Overdosed Description. - Writers Forum

maia · 01-27-2006, 11:42 AM

I have an issue with over describing in my work. It's so overloaded with the finest polished details it's sometimes vague in conveying the actual point. I have an example if you'd like to further critique a small piece of my work. Please help - I'd love any assistance you have to offer.

http://www.freewebs.com/novel

Thanks - maia

Stewart · 01-27-2006, 11:59 AM

Quote:

The mottled grey creature cast long mulberry shadows across the rusting Sahara, as the Sun commenced to fall away into oblivion beyond the ragged sienna. It was evening, and the darkness had just begun to filter across the maimed solitary landscape, searching out corners to darken. A moist crimson heat was solidifying into a large emulsified gleam on the contours of the desert, shining blatantly under the descending veil of moonlight.

There's your problem with wordiness. You are repeating the same thing over and over as you work through your thesaurus. Say it once, and say it naturally.

ie.

Quote:

The creature cast its long shadow over the rusted Sahara where the crimson heat, it seemed, seethed within each grain of sand.

My example is, pretty much, what you are trying to say, isn't it?

maia · 01-27-2006, 12:15 PM

No, not really. It has no dramatical influence which the landscape is meant to convey. There is miscommunication or underlying description in which the reader could arise suspicions from. And it makes it sound like a sauna, not a desert. Thanks, lol, but no thanks.

Furthermore, many points have been left out, the reader needs a total, clear and complete picture of what he/she is being flung into.

edf · 01-27-2006, 12:47 PM

I have the oposite problem I believe, i leave out description!

I read the little passage that Conner Wolf quoted from your work, and yes, it does paint a good picture of what is going on, but to me, it is a bit much... I honestly found myself wanting to get to the point. Now Conner Wolf did offer up aother way to handle the paragraph, and if you think that was not good enough, then that's fine... perhaps the passage should have a tad more detail, but carefull to not go overboard and make the reader want to skip ahead to get to the point, To be honest with ya, some of the words you used I don't even know what they mean ( hey, that could just be my bad vocabulary usage, LOL) but if I truly wanted to undertsand what you have written, I would need a dictionary. I do agree that things are repeated more then they are needed. The passage does create great imagery tho, but I personally wouldn't re-read paragraph after paragraph to understand what the writer is portraying when it is that complex.

Now, as to how to fix the overdescription.....I wish I could provide better help, but as I stated above, I usually underdescribe things out of laziness or not knowing how to ( i am an inexperienced wrtier). Maybe if you look at Conner Wolf's suggestion, and work with it... if you feel it needs more description then that, then add more in and see what it looks like then.

I hope my honest input has some value to you. And I am sorry I could not come up with a solution, but hopefully my input would help you in some way.

Best wishes!

edf

maia · 01-27-2006, 01:43 PM

Thanks very much edf!!

TimK · 01-27-2006, 02:32 PM

Hi, maia.

You don't have to provide a complete description of everything in the scene. You only have to provide enough so that the reader feels he's there. Each reader will fill in details from his own imagination, and each reader's details will be different. This is better than providing a complete description for two reasons. Firstly, laundry lists of description are boring. Second, if you involve the reader's imagination, you are involving the reader, and that will keep him engaged, which will keep him reading your story.

Also, you should show instead of tell. Rather than use expository prose, imply through demonstration what the setting is. This again will involve and engage the reader. And it will also provide a more vivid image, since we usually remember what we're shown rather than what we're told. Think of how a small child might react if you shouted "I LOVE YOU!" at her with an angry scowl on your face. She'd cry, even though you were saying something nice. Actions speak louder than words. Use this fact to improve your descriptions.

So, let's look at the clip quoted above:

Quote:

The mottled grey creature cast long mulberry shadows across the rusting Sahara, as the Sun commenced to fall away into oblivion beyond the ragged sienna. It was evening, and the darkness had just begun to filter across the maimed solitary landscape, searching out corners to darken. A moist crimson heat was solidifying into a large emulsified gleam on the contours of the desert, shining blatantly under the descending veil of moonlight.

What's the setting?

There's someone standing...
... in the Sahara...
... at evening..
... alone.
It's hot.

There's no moist heat in the Sahara, so I got rid of that part. Also, either the sunlight or the moonlight is dominant, so I'll stick with the former and ignore the latter. And I haven't read the story this is from, so I don't understand the part about the mottled, grey creature, so I'll just skip that for now, just to demonstrate.

Let's show each of these. (You don't have to make a list, but I'm doing so here just to seperate out each item and make it clear what's happening.)

Someone standing: Maybe his legs are tired, and he considers setting up camp for the night.
The Sahara: Most people are familiar with the name, and that will effectively bring up an image of a vast, hot desert.
Evening: The sun is dropping toward the horizon, and the shadows are stretching longer, and he knows it will get cold soon.
Alone: He's afraid and would like to talk to someone.
Hot: His throat is dry, but he's conserving his water.

Okay there's a lot there, but let's write a quick paragraph to try to pull these together.

He stopped and almost collapsed under his own weight. He considered taking a swig from his canteen to soothe the hot, dry burn in his throat, but he knew he needed to conserve the precious fluid inside. The sun cast a growing shadow in front of him, and he knew the deep, cold Sahara night would be upon him soon. He knew he needed to stop, to build a fire. Still, he considered whether he could make it another mile or so. This thought came more out of dread of facing the long night without even a rock to keep him company. More bearable is a shared misery. Some part of him believed that if he kept walking, the night would never come, and he would not have to face it alone.

Rough, but I hope it makes the point. Note also that I'm talking about conflicts here, not just setting. Each part of the setting bears upon conflicts the character is experiencing, no matter how trivial or transitory those conflicts are. If you want your prose to have the most impact, after each statement, ask "So what?" If there's no obvious immediate answer, elide that sentence.

Note also that my version has more words than yours, but I hope it's easier and more interesting to read.

-TimK

maia · 01-27-2006, 04:18 PM

This is true - and I take your advice with great interest, however it seems that you are simply creating the emotions of a character - by the way, this is the complete story - http://www.freewebs.com/novel - not describing the scene?

mammamaia · 01-27-2006, 07:39 PM

i agree with connor... your writing does resemble an explosion in a thesaurus factory... it's a common fault of many young writers who are trying too hard to sound 'old' or at least 'older'...

here's how this passage could be pared down to a coherent minimum, without losing the wealth of detail you seem to think you need:

Quote:

The grey-mottled creature's mulberry shadow stretched along the rust-tinged [can't be 'rusting'] Sahara, as the sun [not normally capped] began its fall into oblivion, beyond the ragged sienna. [what do you think this means?...if referring to the color, sienna 'what'?...if referring to the 'clay' there wouldn't be any clay in the sahara and it if there would, it wouldn't be 'ragged'] It was evening, [doesn't gibe with long shadow, which would still be afternoon] and darkness had just begun [neither does this square with sun making shadows] to make its way across the lonely, [solitary doesn't fit here] maimed landscape, seeking corners to darken. [darkness can't darken] The crimson heat was solidifying into a large emulsified gleam on the contours of the desert, shining blatantly under the descending veil of moonlight. [so much here is self-contradictory and impossible, given what it follows, that the whole sentence really has to go... you can't have sunlight gleaming, while moonlight descends!... and 'heat' alone doesn't gleam, anyway]

...here's a sample revision [sans comments], that makes more sense:

Quote:

The grey-mottled creature's mulberry shadow stretched along the rust-tinged Sahara, as the sun began its fall into oblivion beyond the ragged hills. Evening was fast approaching, and darkness would soon make its way across the lonely, maimed landscape.

...i strongly suggest you leave that thesaurus on the shelf for a while, while you learn to make the best use of words you're familiar enough with to use appropriately...

...if you'd like an assessment of a longer excerpt, or other work, feel free to email me any time... it's what i do all day, every day, for writers the world 'round...

love and hugs, maia
maia3maia@hotmail.com

cbrmale · 01-27-2006, 08:25 PM

I personally prefer less for description, put in enough to outline the scene a leave a little for the reader's imagination.

The general rule of thumb is more description for romance and, maybe, historical novels. Less description for mystery and suspense novels.

The example above is the best, with one exception. From Australia, a land of deserts, the desert light, even in the evening, is as bright as bright can be. It beats down from a sky that is so blue that it is hard to describe. A shadow in the desert, under such a light, are always deep dark black. Even at dusk, the shadows are deep black. Never mulberry.

Hodge · 01-27-2006, 08:31 PM

You don't need to make sure your setting is shown in whole. Especially if it's a setting most of us are familiar with. Give us a few details and our brains will fill in the rest.

Go read Vonnegut to see how you can cut nearly all description yet still have very well defined settings and characters.

beth10 · 01-27-2006, 10:10 PM

I'm not the greatest with descriptions by any means, but I've heard to write it how you want, then go back and take out all of the adverbs.

TimK · 01-29-2006, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maia

This is true... however it seems that you are simply creating the emotions of a character... not describing the scene?

Exactly, maia! The scene is part of the story. It's part of what the character is experiencing and is relevant to that.

That said, you might be able to convince a reader to bear with you through a little raw description. That's why raw descriptions must be kept short, because the reader is bearing with you.

For an example of some great description, read Stanislaw Lem's story "The Conditioned Reflex," in his Tales of Pirx the Pilot.

-TimK