Comments and further discussions are very welcome.
=====
Gratuitous Self: Meta-Meta-What?
- 13-
Sparse.
That's the one word common to most commentaries of my writing style.
Sparse. I have no problem with 'sparse'.
Asimov's writing was 'sparse'. I have no problem being tagged with the
same adjective used to describe the writing of the author of the Foundation
books, one of my all-time favorite SF series.
Hemingway's writing was 'sparse'. While I don't particularly care for
Hemingway, or his writing, or his 'cleaning the shotgun' death, I certainly
don't mind having my writing labeled as being in the same style as such a
famous writer (whose name, by the way, gets bandied around by people who
have never read his work, so that they can sound literate).
I did check out some synonyms for 'sparse', though, and here's a few
that I came up with: Meager, scanty, inadequate, and restricted.
Then I read a few books, most notably by Dickens and by Jeannette
Winterson, and I read my own works again.
And BOY, did it feel sparse.
No lengthy expositions on the families that lived in the area that the
protagonist grew up in. No rich, earthy, innovative metaphors. No deep
social commentary. No inclination to attempt a more cutting-edge method of
portraying lovemaking, or cancer, or autumn leaves. No propensity to
substitute long, Latinate words for short, brief, low-grade Anglo-Saxon
words.
All I have in front of me are scads of fast-paced dialogue interspersed
with medium-sized blocks of introspection and personal observation.
So this is my style. Sparse. Minimalist.
I like it.
- 14 -
I blame my insecurities about my writing on my education.
My Creative Writing teachers have told me many things; they tell me
that my writing resembles a comic book script, that I moralize, that I rely
too much on my reader's ability to infer things on their own, and above all,
that I make very little effort to tell the readers where and when each and
every event takes place.
Let me address those things one by one.
Comic Book Scripts: Have you read any Sandman comics? How about
'Kingdom Come'? The Invisibles? I would be proud to have my writing lumped
in with those works.
Apparently, some professors agreed with me, because they're offering a
Comic Book Writing course at the university now.
Moralizing: I do not moralize. I express my opinions and beliefs, yes.
I don't feel the need to explain these beliefs to other people, nor do I
force those who read my works to accept them as gospel. No, because that
would be moralizing, wouldn't it? Only book-burners and bible-thumpers
moralize. People always say, "If you don't like it, don't read it." I say,
"If you don't like it, don't burn the book, just form your own opinion."
Reader's Ability to Infer: Let's face it: we hate it when we think that
the author is patronizing us. When the author takes a condescending tone
toward the readers for their inferior understanding or knowledge, his or her
work becomes almost repellant to us. Yes, I rely on the reader's skills at
induction quite a bit. When I say, "Takezo was crushed. How could his
masterpiece come under so much criticism from the mailing list?" I expect
the readers to infer a couple of things: Takezo sees Turning Road as his
masterpiece, and in his youthful idealism he was unprepared to accept
negative C&C.
I didn't say these things outright, and yet the average reader picks it
up right away (even if only unconsciously). When I say "This was the fourth
girl he and his friends propositioned this day that didn't respond as
predicted," I think it's safe to assume that there were three girls before
this particular one.
The reader is not stupid, and won't take kindly to being treated as if
he or she is. Stephen Hawking never sounded condescending, and yet he's more
knowledgeable about his chosen field and most probably more intelligent than
most of his readers. Joseph Campbell didn't patronize us even though he
probably knew more about mythology than anyone else on the planet.
So why should I talk down to my readers? Just because my 'teachers'
want me to pander to the lowest possible denominator? No, thank you.
Tell the Readers Where and When: This is related to reader inference.
When I say Keiichi and Skuld are riding their motorcycle home while the sky
turns from blue to orange and the cherry blossom petals fall, I assume that
the readers know that they're on the road, that it's sunset, and that it's
spring. Unfortunately, some of my teachers seem to want me to expound on it
in the following manner:
Keiichi and Skuld rode down the highway to the temple during a spring
sunset.
Excuse me? How boring is that?
As a further illustration, compare this excerpt from Yen Town:
The little girl with the pigtails and coveralls stood on top of the
building, on the edge. She stared at the city below, her new home ever since
her father decided to move here with his friend. The buildings around her
were bathed in the setting sun's light; some glinting, some not.
With this "better", "more descriptive" revised, and professor-friendly
version:
Nabiki was a little girl who wore coveralls. Her hair was tied in
pigtails. She stood on top of a tall building, which was located in a
Japanese city. She and her father had moved to the city with her father's
friend. It was dusk. The sun was setting. The buildings that were shiny
because they were made of glass and steel, reflected the sunlight. The
buildings that weren't shiny didn't reflect the sunlight.
I rest my case.
Incidentally, all this education taught me a few important lessons:
A degree in Literature does not make anyone's opinion better than
yours.
Nod politely while internally rejecting someone's advice.
The FFML writers probably have a larger audience for their works than
these academicians.
Don't expect to learn writing from writing classes. Take them only when
you already know how to write, and take them so you can learn how to handle
criticism, valid or not.
And finally:
Workshop writing classes are great for a laugh.
=====
TimeRunner's Web Page:
http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Towers/7482
=====
Writers have to simultaneously believe the following two things:
1. The story I am now working on is the greatest work of genius ever written
in English.
2. The story I am now working on is worthless drivel.
Of course, believing two contradictory facts at the same time is somteimes
referred to as madness -- but that, too, can be an asset to a writer.
-- Orson Scott Card