Falken

I started to write on my novel and have gotten though the first pages, I write using a quite simplistic style. I like fast paced books, a book should be like a good movie in my head. I explain the characters feeling and what they look like, but I seldom put any high detail to the environment. I just explain that they walk into a hall way and make a brief summary how the total look & feeling is, not details like there are old well designed chairs at the sides unless they have a meaning in my scene.

Is this a problem? That there is sparse/few details on the environment in a story, or can it be written this way.
Are there any authors that write in this fashion so I can read how they wrote it?


I would really like to hear some comments on this.

Dexter67

A friend once told me that one needs to only write the details that matter. If the enviorment needs only a brief description, or if something else holds precedent, then there is no need to describe the exact shade of the carpet. Remember, this is only the first draft (I am guessing) after all and there will be plenty of time to go back and added more details where you see fit.

Overly detailed stories are as annoying as those lacking little them.

__________________

Raging_Hopeful

Well it's a matter of preference and style. Many writers chose to write in a more simplified manner though well placed adjectives and descriptors can really punch up a piece. Some writers spin elaborate tales with heavy descriptions... again a matter of preference. I am more of the descriptor type but there's a lot to be said for the simple trot of a well-executed plot line. Just don't skimp on the important parts or you'll just look lazy. Choose your words carefully, pick the real "Stand out" adjectives and lay the rest to waste if that's your preference. Unfortunately, no authors come to mind in either example... just goes to show how long its been since I hit the books. Doh!

Cheers,
Linz

__________________

Mike C

No. Some writers like to describe everything doen to the last detail, but it's not something I enjoy. Describe what needs to be described, let the reader fill in the gaps.

To keep your prose crisp and sharp (if that's the style you're aiming for) I'd offer advice counter to the above - see how many adjectives you can strip out. And adverbs doubly so.

__________________
My writing
My Photo Blog
Web design for Writers
The Oddville Press

Fegaril

I must agree. Descriptions of the surroundings can be overdone. An example of almost too much description is Tolkien. The Lord of the Rings books feature some long paragraphs of description, and they tend to drag out, making the story slightly dull, and this is also my main complaint about these books.

I guess it all depends on how important the environment is to the characters, If the places the characters stay in and interact in possess a certain value, e.g. taking place in the same apartment or the same city, a longer description might be needed. But when the main character is walking down the sidewalk, not paying any attention to the environment, then why should the reader get ten long, dreary paragraphs about the buildings the character passes if he or she isn't even looking?

Sometimes I even make a city a character in itself if it has an important effect on people. For instance, a nasty city gives a sense of gloom in contrast to a shiny, problem-free city.

Anyway, it all depends on the importance of the place. If the place is important, give it a description (not necessarily immediately, it can always be added in a second draft which I tend to do because I have an inclination to develop characters and set up plot first). But if the place is unimportant and random like two friends entering a store of little importance in order to buy a six-pack before going home and getting loaded in an apartment, then it'd be much better to describe the apartment than the store they go to.

SilkFX

Tolkien was writing in a different era, when long passages of narrative description were more tolerated. But I agree with the basic gist of your comment as well as Mike's...again, if that's the style you're aiming for.

__________________
you can't you can never be sure
you die without knowing
whether anything you wrote was any good
if you have to be sure don't write

Hobbes

Most descriptions I read in books bore me. I particularly detest when authors provide six or seven-object lists of items of clothing, things in a room, or other inconsequential drivel that add nothing to the story but a word count. For the sake of readers who don't care to know that Miss Stevenson wore a blue flowered dress, a sunflower hat she'd seen at a garage sale and couldn't put down, matching purple penny loafers, and a yellow-tinted neclace given to her by her first I don't give a damn!...please just get to the point, and cut the chaff.

je33ie

I agree, I can't stand long descriptions! I find myself skimming over them in novels because they bore me to tears.

I also hate it when I'm happily enjoying a book and I have the image of a character/location in my head, then suddenly the author decides to describe that character/location for me... usually describing something that is nothing like what I have pictured in my head. It confuses me and and brings me back to reality, unfortunately reminding me that I am simply reading a book.

__________________

Want to read more?

A holiday to England
Close Shave
Tears on the kitchen floor
Three minutes
The attack

Umogrim

I love details, when they are done properly, i love to be able to place he ambience in my head, now, if you are going to start detailing a few chairs and a table in a room, you can very well skip it, but if the scenery is more complex, more details for me please. <munch>

__________________
"Roses are red, violets are blue, all of our bases are belong to you." - Someone

"There are only 10 types of people in the world -- those who understand binary, and those who don't." - Someone else

movieman

I find a lot of amateur writing I read doesn't have enough description and just leaves me feeling as though I'm in an empty room with white walls. That's particularly true for SF and fantasy where you're often in a completely unknown environment and need to explain what it's like; it's less necessary in stories set in the modern day where I can pretty much guess what the surroundings would be like from a couple of lines.

But still, there's a fine line between leaving readers wondering where they are and boring them.

Cran

Falken, everyone who has replied so far have managed to sum up my opinion and the dilemma you face ...
how much emphasis you need to put into immersing your reader in the setting will depend on your personal writing style, the sort of story you are writing, and the kind of reader you wish to write to ...

I would suggest that you work most of your environmental pointers into the flow of action and dialogue, and use purely descriptive passages for only those settings which are critical to the story. The only other thing I can suggest is to not rely on visual descriptions alone, but incorporate the other senses ...

__________________
"I don't know ... I'm making it up as I go ..." - Dr I Jones

Nature abhors perfection - cats abhor a vacuum!