entertaining.
I'm glad I read them, but most I will never read again.
Roy
> If you're not in adult fiction, you're in children's fiction with other
> names.
>
> I don't mean this is a nasty way -- well, not my type of nasty -- but
> seriously. With some exceptions, real scifi for example, most of these
> genres are extensions of the wonder of a child's mind, children's books for
> adults. Children love fairy stories but give up belief in fairies when the
> mature. But for many, that child-like love of fairy the story clings and so
> it becomes fantasy of horror, etc.
>
> Now you would probably take that as an insult, I'm guessing Alaric is
> already girding his loins. Actually, it is a compliment. To retain a
> child-like imaginaion into adulthood is to be able to imagine a world of
> make-believe, someting a writer must have to be a true storyteller.
So I did some online searching about why modern novels are so boring.
I was surprised by the breadth and depth of critical hatred there is
against non-genre novels. I am certainly not alone in my feelings.
Anyways, there is one blog by a professor which strikes a chord with
what you say above. I include a short quote that relates.
http://koreanish.com/2009/09/09/why-must-the-novel-be-boring/
There was a time when difficult literature was exciting. T.S. Eliot
once famously read to a whole football stadium full of fans. And it’s
still exciting—when Eliot does it. But in contemporary writers it has
just become a drag. Which is probably why millions of adults are
cheating on the literary novel with the young-adult novel, where the
unblushing embrace of storytelling is allowed, even encouraged. Sales
of hardcover young-adult books are up 30.7% so far this year, through
June, according to the Association of American Publishers, while adult
hardcovers are down 17.8%. Nam Le’s “The Boat,” one of the best-
reviewed books of fiction of 2008, has sold 16,000 copies in hardcover
and trade paperback, according to Nielsen Bookscan (which admittedly
doesn’t include all book retailers). In the first quarter of 2009
alone, the author of the “Twilight” series, Stephenie Meyer, sold
eight million books. What are those readers looking for? You’ll find
critics who say they have bad taste, or that they’re lazy and can’t
hack it in the big leagues. But that’s not the case. They need
something they’re not getting elsewhere. Let’s be honest: Why do so
many adults read Suzanne Collins’s young-adult novel “The Hunger
Games” instead of contemporary literary fiction? Because “The Hunger
Games” doesn’t bore them.
Anopheles
"Roy" wrote:.
After all you have said, Roy, try googling on Amazon for a book called "Miss
Alice Merriwether's Long Lost Cakes". It isn't a cookbook but it cooks up
the sort of stuff you claim you like.
Amanda
It's strange what appeals to different people. For instance, I
sometimes read and enjoy fantasy and especially near-future science
fiction. But I can't abide shallow characters. If I can't believe in
them, I can't care what happens to them, so why turn the page? I also
don't like genre fiction that doesn't say something about human
nature.
Of course, I don't say any of this stuff to criticize your preference,
just talking...
Roy
> After all you have said, Roy, try googling on Amazon for a book called "Miss
> Alice Merriwether's Long Lost Cakes". It isn't a cookbook but it cooks up
> the sort of stuff you claim you like.
First off, congratulations Barry! I had no idea you got published!
Serves me right for being so on-again, off-again.
Secondly, yeah, it does seem right up my alley. I'll give it a go.
Anopheles
"Roy" wrote:
On Nov 5, 3:05 pm, "Anopheles" <anophele...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> If you're not in adult fiction, you're in children's fiction with other
> names.
>
> I don't mean this is a nasty way -- well, not my type of nasty -- but
> seriously. With some exceptions, real scifi for example, most of these
> genres are extensions of the wonder of a child's mind, children's books
> for
> adults. Children love fairy stories but give up belief in fairies when the
> mature. But for many, that child-like love of fairy the story clings and
> so
> it becomes fantasy of horror, etc.
>
> Now you would probably take that as an insult, I'm guessing Alaric is
> already girding his loins. Actually, it is a compliment. To retain a
> child-like imaginaion into adulthood is to be able to imagine a world of
> make-believe, someting a writer must have to be a true storyteller.
So I did some online searching about why modern novels are so boring.
I was surprised by the breadth and depth of critical hatred there is
against non-genre novels. I am certainly not alone in my feelings.
Anyways, there is one blog by a professor which strikes a chord with
what you say above. I include a short quote that relates.
http://koreanish.com/2009/09/09/why-must-the-novel-be-boring/
There was a time when difficult literature was exciting. T.S. Eliot
once famously read to a whole football stadium full of fans. And it�s
still exciting�when Eliot does it. But in contemporary writers it has
just become a drag. Which is probably why millions of adults are
cheating on the literary novel with the young-adult novel, where the
unblushing embrace of storytelling is allowed, even encouraged. Sales
of hardcover young-adult books are up 30.7% so far this year, through
June, according to the Association of American Publishers, while adult
hardcovers are down 17.8%. Nam Le�s �The Boat,� one of the best-
reviewed books of fiction of 2008, has sold 16,000 copies in hardcover
and trade paperback, according to Nielsen Bookscan (which admittedly
doesn�t include all book retailers). In the first quarter of 2009
alone, the author of the �Twilight� series, Stephenie Meyer, sold
eight million books. What are those readers looking for? You�ll find
critics who say they have bad taste, or that they�re lazy and can�t
hack it in the big leagues. But that�s not the case. They need
something they�re not getting elsewhere. Let�s be honest: Why do so
many adults read Suzanne Collins�s young-adult novel �The Hunger
Games� instead of contemporary literary fiction? Because �The Hunger
Games� doesn�t bore them.
I see two pathways here. The first was the subject of a satirical short I
wrote called, "How To Write a Short Story" which took modern short fiction
to task for forgetting the 'story' half. I put the blame on 'creative
fiction' classes run by academics who are constipated with technique but
have diarrhoea of the imagination. I see this in my novels group with one
woman who waves her BA in English around as if it actually means something
yet her writing is flat, boring and nothing much happens.
That seems to have pervaded competition fiction is evident from the winning
entries. But I didn't suspect -- nor do I believe -- it has crept into
novels. Novels -- at least those published by true publishers -- go through
a vicious vetting cycle where the prime selection rule over all others is
making money.
So, if novels are 'perceived' as boring, there must be another explanation
other than the obvious 'they are boring'. Let me put up another of my
hypotheses (so Alaric can practice his debating skills) and this is about
boring writing. Rather than the actually story, it is the writing that is
unreadable. It might be word clutter, it might be word choice, it might be a
number of causes, but the upshot is you get tired of it quickly and you
can't concentrate on the story. Good writing is of two types, the first
positively glows with word choice and is an absolute delight to read for the
beauty of the language. The second is almost invisible and the reader reads
effortlessly.
So, Roy, think over those works you rejected and ask yourself, was it the
writing?
But if it is true, why are other genres not boring?
Barry
Wind River
Me, too, Amanda. I want interesting characters with depth to them and
something about human nature. I also want it well written.
I don't really care if there's a twist or not as long as the journey
intrigues me. In fact, I'm annoyed if it's obvious the twist is the main
reason for the book, and everything is geared toward it. It makes me
feel manipulated by the author.
Sue
Alaric McDermott
that you want. A fast moving story, unpredictability right up to the wire -
the fate of every character (and I stress well drawn character, about who
the reader cares, rather than formulaic genre cipher) is unknown until the
last page is turned, and the twists shock, take your breath away.
Catch 22 is the funniest book ever written. I defy anyone to read it and not
laugh out loud. But it's also the best anti-war book ever written.
My wife is a limited reader like you (by limited I don't insult, I mean
genre-specific). In 30 years I've never known her read anything but forensic
detective fiction - Rendell, Reichs and the like. But she read and loved
both of the above.
A Gentleman's Game is a dark, twisted, relatively undiscovered spy thriller,
a Deighton or Le Carre for modern times, with the most complete female lead
I've discovered - the ultimate non-sexist action book.
"Roy" <roy.an...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f9931078-2791-4add...@f16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
Alaric McDermott
"Anopheles" <anoph...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:7ljibpF...@mid.individual.net...
I don't know who I'm disagreeing with (probably Roy and a little with you)
but to be honest I think this whole debate is horseshit. Genre has nothing
to do with it. Nothing at all. Good writing is good writing - period. People
are making the common mistake of confusing good writing and literary
writing, whereas literary writing is often very poor - boring, yes.
Convoluted, overwritten. Literary fiction is a genre of its own. Good
writing isn't. And there is good writing in every genre, fantasy included.
Stephen Donaldson is one of the best writers of his generation. Fantasy
doesn't appeal to me any more not because of writing quality but because of
the craven nature of most of its popular writers, refusing to crawl out of
the box that Tolkien, Dunsinane et al created - it's pathetic, to be honest.
Elves, dwarves, goblins, giants, white magic, black magic, dragons, tokens.
Just, y'know, yawn. Create something of your own, for Christ's sake. It's
little better than fan fiction.
Good writing is writing that moves story, creates character, shows care for
and understanding of the reader. End of.
Anopheles
"Alaric McDermott" wrote:.
Um, can you point out just where you were disagreeing with me? Isn't
language exciting?
Alaric McDermott
It was the word upshot. It was used asymetrically in the sentence.
Anopheles
"Alaric McDermott" <wrote >
Would 'down not-shot' be more satisfying?
Just Me
Well stated, Susie.
--
JM
Dave Allyn
<anoph...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>"Amanda" wrote:...
>On Nov 4, 1:04 pm, "Alaric McDermott" <alari...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> The man is worse than Dan Brown, and that's a sentence I never
>> thought I'd write.
>
>Perhaps the best description of bad writing that I've seen.
>
>I have read some bestsellers that I considered poorly written. I've
>read some thrillers where the relationships between characters were so
>shallow I couldn't believe anyone could suspend disbelief enough to
>care about the plot. I've read wooden dialog. I've encountered plots
>so simplistic I knew the end within the first couple chapters.
>
>But I finished those books and probably found something to enjoy in
>them*. I even read up until book 8 or 9 in the Wheel of Time**. But
>after finishing that Da Vinci Code drivel, I couldn't imagine reading
>Angels and Demons.
>
>
>Yeah, yeah.
>
>Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code = 20 million copies = Royalties + Over
>^S$20,000,000.00
>
>Dear God, send me a book on how to write real bad.
Selling millions of books is easy. All you need to do is write some
sort of contraversial material, and millions will buy it just to see
what is so bad about it. My word, here in the states there were many,
many books written just about DVC, and the proper response to it.
That is what sold it.
Also, keep in mind the reason that his books "worked" aside from
everyone wanting to see what was so horrific about it, was that he
used the tell, not show to make it sound like a non-fiction book.
People (like me) who watch the history chanel more than they do
anything else, don't mind being told things.
Anopheles
"Dave Allyn" wrote:.
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 11:49:01 +1100, "Anopheles"
> <anoph...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Amanda" wrote:...
>>On Nov 4, 1:04 pm, "Alaric McDermott" <alari...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The man is worse than Dan Brown, and that's a sentence I never
>>> thought I'd write.
>>
>>Perhaps the best description of bad writing that I've seen.
>>
>>I have read some bestsellers that I considered poorly written. I've
>>read some thrillers where the relationships between characters were so
>>shallow I couldn't believe anyone could suspend disbelief enough to
>>care about the plot. I've read wooden dialog. I've encountered plots
>>so simplistic I knew the end within the first couple chapters.
>>
>>But I finished those books and probably found something to enjoy in
>>them*. I even read up until book 8 or 9 in the Wheel of Time**. But
>>after finishing that Da Vinci Code drivel, I couldn't imagine reading
>>Angels and Demons.
>>
>>
>>Yeah, yeah.
>>
>>Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code = 20 million copies = Royalties + Over
>>^S$20,000,000.00
>>
>>Dear God, send me a book on how to write real bad.
>
> Selling millions of books is easy.
Was this supposed to be satirical, Dave. God, I hope so.
For a start, you have left yourself wide open for the obvious.. If it is so
easy, why not you?
I'm sorry, your argument won't hold water. 20 million copies sold to people
who bought it JUST to see what the rukkas was all about? So Roy was the only
who actually enjoyed it-- out of 20 million?
>All you need to do is write some
> sort of contraversial material, and millions will buy it just to see
> what is so bad about it. My word, here in the states there were many,
> many books written just about DVC, and the proper response to it.
> That is what sold it.
This was after it had already sold millions. There's no question the
controversy helped, but the controversy was over matters of plagiarism.
> Also, keep in mind the reason that his books "worked" aside from
> everyone wanting to see what was so horrific about it, was that he
> used the tell, not show to make it sound like a non-fiction book.
> People (like me) who watch the history chanel more than they do
> anything else, don't mind being told things.
He used the 'tell' because he can't write good prose, but he can write well
enough for the plebs and they bought his book in droves. Sorry, Dave, I
can't swallow your arguments, even if you had provided a featherweight of
proof to back it up. But wait a few hours and someone will come by who will
believe it.
Barry
Wind River
Thank you.
Roy
> novels. Novels -- at least those published by true publishers -- go through
> a vicious vetting cycle where the prime selection rule over all others is
> making money.
True. But I strongly suspect that publishers pump out 2 kinds of
novels. The first kind is the "standard issue novel." It's not
particularly unique. It's just something that they know will probably
sell X amount of copies, stay in print for a year or two, then fade
away. Basically, the bread and butter novels. The remaining are the
unique ones. The ones the publisher really hopes will boom. Why am I
saying this? To set the foundation for my next point...
> So, if novels are 'perceived' as boring, there must be another explanation
> other than the obvious 'they are boring'.
Nope, I truly just think most non-genre fiction is boring due to my
rationale above. Many novels (even the best) could be said to be
formulaic, but it seems to me that non-genre fiction is the most
formulaic and has the most "standard issue novels" printed. I'm so
sick of reading about yuppies/crazy rich lifestyles, drug addiction,
about terrorists smuggling XYZ, about married folks having affairs,
about communities coming to grips with ABC, and OH MY GOD most
especially about racial issues.
> So, Roy, think over those works you rejected and ask yourself, was it the
> writing?
Nope. Though I do see your point. Some novels do have distracting
writing, but as long as the plot is good enough I overlook it.
Roy
> Well, just choosing one, The Bonfire Of The Vanities has everything you say
> that you want. A fast moving story, unpredictability right up to the wire -
hahaha It's funny you should mention that one. That's the one that
(again, judging by the brief synopsis online) I thought I would like
the least! It has all the ingredients for boring (for me anyways). I
mean, the author seems to have pulled his plot straight off of a
novels-by-numbers spreadseet.
Rich white wall streeters? Check.
Race relations? Check.
Overzealous District Attorney? Check. (has anyone ever seen a novel
about a DA who isn't "overzealous"?? that might be a novel worth
reading)
I've no clue about the rest, but let me just fill in some blanks
automatically. Everyone's screwing everyone (both literally and
figuratively), and the black folk are all angry Jesse Jackson-esque or
conversely, pious and timid.
Not downing the book though (well...ok, maybe I am, a little. my
apologies, no offense meant), but damn I'm so over race relations.
Maybe if I had lived through the 60's it'd be more interesting, but if
I never see another "racially charged" bit of fiction in my life I'll
count myself blessed. You know what the true tragedy of the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict? Not the terrorism against Jews or the war crimes
against Palestinians...it's that in a few decades there will be
nightmarish tidal wave of racial "forbidden love" movies and novels
coming out of there. Ugh.
> the fate of every character (and I stress well drawn character, about who
> the reader cares, rather than formulaic genre cipher) is unknown until the
> last page is turned, and the twists shock, take your breath away.
>
> Catch 22 is the funniest book ever written. I defy anyone to read it and not
> laugh out loud. But it's also the best anti-war book ever written.
I like funny books. I'll give it a go.
P.S.---btw, unrelated, but "The Keep" is excellent so far!!
Roy
> Elves, dwarves, goblins, giants, white magic, black magic, dragons, tokens.
> Just, y'know, yawn. Create something of your own, for Christ's sake. It's
> little better than fan fiction.
>
> Good writing is writing that moves story, creates character, shows care for
> and understanding of the reader. End of.
Unfortunately, much like vampires, those fantasy waystones show little
sign of flagging. Rowling didn't help it any. You can't much more
formulaic and fan-fictiony than her novels, but they were excellent
and she's richer than God now.
And btw, most new fantasy novels break the mold you describe. "Classic
fantasy" seems to be becoming a sub-genre all to it's own.
P.S.---not related to novels, but if any of you want an entertaining
movie that makes you relive fantasy through a child's eyes I HIGHLY
recommend "Spirited Away." You won't regret it.
Roy
across that way. Textual interpretation and all that jazz... Love you
all and the discussion about differing genres really boils down to the
ridiculous argument I heard once between two Star Wars fans. One was
overflowing with praise about "The Empire Strike Back" being the best
in the series. The other was crowing about "Return of the Jedi." But
to outsiders, it's a silly distinction. :)
Wind River
Spock would have made a better captain than Kirk! So there!
RDA
May God have mercy on my soul.
Becky Synk
at one stage of our lives and can't stand it later. Worse things can
happen to your soul and any reasonable God would know this.