The Bottom Line
In my real life, with four kids, three dogs, one cat, one hedgehog, a parrot, a snake, a career, visiting parents for a month, cooking, cleaning . . . the whole nine yards, I have become a "bottom line" person. If someone wants to tell me a story? Just cut to the end.
I find it even in my own bottom lines. If I don't tell my Significant Other my emotions WHEN they happen . . . if they are delayed a couple of days because we never see each other, then by the time we DO, I can't be bothered explaining that I was sad three days ago. Consequently, I bottom line much of life into "is this something I need to deal with right now." If not and it's over, I try to let it go. I have enough clutter. Emotional and otherwise.
So it was interesting . . . I brought two scenes to my critique group on Tuesday. Both . . . good feedback. BUT . . . particularly in one chapter set in Chernobyl? They wanted MORE detail, more depth. Me? I'm constantly worrying I'm BORING the reader, so I move it along, cut to the chase.
I think we have to be cautious, as writers, that we don't bring our "nature" into the story unless it serves us well. I have been bored to tears by some manuscripts so full of details I can't wade through them all. My guess? The writers are the type of people to take two hours to tell a simple story in minute detail in real life. Then again, I am sure I can add more--a lot more.
So what about you? What's your bottom line?
10 comments:
I think it goes a long ways toward what types of books you write and their success. I'm the type of reader who loves to be sucked up into a fast-paced story and can't wait to get to the end. So that's the kind of story I write. Is it part of my personality? Maybe. Certainly there's a kind of head-down-move-forward-no-matter-what aspect to my personality that's part of the Derek Stillwater novels. The trick, as you say, is, if you're writing something else, to be aware of it and no what your liabilities are.
I'm a minimalist, so I like to keep it lean and clean. It can feel rushed sometimes, though, so sometimes I have to go back and flesh it out a bit. On revision, some people are adder-to-ers and others are taker-away-ers. I'm an adder-to-er.
I think my bottom line lands somewhere in the middle. My female global mind likes details, tactile descriptions that put me in the scene, and random connections between characters and setting. To leave out too much of that good stuff makes for a read that doesn't satisfy me. ON the other hand, please don't spend three pages describing a table setting or a field of wild flowers.
In my reading this year I've tried to pay attention to when I get bored with a descriptive narrative section so I can hopefully recognize when I go way beyond the bottom line of the story.
Sometimes I see this stuff most clearly when I re-read a book. I tend to skip parts that held no real meaning to me the first time I read the book. Those types of sections are one I think could probably be left out as they obviously didn't move the story along that much.
Mark:
I agree. When I was fiddling with a thriller, I wanted it to move along.
Jude:
I'm an add-to-er also.
I had this problem in music and I have this problem in writing, LOL. Worse, a story will set me to skimming quickly. If you give me more than three sentences in a paragraph, there's a 70% chance I'll skim.
Thus, I still can't write a freaking paragraph.
In my reading, I tend to skip over detail to get to story. That's true unless the writer is especially good and writes compelling detail which has an emotional quality in itself.
As a writer, if I err, I err on the side of not telling enough.
Beth:
I find I will wade through more details on character than scene. That tends to be my line in the sand.
E
Nastasha:
LOL! I hear you!
E
Joe:
I think that emotional quality is what I look for, too.
E
Post a Comment