Question about Style...

thequotegal · Apr 21, 2008

I still consider myself someone who learns something new about writing each day, even though I'm 43 and majored in writing many years ago. But one thing that nags at me is recently is "style similarity." I've understood for a long time that "good" writing doesn't rely on lots of adverbs and instead you should use strong, descriptive verbs. You should show, not tell and then there's all the guidelines about dialogue tags as well and other tips/advice that we all sort of absorb almost thru osmosis when we are reading a lot and trying to become strong, powerful writers ourselves.

My question is, won't this sort of (on some level?) make all of our styles sort of "familiar" in a "same old, same old" kind of way. I mean now that I've learned supposedly what the difference is between solid writing and amateurish writing, I notice that my style has become much like the same "sparse, terse, tight, almost minimalistic" writing that I read in so many published books already out there. And believe me, I didn't try to consciously emulate them. I don't know if I'm explaining this right, but I guess it occurs to me...if we're all sort of following the same "rules of the writing game," from the "experts" then how much room is there really left to be unique and original (of course much of the creative leeway comes in the actual story, plot, characters and other things) but how much variation can there be in our actual writing STYLES? After all, language (especially verbs) are not limitless. Just my curiosity for the day.

Phaeal · Apr 21, 2008

thequotegal said:
but how much variation can there be in our actual writing STYLES? After all, language (especially verbs) are not limitless. Just my curiosity for the day.

Nah, there are plenty of verbs out there, and lately they've been breeding like bunnies with the nouns.

The rules of the game you cite are all sound, but like all such rules, the master can break them. Style grows out of his or her skill in doing so judiciously, with purpose, avoiding mere mannerism.

ToddWBush · Apr 21, 2008

In my opinion, "style" isn't about verbs, nouns, adjectives, and all the other things in the old toolbox. It's about story. For instance, I could read a paragraph by Stephen King, then read one by James Patterson, and even if they use the same words (or at least 70% the same words) I could tell instantly whose work was whose. It's about how you use those words.

Plus, I believe that style is really a closer relative to tone than it is to vocabulary. Take mysteries: Raymond Chandler can use the same words in his private detective story that Janet Evanovich uses in her Plumb series. But it's the way the words are arranged, and the general tone of the story that makes Chandler's style different than JE's.

But then again, what the heck do I know? I'm just your basic novice trying to make sure my characters walk into a bar in Staten Island in one chapter, and not wind up walking out of a bar in Mississippi in the next chapter.

angeliz2k · Apr 21, 2008

thequotegal said:
My question is, won't this sort of (on some level?) make all of our styles sort of "familiar" in a "same old, same old" kind of way.

Yes, which is why i think all these rules--NO PASSIVE VOICE! LOTS OF ACTION ACTION ACTION VERBS! START OUT WITH FIREWORKS!--are not always right. Frankly, I don't want to write like some of the more mundane stuff that's on the market. I much prefer writing in my own style, which tends to have a bit of passive voice and not so much ACTION.

Maybe I'm being really arrogant to do that because it must mean I consider myself "a master" who can break the rules. But I think there aren't rules in writing as long as it's grammatical. And even then, non-standard English has its place.

Just my humble opinion. Or not so humble. Take your choice.

kuwisdelu · Apr 21, 2008

Keep writing. Permit yourself to break the rules once in a while. Try to think "this is how a writer would write it," but then, instead, write down what you think "this is how I'd write it." Don't just think the words. Feel them, and then maybe you'll find that a different sentence works better here. Maybe a different way of expressing something that doesn't quite feel as "solid," but in the end is nonetheless better. Think less. Feel. Once you know them, don't be afraid to break the rules, but remember to accept it when it doesn't always work.

Truly, prose that's strong, terse, tight, solid...and nothing else--is boring.

eqb · Apr 21, 2008

thequotegal said:
My question is, won't this sort of (on some level?) make all of our styles sort of "familiar" in a "same old, same old" kind of way.

I don't believe so. Using strong verbs and specific details still leaves a lot of leeway for individual style. And tight writing doesn't mean we all write the same way--it just means we hone our craft to its best, whether we write minimalist prose or long lyrical complex prose.

Matera the Mad · Apr 21, 2008

Just because we all (should) use the same language in a clear, correct way doesn't mean that we all (have to) sound alike, any more than all our characters would turn out identical. A great big FIFFLE to the notion.

Danger Jane · Apr 21, 2008

angeliz2k said:
Yes, which is why i think all these rules--NO PASSIVE VOICE! LOTS OF ACTION ACTION ACTION VERBS! START OUT WITH FIREWORKS!--are not always right. Frankly, I don't want to write like some of the more mundane stuff that's on the market. I much prefer writing in my own style, which tends to have a bit of passive voice and not so much ACTION.

Maybe I'm being really arrogant to do that because it must mean I consider myself "a master" who can break the rules. But I think there aren't rules in writing as long as it's grammatical. And even then, non-standard English has its place.

Just my humble opinion. Or not so humble. Take your choice.

Not all the rules are so pointless, though. Sure, I find it annoying when a critiquer bugs me about ending a sentence in a preposition, but passive voice is something to take in small doses for greatest effect. With fewer words stating an idea, the idea is least diluted and most potent. Generally, passive voice has less impact. You can break the rule skillfully, but it deserves some observance, and when following the rules is as powerful as breaking them, you might as well follow them so it's even better when you break it next.

Now, the fireworks "rule"...I think that's just people giving too much attention to advice that's valuable because SOMEbody gave it. Like the preposition thing. Beginnings have to snag people, and for lots of writers that means some kind of action, because it's harder to start stories interestingly in other ways. It doesn't mean fireworks. It can mean running late to a job interview. Whatever. Action. It's just as valid to start more slowly and raise questions, and keep people reading that way...it's just harder. And some people, when they give advice, don't give the complicated version. They give the simple answer that includes the greatest segment of people.

Ravenlocks · Apr 22, 2008

thequotegal said:
the same "sparse, terse, tight, almost minimalistic" writing that I read in so many published books already out there.

I see this all the time too, and this style doesn't really work for me. I rarely feel it serves the story or characters as well as a richer style would. I believe the rules exist for a reason, but I also believe that once you know them you can break them if that's how you write AND IT WORKS. For instance, I love C.J. Cherryh's rich style, which, as I recall, is full of the verb "to be." But it works. I don't think we should cramp ourselves based on what we think our writing is supposed to be like.

zornhau · Apr 22, 2008

Style doesn't matter

To expand; style doesn't matter as long as the reader doesn't notice it. If somebody notices your style, then they're seeing the words on the paper, not the pictures in their head, and you've failed.

Beyond that - IMHO- style should reflect the POV character, even if you're writing in close 3rd (or whatever you want to call it). A soldier experiences the world differently from a poet, so the words should come out differently.

Garpy · Apr 22, 2008

Imho, rules are there to get you going. Once you're feeling confident with your voice, you can go ahead and break 'em all at will.

I adverb a bit, I sometimes tell not show, I hop heads, I break grammar and punctuation rules all the time.

So I'd say, start out within the rule-set, then find your voice and strike out. I'd say the biggest crime is to read like a not-quite-so-good version of a writer already in print.

Twizzle · Apr 22, 2008

thequotegal said:
My question is, won't this sort of (on some level?) make all of our styles sort of "familiar" in a "same old, same old" kind of way.

All? No. Not at all.

if we're all sort of following the same "rules of the writing game," from the "experts" then how much room is there really left to be unique and original (of course much of the creative leeway comes in the actual story, plot, characters and other things) but how much variation can there be in our actual writing STYLES? After all, language (especially verbs) are not limitless.

How much room for variation? It's infinite or as infinite as the human mind can be. If you have a group of writers, and their writing is too similiar, that's a lack of creativity and style. That's all. And it's not inevitable.

Just for example. I give three painters three bottles of latex paint. The same three colors. Then three canvas and three brushes. I set an apple on a table. I tell them they have one hour to paint a picture of the apple.

They have all the same tools and guidelines, don't they? And very limiting ones at that. Just like as writers we have the same limiting tools and guidelines. But that's where creativity and style come in.

Because once time is up, something amazing will have happened. One will have tossed two of the bottles of paint and painted his canvas entirely red. He will say this is my version of an apple.

The second will have used all the colors, but will have tossed the brush and splattered the paint all over the canvas and used their fingers to paint a primitive-looking apple.

And the last will have used all 3 paints and brush and will have painted an apple so real it looks like you could reach in and grab it.

Now if you go to your local college and step into a painting for beginners class, and you ask them to do the same assignment, you will indeed see many unoriginal renderings of an apple, they will almost ALL be very similiar. But it's not because of the limits of the tools. Just the mind. And you might just see a student in that class who's painting is unique, and unique to them; they've done something very different with that they were given. That's creativity and style.

Twizzle · Apr 22, 2008

zornhau said:
To expand; style doesn't matter as long as the reader doesn't notice it.

Oh, boy. see, I will totally have to disagree. Style very very very much matters. If I had to order it, I'd say it's story, voice, and style that are most important, with "technically good" writing being VERY far behind. But don't get me wrong, the best writers are the ones who excel at all four.

HeronW · Apr 22, 2008

Style and tone and voice all come down to the writer: how do you get your characters from A to B to C, how do you work with their motives, their needs. How do you keep the drama--which isn't necessarly action--going?

Charlie Horse · Apr 22, 2008

I didn't study writing in college other than your basic english classes. I did, however, study music theory and composition. What I discovered was that after so many semesters of learning all the rules of harmony, style, voicing, orchestration, etc. everything you've been taught is wrong.

Writing is no different. Knowing the rules and understanding how to break them is key. That's when you can inject your own personality into your work.

CDarklock · Apr 22, 2008

Style is a lot more than what words to use. It's where you put your focus, and how you choose your direction. The options really are limitless.

maestrowork · Apr 22, 2008

Style has to do with the sentence structures, word choices, pacing, etc. You can write "in the style of John Grisham" or "JK Rowling" by following similar patterns, word choices, down to the use of adverbs, etc. Seasoned writers will eventually find their own styles that are uniquely theirs.

Tone/voice has to do with what's being said, and how it's being said. It's related to style but different. The tone can be military, infantile, official, casual, authoritative, casual, descriptive, sparse, etc. Again, it depends on word choices, etc. but it has more to do with content than structure. I think tone and voice can change from genre to genre, story to story. Obviously, my drama will have a different tone/voice than my suspense/thriller; but you may find that I still have a similar style.

BlueLucario · Apr 22, 2008

I like rules. They tend to keep me in line.

I don't see how perfectly written prose is exactly boring. (But it's just me.) I thought it keeps the reader's eyes on the page.

Nateskate · Apr 22, 2008

Garpy said:
Imho, rules are there to get you going. Once you're feeling confident with your voice, you can go ahead and break 'em all at will.

I adverb a bit, I sometimes tell not show, I hop heads, I break grammar and punctuation rules all the time.

So I'd say, start out within the rule-set, then find your voice and strike out. I'd say the biggest crime is to read like a not-quite-so-good version of a writer already in print.

Lol- Rock on- That's the way I see it.

Of course, there is some wisdom to rules, but they can stiffle creativity.

Nateskate · Apr 22, 2008

It's best not to obsess on rules, as a rule. When I was in high school, I took music theory for a few semesters, using Bach's style. Honestly, people who tried to stay within the lines became too predictable, and few of them could put together an interesting song.

I think it works in a similar way with all creative endeavors. It's good to understand a concept [show- don't tell], but it's another thing to be locked into that as a compulsion. That's where Beta Fans are important. If you find people love your writing, that's more important than knowing writing theory.

Quadrillion · Apr 22, 2008

Dean Koontz said "just tell a good story."

THat is definitely one of the keys. I just started reading Crichton's "State of Fear" and have been surprised by his use of passive verbs and lackluster descriptions. But he must be doing something right.

ToddWBush · Apr 22, 2008

Quad, I hope you like "State of Fear". It's long, and detailed (VERY detailed), but it's good.

Jackfishwoman · Apr 22, 2008

but i see your point quotegal.... i kind of wonder about the same thing. I realize that i do pick up style, technique, voice from the books I read - and it just happens, I don't consciously mean to. It's just the way the subconscious mind works.
I have read somewhere before that some authors are so bothered by this phenomenon that they CANNOT read other books while in the process of writing thier own - for fear of that "contamination".

Melenka · Apr 22, 2008

I don't mind the rules, as long as no one attempts to apply them to my dialog. People do not speak proper English. We mangle verb tenses continually, find dangling prepositions impossible to avoid, shorten words or slur them together, and in general make a hash of the language. With one exception, my characters do the same.

I do find it distracting when expository sections are full of grammar mistakes. It jars me out of the story because I find myself having to correct the sentence in my head. If I encounter enough of those, I stop reading. Granted, I could just be the freak child of an English teacher, further corrupted by too much instruction in editing during my early years. For all that, I still have trouble with commas.

ishtar'sgate · Apr 22, 2008

angeliz2k said:
Yes, which is why i think all these rules--NO PASSIVE VOICE! LOTS OF ACTION ACTION ACTION VERBS! START OUT WITH FIREWORKS!--are not always right. Frankly, I don't want to write like some of the more mundane stuff that's on the market. I much prefer writing in my own style, which tends to have a bit of passive voice and not so much ACTION.

I'm with you on the rules nonsense. I don't pay any attention to them. I write the way I want to write. I use a fair amount of description and purposely set a scene to provide the grounding I think my story requires. I don't much care that those things run contrary to contemporary thinking. I really wish people would stop trying to put writers in a box and say they HAVE to write this way or that way. Too many novice writers worry about doing it right and get bent out of shape when adhering to the rules makes them nervous and selfconcious and anxious. Rules stifle creativity, they don't enhance creativity.
Ah, that feels better. I'm done.

Linnea

Question about Style...

Whatever I did, I didn't do it.

never mind the shorty

Revolutionize the World

I write novels

Bartender, gimme a Linux Mint

How novel.

Swordsman

keyboard monkey

Cluck that.

Cluck that.

Down Under Fan

Speaking in metaphors

Yes!

Fear the Death Ray

Blood Elves FTW

Better is the enemy of done

living in the past