Ore-sama

There is an easy test to see if your amount of description works. Just write a chapter out how you normally would, don't pay attention to the amount of description. When you're finished writing the chapter, take a break from it and get your mind focused on something else, watch a movie, go see some friends, video games, whatever. Then go back and read your chapter.

Here's the test:if you find yourself skipping over parts of your chapter, it's probably because you have too much description. If you read and find your description dosen't really describe much, you should add more.

Also note that descriptions don't have to be heavy like Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter or the majority of literature from the 19th century and before. Sure, some of these books were enhanced by their great descriptions, particuarlly the first two mentioned, but some also tended to drag because of it. Ernest Hemmingway's descriptions were pretty basic, H.P Lovecraft's descriptions were slightly more detailed then Hemmingway's but still basic.

Katastrof

What are you talking about? H.P Lovecraft's descriptions were more basic than Mrs. Rowling's? Have you even read H.P Lovecraft at all? I just recently read a whole collection of his short stories, but maybe there is a different H.P Lovecraft, one that doesn't write tales of the macabre.

I wouldn't say he has the best or even the heaviest description (Faulkner takes that cake), but usually his stories are from the point of view of an observer. Which means that there is usually alot of words attributed to describing things rather than showing through dialog or action. Lovecraft creates suspense by delaying the story through his description. That's what makes his writing (IMO) good.

So what are you talking about?

__________________
Read:

When The Man Comes Around

"Carpe Diem, quam minimum credula postero"
(Seize the day put no trust in tomorrow.) ~ Horace

Ore-sama

Ore-sama

FYI not all non dialouge portions are descriptions. It can also be used to convet thoughts and explain dialouge, which is 80% of the non dialouge portions of his stories.

But way to take things way off topic.

lin

One man's loving creation is another man's obsession.

The obsession that I find bizarre is how many teenagers still wet behind the ears without a sale, or generally a completed work, to their names seem to think the world is hot to hear their expertise on how to write gooder.

I just don't get it. Why don't they give out tips on how to raise families or balance the federal budget of cope with Alzheimers or something?

This one thinks that Lovecraft did "slightly more" description than Hemingway. And that reading over your own work is a good hit on how it will affect those who didn't just write it.

Christ I'd have blown my mind to have access to pro writers when I was a kid. These twerps have it and want to use it to tell everybody else how to write.

__________________

Ore-sama

It must be so lonely on that pedestal of yours. I find it strange my advice is so worthless simply on the basis I'm young yet it's worth it for you to go on a rant over it. I find your ageist ideals and total lack of respect, pretty unsetiling.

Well I can see that this thread has been raped beyond repair, so I'm not even going to bother asking anyone to try and add any respectability. So all great author, quit wasting both of our times and go write the next great novel.

Katastrof

How am I taking things off-topic? You're the one suggested that H.P Lovecraft had descriptions a little less basic than Hemingway and thought Harry Potter was heavy in description! I was just taken back because I had recently finished a collection of Lovecraft's stories, and comparing his amount description to Mrs. Rowling's, I don't think I can support your statement!

And by-the-way, Lovecraft barely wrote dialog. Like I said, it was an observer point of view.

Your advice is valid (don't go heavy on description) but you shouldn't make generalizing statements on authors you obviously haven't read!

__________________
Read:

When The Man Comes Around

"Carpe Diem, quam minimum credula postero"
(Seize the day put no trust in tomorrow.) ~ Horace

RSD

I'm confused. Are you saying J.K. Rowling "describes things gooder cuz it's newer than those old peoples?" I is confuzzled. Does "old" mean "basic"? Does "new" mean "better"? How many ways can you describe something before it gets basic? Is "black" the new "purple" or is "purple" the new "black"? Are you searching for a better way to describe a rain drop?

What I find more from younger people today, is if the story isn't exciting then the description was too much. So if an older story is boring, then it must be too descriptive. They don't want to waste their time reading all the description because it takes the pace away from the story.

Granted description is what keeps a novel going, along with plot, character interaction, etc. etc. But a lot of younger people today don't like to get bogged down in details and want to read their novels like a fast-moving movie. Gone are the lazy days of sitting on the back stoop with a novel and reading for hours. Now we want our story and we want it NOW! So we can get done with it to play our video games.

In essence our youth is speaking to us on this forum. They want to read about the car chase, not about the description of the car. Action before... well... screw it. Just give me action! Who cares what or who does it. Details, details. The sword is silver, great, now stab someone with it!

Mike C

No, your advice is worthless because it has no substance. Though that lack of substance (and the desire to share it) is probably a consequence of impetuous youth. As is your apparent need to sulk when people disagree with you.

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