Craft versus art, craft into art, style and substance, rumination and entertainment

litdawg

Helping those who help themselves
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 18, 2019
Messages
873
Reaction score
562
Location
California
I've been puttering around on these boards for a few months trying to learn more about the craft of fiction writing. I've read a dozen or so books on writing, investigated a few methods, and read countless articles online. And I've read scores of novels in the genres I'm writing. I've come to an impasse.

Much training is about how to write sentences from particular POVs, develop scenes to create tension, signpost character emotional arcs, and weave character arcs into plot arcs. But when I read well-constructed books that follow all these guidelines I can hardly remember the pages I've turned despite being interested in turning the next one.

All I have to do is read, and then the book is over. It's like a slide for my eyes. So much of the craft focuses on issues like smoothing seams between sections of the slide, making it clear where on the slide a reader is, and increasing the slope of the slide.

It's like the books are about nothing other than engaging the reader long enough to be read.

This is immensely different than my previous forty years of novel reading. Yes, I read lots of fantasy and sci fi as a child, but it really made me think--I devoured LOTR in 4th or 5th grade, everything Asimov in jr high, Heinlein, Le Guin, etc. I even read a lot of westerns in high school. But I also started reading the classics--Dickens, Joyce, Dostoevsky. For the next thirty years, I read everything from Gilgamesh to Kafka, from the San Guo (romance of the three kingdoms) to the Ramayana, Cooper, Hawthorne, Melville, James, Hemingway, Howells, Austen, Sedgwick, Tolstoy, Endo Shusaku, Morrison, Wharton, Baldwin . . . And not just read--I'm a literature professor, so I also studied, analyzed, and grew to love those works even more for their complex engagement with what it means to be human, to be alive.

Occasionally, I come across genre novels that engage me as fully as those I teach in lit classes--N.K. Jemisin's work, for instance. I just reread Heinlein's Starship Troopers and was blown away by how little happens in the book. I loved it, of course, but that's because it is about moral philosophy and father/son reconciliation. The fighting in metal suits is a relatively small percentage of the book.

My preferred reading style is ruminative. I'm happy just being in a fictional world. Action is great, but so is interiority.

I've never before felt a tension between genre writing and the classics I study and teach. There's great stuff out there in genre writing, but what makes it great in my estimation is its ambition to capture and mold our world, not merely to engage the eyes of the reader long enough to get them to the bottom of the slide.

I understand entertainment value, and I'm glad some people turn to books rather than just binge on Netflix. And I spent over a decade reading aloud to my four kids every MG and YA series I could get my hands on, from Harry Potter to the Inheritance Cycle, Prydain to anything by Angie Sage. I found those works to be delightful for what they were aiming to be.

What are the right search terms to gain more insight into what makes for great writing and not just great craft? I'm a noob as a fiction writer and am continually discovering new vocabulary for phenomena I've studied for decades from a different angle.
 

lizmonster

Possibly A Mermaid Queen
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
14,532
Reaction score
24,098
Location
Massachusetts
Website
elizabethbonesteel.com
What are the right search terms to gain more insight into what makes for great writing and not just great craft? I'm a noob as a fiction writer and am continually discovering new vocabulary for phenomena I've studied for decades from a different angle.

I really think you're talking about voice, which is a pretty ephemeral thing.

I recently re-read Norton's The Crystal Gryphon. Tons of backstory, lots of internal monologue. Very few actual events. I'd loved it as a kid, and much to my relief, I loved it as an adult. Nostalgia? Maybe some. But she hauled me right into the minds of these two characters.

If I had to define voice, I'd say it's the piece of writing that hides the craft from the reader. No reader (who isn't deliberately analyzing) should be popped out of the narrative by sentence structure. Someone once said (paraphrasing): writing that's easy to read is hard to write.

Does that make any sense? Did I miss what you were asking about? :)
 

litdawg

Helping those who help themselves
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 18, 2019
Messages
873
Reaction score
562
Location
California
If I had to define voice, I'd say it's the piece of writing that hides the craft from the reader. No reader (who isn't deliberately analyzing) should be popped out of the narrative by sentence structure. Someone once said (paraphrasing): writing that's easy to read is hard to write.

Does that make any sense? Did I miss what you were asking about? :)

That's an amazing definition of voice--I love it! Voice may be one of the terms I need to investigate further. I know when I read Gene Wolfe's Urth series that voice was the piece I found most powerful. That's also a series with slender action and many, many standalone scenes that existed only to let the narrator ruminate.

I've been writing in distant 3rd POV, mixed in with some bits of interiority. Are there exercises for focusing on voice? No need to answer that since I haven't done any searching on it yet :) I'll do my homework.
 

sandree

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 30, 2018
Messages
352
Reaction score
47
Location
PA
I understand what you are saying and I agree. I don’t quite know how to define what it is that I find lacking in some of my more recent reading. I do think the emphasis on creating page turners may squash an author’s freedom to write about ideas and to spend time drawing me into another world. Many of us are reading similar advice that warns against too much telling, urges us to create a great hook, tells us to end each chapter with a hook that will encourage the reader to not be distracted by their phones and social media. Use this method of plotting, that story structure. It makes for a different kind of fiction that is perhaps closer to television or movies and is more homogenous and less original.
 

Woollybear

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
9,721
Reaction score
9,697
Location
USA
I'm going to try again.

I think a novel needs a reason to exist. I think that is separate from the typical practice of writing in a coherent and engaging way.

I also think the market is part of the equation. Many top agents are not open to unsolicited queries. Many newer agents are--and they need sales in order to establish themselves. I think many of these types of think-y books are less likely to be written by a debut novelist--not to say such novels don't have themes and aren't important, because that is demonstrably untrue. they do have themes, and they are important--they are the top of the heap. But it is also true that an established author (who, do to the nature of time, is more likely to be represented by an established agent with a full stable) can take allowances that new writers are steered away from. If you look at the agents who do not accept unsolicited queries, they represent some top, tippy-top dogs.

But aside from all of *that* I also think reading in 1975 was a different experience than reading now. I remember reading Stranger in a Strange Land and my mind being blown by the ideas in it. But were that book to come out today, I'd have a different (lesser, I suspect) reaction to it. Because we are steeped in ideas, all the freaking time now, and in 1975 we weren't, not to the same extent. I lived in a small town in southern Indiana and detasseled corn in the summer. We had a three-minute phone limit, and could only watch television on weekends.

One of my kids sees Bojack Horseman as existential art. Other people feel the same way about it. (I have difficulty with it, and don't have an opinion about its value one way or another.) This connects but I'm not sure how, so I'll leave it.
 
Last edited:

angeliz2k

never mind the shorty
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
3,727
Reaction score
488
Location
Commonwealth of Virginia--it's for lovers
Website
www.elizabethhuhn.com
It sounds to me like what you're looking at is the difference between "good" and "great" (which is pretty close to what you said above).

And if we all knew how to go from "good" to "great", then we'd all be doing that. That might sound flippant, but I don't really mean it to be. I mean that there's not necessarily any magical element that will lift you above and beyond the "entertaining but ultimately forgettable" level. Perhaps it has to do with theme, which I think you also are suggesting in your first post. Perhaps the more engaged the story is with important themes, and the more thoughtfully the story addresses the questions at issue, the more "unforgettable" or "great" it is. But opinions will vary as to what themes are important and what constitutes a thoughtful treatment of them. Personal taste, experience, and world view and obviously going to be major factors in how readers feel about a given book.

I think I detect a hint of nostalgia, as well, since you make note of a lot of books you loved while growing up or while being intellectually formed as a young adult. There's nothing wrong with that. It's part of the "experience" factor that I noted above. You might judge those books differently because of the role they play(ed) in your life.

FWIW, this is what I find lacking in most television shows and movies, though in recent years television (with additional time and budget and thematic liberty) has been able to bring this to the table. It's treating the audience not as people to be entertained for x number of hours, but as adults to be engaged in a sort of two-way exchange, albeit through a screen. I mean, the show (or movie) goes deep into the theme and asks questions without necessarily providing neat, bow-tied answers (while still providing hints as to what the writer/producer wants you to conclude). The audience is invited to think about what message the writers want them to get out of it, and--maybe more importantly--to think about whether they agree with that message. Books are more likely to do this, because they simply have more space and don't have to visually convey their message. Really great books, I think, do this really well.
 

litdawg

Helping those who help themselves
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 18, 2019
Messages
873
Reaction score
562
Location
California
And if we all knew how to go from "good" to "great", then we'd all be doing that.
True enough. And I assume, perhaps charitably, perhaps not, that most writers, even of potboilers, intend to illuminate worthy themes.

I think I detect a hint of nostalgia, as well, since you make note of a lot of books you loved while growing up or while being intellectually formed as a young adult. There's nothing wrong with that. It's part of the "experience" factor that I noted above. You might judge those books differently because of the role they play(ed) in your life.
Oh, yes, I'm a professional nostalgist. Yet I'm constantly introducing new generations of students to those fossils that shaped me. With a little training, a few hints on historical and social context, these new readers of old tales find the fossils turning into little jurassic parks. I'm a tour guide, but the literature is the magic.

It's treating the audience not as people to be entertained for x number of hours, but as adults to be engaged in a sort of two-way exchange, albeit through a screen. I mean, the show (or movie) goes deep into the theme and asks questions without necessarily providing neat, bow-tied answers (while still providing hints as to what the writer/producer wants you to conclude). The audience is invited to think about what message the writers want them to get out of it, and--maybe more importantly--to think about whether they agree with that message.

I very much agree. One of my favorite contemporary writers, Annie Dillard, writes as though her work will be the most important thing her readers ever stumble over. And she is merciless in making them work. But not merciless--artful. Nothing is handed to her readers on a platter, but when time is invested, everything comes to them, even the steaming head of John the Baptist.

I'm reading a wonderfully written novel right now which has all of the right arcs, signposts, emotional engagement, plot development--everything. And yet it trusts me not at all as a reader. When an important thing happens, there is a character that has an epiphany I can read. When an emotional turning point is reached, I get it from three angles. No chewing required.
 

ap123

Twitching
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
5,648
Reaction score
1,732
Location
In the 212
I don't know if it's the difference btw good and great. We read different stories at different times for different reasons.

I agree voice is part of it, and then it's the focus of the novel. Is it about what happens, or why someone makes the choices they do? For me, stories that explore why are going to resonate long after a tightly plotted thriller, no matter how much I might enjoy that thriller.

To me, a story is a promise. A promise can be practical--in my head the more story-focused stories, if that makes sense--someone offering to grocery shop for you, pick the kid up from school, buy you dinner, or a promise can be less concrete but equally valuable--the stories that don't take me away/out of myself but instead make me feel--someone who will sit with you while you cry, or let you laugh about the all-too-real when you're sick of crying.

In the latter, every scene still has a purpose, but the purpose might be more about bringing the reader deeper than bringing the reader closer to the conclusion. Does that make sense outside my head?

I don't know what you'd study or search for this, I suspect it's more reading. The contemporary novels that offer the same focus on depth and exploration like those classics, the ones that many rave about while a good number of reader reviews say but nothing happened.


:Shrug:
 

Woollybear

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
9,721
Reaction score
9,697
Location
USA
This is a nice think-y topic. Patty is happy.

Maybe it's also about what isn't in the novel. I'm reading a mystery ATM and it's fine. It has all the pieces. I don't care about the characters, but I plan to finish it. Partly to see how the author solves the puzzle. Not that I care how it is solved, I'm just curious enough.

I could not have written this novel. It's too well-researched about things I don't care enough about to research. The pacing is fine, the characters are distinct, the dialog is snappy.

But by golly, it's also annoying. Would not pass the Bechtel test. I'm left thinking every man in this world only thinks about sex, and every woman is only strong if she knows how to turn that away. The first woman introduced is a love interest and a cop, a smart lady--but she's out of the picture by chapter... twelve? just walks out after the sleuth does something she disagrees with--and he doesn't care. He doesn't care that she's gone. She never shows up again.

I'm left feeling like the author tried to write a strong woman but didn't follow through on the ramifications of that to the main character. The author tried to keep the focus on the plot line and the wherever the main character was at in his own quest, and this seems reasonable, but again, by golly, these characters--who are each distinct and there's no denying that the book is fine--leave me cold.

Maass talks about often feeling empty when he reads manuscripts. This novel leaves me feeling empty. What isn't in this novel, is a sense of completion with characters who should matter to our protagonist. Also what isn't in this novel, is any important message. It's a mystery novel, and a puzzle, and the main character has depth (he does), but seems to only see women as objects to protect or to attract. I'll read it to the end. See how the murder is solved.

I think the great books aren't missing big chunks like this. And I think there are a lot of chunks to keep track of.

How's ^^ that for an answer? :)
 
Last edited:

lizmonster

Possibly A Mermaid Queen
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
14,532
Reaction score
24,098
Location
Massachusetts
Website
elizabethbonesteel.com
I've been writing in distant 3rd POV, mixed in with some bits of interiority. Are there exercises for focusing on voice? No need to answer that since I haven't done any searching on it yet :) I'll do my homework.

I'll be curious what you find, because I think voice is the piece that's most dependent on that old adage: practice, practice, practice. :) I don't think it stands up to examination at the sentence level, but I could very well be wrong about that.

My own experience? I started out echoing the voice I found in books I read and loved - sort of like unconsciously picking up an accent when you travel. At some point my own voice started taking shape, but for a long time I couldn't read other work while I was writing, because my own writing would subtly shift toward what I'd read. Then at some point my writing voice became Just Me, but it hasn't remained the same over time. The more I write, the more it changes. No idea if it works the same for others!
 

Cobalt Jade

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 21, 2015
Messages
3,289
Reaction score
1,439
Location
Seattle
To me Voice is like the author as actor, taking on different roles to see the story: the wise old philosopher, the naive child, the Biblical prophet, etc.
 

Stytch

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2019
Messages
1,021
Reaction score
1,682
Location
N.C.
So, I'm probably a lousy novelist, because I've only written one so far, but I'm pretty good at the writing that I do for a living... because I've been doing it for a long time now, lots of it, all the time. I suspect voice and craft/art is a lot like that. Just keep doing it, scrutinize and tinker with your output, and repeat. (on different things, not the same thing over and over, that way lies madness) I don't think there's a shortcut to putting in the practice, though. Reading about voice or whatever can only help,but it's not like you're going to research a bunch of stuff and then be able to turn it out on command. The more you're thinking about the craft/art aspect, the more you'll notice it on the stuff you take in, where before it was just easily sliding past in an entertaining slide show or whatever. Then you'll be able to try to do it consciously, and eventually you may even do some of those craft/art things unconsciously.
And that's the part where the ballerina suddenly makes it look easy to stand on point and pivot with a smile, when in fact they practiced for years to make it look easy and smooth.
Hope that helps or encourages some, whatever works.
 

SwallowFeather

Oops I just swallowed a feather
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
1,436
Reaction score
647
Location
In the wilds of Illinois.
Have you tried Story by Robert McKee?

It's a book for screenwriters, so it's not the most obvious to pick up as a novelist. And he gets so technical and jargony that it's easy for it to seem like craft and not art. (I get exactly what you mean about smoothing the seams rather than making the reader think.) But the sections on theme (or as he calls it, understanding your Controlling Idea) are incredibly deep once you finally start to understand them. (And it's hard to, but after a few years I got it and started working with it, and the effect on my work was very marked.)

I've got a lot to say on McKee, but I'm trying to jump back into writing today after a forced hiatus that's been itching me horribly, and it's now time to go and I'd hate to miss that mark. So for now I'll just say two things by way of intro:

- If I had to define it, I'd say art is what happens deep inside you while the rest of you is busy crafting. Craft is utterly necessary but art puts the soul in your work. McKee understands this. He says you never know your Controlling Idea (and sorry about the capitals, I know they look soulless!) at the beginning of the writing; it comes to you, it surfaces sometime in the process, when the work comes alive. And once it does, write it down and tape it to your computer so you can see it every day and focus everything on it, because it's the heart.

- McKee says something really liberating: say what you're trying to say. You believe something about life, whatever that may be, and it's going to end up reflected in your theme; that's not bad and it's not didactic (unless you make it so.) Say what you're trying to say, but acknowledge every strength of the counter-argument (which he calls your counter-theme); that's how you show your reader good faith and don't slide into didacticism. (That and not putting your argument on the page as such. You bake it into the structure of the story. Show don't tell on a fundamental level.) To me this is how you write a book that makes a reader think rather than just entertaining; how could you make someone think if you're not saying something you really mean?

I believe very strongly that there aren't two kinds of books, Deep and Fun, or Literary and Commercial/Genre, or Character-Driven and Plot-Driven, or whatever people want to name the categories. Or at least, those categories exist because people create them and write to them, but it's not fundamental; it doesn't have to be that way. Plot and character balance together on the pivot point of choice, and choice is what stories are made of. Choices that mean something in the character's life--whether it's blowing something up or opening a door. And I absolutely want the best of both. I want to write profound characters and shining prose in stories that have real plots and choices. I've taken a lot more steps in that direction since I met McKee.
 

litdawg

Helping those who help themselves
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 18, 2019
Messages
873
Reaction score
562
Location
California
Swallowfeather, thanks for the introduction to McKee! The interplay between theme and counter theme sounds like a good way to avoid didacticism, but then it also permits (requires?) a direct statement of theme, presumably by a character. "Controlling Idea," if it is a big enough one to be represented in both story structure and theme, sounds much like what distinguishes a profound work from what is merely entertaining. I also like the notion of "real choices." That suggests a richness of characterization where the internal conflicts are nuanced and not blatant like "I love this person but they or their clan are trying to kill me."

This morning I started a new rant about the tendency to equate suspense with melodrama, or if not equate, at least make them bedfellows. I don't want every chapter to end in a crisis. Some chapters should resolve a crisis and end in stasis. The next chapter can begin with the stasis being disturbed.

Moreover, melodrama leaves no ambiguity as to the emotions of the characters. The characters' struggles are very close to the surface. If they drag their feet or resist an action, their emotional reasons for doing so are hammered home, made explicit, and are even voiced by the character. Melodramatic writing is easy to read, but it isn't often true to life. I like depicting characters who are moved by strong emotions they can't always label or which they might only recognize after the fact.

The world of speculative fiction is so incredibly vast that I'm probably just displaying my limited knowledge of it here. There's probably dozens, hundreds, of works that are driven by complex characters with richly ambiguous and ambivalent emotional lives. I somehow keep finding the thrilling melodramas. And I'll admit that I like them, for the moment, just like I have liked playing video games at different stages of life. But when I think of deeply moving, ruminative work, I tend towards the classics of sci fi or those of modern geniuses like Atwood and Jemisin.
 

screenscope

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Messages
681
Reaction score
78
Location
Sydney, Australia
From your opening post I can't help wondering if you are overthinking the task at hand. Perhaps the best way to approach writing is to write and see where it leads you, and in the process find out whether your capabilities and style match your preferences. In other words, simply write what you would like to read and work it out along the way.