# Readers, really that difficult to please?



## Amanita (Jan 26, 2013)

Well, there are many discussions about formal matters of writing around here again. 
There's one thing I'm asking myself though, from the perspective of a reader. Are they really so quick to put down a book because it has too much description, unnecessary uses of the word "said", passive sentences, telling and so on?
I have to admit that it's not true for me at least. When I read a new book for the first time, I tend to read rather quickly not even taking in all of those finer points. If I reread I do, but that's only with the books where I've liked characters and story enough.
If there are descriptions which don't interest me when reading the book for the first time, I'm going to skip them. If I decide that I like it, I will read them in detail next time. 
As long as there aren't any glaring errors and an extremely clumsy style, I'm much more interested in characters and subject matter of the book. For me, the main if not only thing to look at if I want to buy a book is what it's about. If the subject matter interests me, I'm going to give it a try, if not than not.

Maybe I'm alone with this shallow approach to reading, but looking at the bestselling novels like Twilight or Shades of Grey I doubt it. 
For some reason, many bestsellers are doing exactly those "wrong" things that supposedly make readers put down the books.


----------



## FatCat (Jan 26, 2013)

I'm in the same boat as you Amanita. Unless a book is terrible to an extreme, I'll finish it. I think that these kind of questions are brought up here because everyone spends so much time focusing on their own style and editing works, and when the differences in style are noticed it's pretty hard to not be critical. Although, I'm probably too lenient in my reading habits, as I've finished the entire Sword of Truth series and even Robert Newcomb's attempt at a fantasy novel. *shivers* 

I don't think readers will be as critical (as you've pointed out with the bestsellers), but as writers I'd imagine that paying close attention to the finer points of style and substance could be nothing less then helpful if done well, and informative if done poorly.


----------



## Philip Overby (Jan 26, 2013)

I think modern readers have many other distractions in their lives, meaning if a book doesn't keep their attention, they may put it down.  I'm not that quick to put a book down for good either, but other readers may be so inclined.  There are many different kinds of readers, some falling into multiple camps:

1.  Nothing better to do reader:  Someone who reads when they are waiting for something or occupying time (on a public transportation for example).  That's why there are book stores in airports, because people are bored on planes and feel like reading something.
2.  Pleasure reader:  Someone who reads casual or just for fun.  May not be very hard to please as long as the story is engaging or entertaining in some way.
3.  Pleasure+ Reader:  These readers read for pleasure, but they want a little bit more.  More substance, more engaging characters, better plot lines, excellent writing.  
4.  Hardcore Reader:  Someone that may or may not read for pleasure, may dissect things like a critic would. These readers may not give certain kinds of books a chance if they don't engage them right away.  The style of writing is very important and they notice errors more easily than other readers.  

I think the vast majority of fantasy readers are probably in the Pleasure+ category.  I'm probably in that category myself.  I very rarely read for educational purposes anymore and I don't critique books (not yet anyway.)  I like to enjoy what I read, so I'm a bit more selective and take a long time to finish books sometimes.  I often read several books at once, so some are jockeying for my attention.  

Overall, I think if you have a good story with good characters, most readers are going to be forgiving about more minor things such as dialogue tags and the like.  This doesn't mean aim lower in your writing, but don't worry so much about the people who will more than likely not like your writing, but focus on the ones that will.


----------



## wordwalker (Jan 26, 2013)

It's a Glass Half-Empty thing... partly. We use the forums to work on the things that worry us --and gripe about people who don't-- but the better the story is at its strengths, the less any weakness matters. But like Phil said, some readers are less forgiving than others (especially on the first page, _especially_ if they're editors), so a little more refinement just might be what keeps another person or two with you.


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 26, 2013)

I don't think they're that difficult to please on the whole, Amanita. A lot of the minutae we worry about in writing forums are things the reader won't care about. I doubt most readers would ever bat an eye at the use of "said" versus leaving out a dialogue tag, for example. If you can write characters the reader will connect with and care about and tell an engaging story, all of the rest of runs a distant, distant third.

If you're really bungling things, however, such as not doing description well, or not using "telling" well, or writing passively on accident rather than making an informed choice about when to do it and do it well, then readers may dislike your book without being able to articulate exactly why in terms of the craft of writing (i.e. to them it may just have been boring), but as writers we can see the things that caused the reader to feel this way. 

It's not about doing X or Y, but about doing it well, whichever path you decide to take. Most of the things that seem formal in discussions on writing sites revolve around things that are easy to mess up and make a reader feel bored or disconnected. It is harder to write a story that is mostly telling, for example, and still create and engaging read that hook the reader. There are writers who can do it, however. It is harder to engage the reader with a story told largely in passive voice. There are writers who can do that as well. 

So it seems to me, writing forums tend to be a place of averages. On average, it's better to X than Y, for example. As a writer you should still feel free to do Y.

Going back to my initial point, however, if you give a reader characters she cares about and an engaging story line, most readers won't fixate on the sorts of things we talk about when it comes to writing formalities. They'll just enjoy the book, no matter how many things it has in it that people on writing forums don't think should be in there


----------



## CupofJoe (Jan 26, 2013)

Phil
Think you've missed the greatest groups of readers...
0. Those that don't read on a regular basis [if ever] and would usually have to be all but forced to read anything more than a magazine blurb or web article, text or tweet. 
I haven't read her work but from what I have heard about it I am fairly sure this is where most of EL James' readership came from. This is were new media [ebook, web publishing etc.] can expand, the Terra Incognita. Once they are reading on their phone / reader / tablet they will discover for themselves if they are a 1,2,3 or 4.


----------



## Xaysai (Jan 26, 2013)

I look at it this way:

There are thousands upon thousands of books out there on the shelf I could choose from, but I chose yours.

What is it about yours that makes me happy with that decision?

To me, watching a bad movie is better than reading a bad book simply because the movie will be over in 1.5-2 hours, a book is going to take me 10-20x that.


----------



## WyrdMystic (Jan 26, 2013)

As one of those of those people who debates those formal questions - I'm not so much worried about what will put the reader off as I am worried about my own writing ability. The debate consolidates knowledge and helps confidence and also cements what you know you want to do and what you think you shouldn't do.

The other side to that coin - it's also fun and makes you think. It's a good brain excersise that really makes you look below the surface at the same time as giving a much needed distraction at times without drawing you away from the subject of writing altogether.

At the end of the day - it's the same as any professional forum.

Also, it depends what method of publication you want to take. I don't know about Twilight but Shades of Grey was self published. I know loads of women who read it because of word of mouth, but noone who actually still liked it once the hype had died down (I know there a lot who do, but I haven't personally met any and I aim to please the circles I travel in - if that makes sense). Strangely, they all liked Twilight and can easily draw the comparison. No offense to the author, who has done a really good job, but I don't want people i know to be left with the same feeling after reading my work.


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 26, 2013)

WyrdMystic:

Twilight was traditionally-published, and not only that it got the author a $750,000.00 advance, as a completely unknown, unpublished author. Which means that despite all the things people in writing forums like to nitpick, it not only attracted a tremendous readership, it enticed people who read books for a living, as professional editors and publishers, to fork out three quarters of a million dollars on an unknown quantity. Characters and story-telling. That's where it's at.


----------



## WyrdMystic (Jan 26, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> WyrdMystic:
> 
> Twilight was traditionally-published, and not only that it got the author a $750,000.00 advance, as a completely unknown, unpublished author. Which means that despite all the things people in writing forums like to nitpick, it not only attracted a tremendous readership, it enticed people who read books for a living, as professional editors and publishers, to fork out three quarters of a million dollars on an unknown quantity. Characters and story-telling. That's where it's at.



Thanks, but like I said - 'I don't know about Twilight' - it was Shades I was referring to. Thanks for the info though


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 26, 2013)

Xaysai said:


> To me, watching a bad movie is better than reading a bad book simply because the movie will be over in 1.5-2 hours, a book is going to take me 10-20x that.



Not me, because I throw the book away or delete it from my Kindle long before that


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 26, 2013)

WyrdMystic said:


> Thanks, but like I said - 'I don't know about Twilight' - it was Shades I was referring to. Thanks for the info though



No problem. To me, it is sort of the poster child for the idea that character and story-telling trumps formal writing, if you're going for commercial success (not everyone has that as their primary aim).


----------



## WyrdMystic (Jan 26, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> No problem. To me, it is sort of the poster child for the idea that character and story-telling trumps formal writing, if you're going for commercial success (not everyone has that as their primary aim).



Like Harry Potter its one of those rags to riches stories, but it's real- life so is a great thing to aspire to. Me? I honestly don't know what my aim is beyond writing at the moment. All I know is I want to take the extra time and effort to make is good as I possibly can before putting it out there.....after that, it's not really in my hands anymore and what ever happens happens.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Jan 26, 2013)

If the story is good enough, if I care about the characters & want to see what happens to them, if I'm engrossed & invested in the tale, then I won't mind the writerly details as much. That being said, if there are repetitive problems like lazy description, overuse of telling through a ton of adverbs, things of this nature, I will notice the writing. It will be jarring over time. Noticing the writing pulls me away from the story.

I try not to read with a writer's hat on (though it's difficult at times). The books that have really grabbed me have things in them (on a 2nd read) that I wouldn't  necessarily espouse for my own writing but on the first time through I didn't  notice them because I didn't know the conclusion. I was more wrapped up in what was to come...so much so that the writing was not noticed.


----------



## Kit (Jan 26, 2013)

I think that all the little nitpicky things we worry over COMBINE to make the book good or not. I think that the average reader wouldn't bother to- or wouldn't even be ABLE to- identify exactly why they got bored with a book and put it down. We might look at it and go, "Well, it uses passive voice, and too many adjectives, and..." but all the reader knows is that it didn't grip him or her.


----------



## wordwalker (Jan 26, 2013)

Kit said:


> I think that all the little nitpicky things we worry over COMBINE to make the book good or not. I think that the average reader wouldn't bother to- or wouldn't even be ABLE to- identify exactly why they got bored with a book and put it down. We might look at it and go, "Well, it uses passive voice, and too many adjectives, and..." but all the reader knows is that it didn't grip him or her.



Agreed. Let's worry over everything, but not each thing-- um, not figure we need every separate point perfect, or something like that.  And keep working on our strengths at least as much as our weaknesses.


----------



## Xaysai (Jan 26, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> Not me, because I throw the book away or delete it from my Kindle long before that



I have a very tough time abandoning a book, and usually choose not to do it until I get at least a few hundred pages into it, but then I feel like I'm invested enough into it to just finish.

I gave up on Girl With a Dragon Tattoo after about 80 pages and Russell Kirkpatrick's Across the World after about 20.

Those are the only 2 books I think I've ever just outright stopped reading.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jan 27, 2013)

The OP's question brings up a lot of topics.  I'd answer, "Depends on your intended audience."

When I was young, I read a lot of truly horrid stuff and thought it was good.  I didn't know any better.  The older I get, the more discerning I become.

Some readers are where I was a long time ago.  If you can interest them in a character OR a plot OR with solid writing, you're good.  Others require you to have all three in line.

If you're asking, "Can I be successful by writing crap?"  Of course you can!

I'm not even sure that writing well brings you more likelihood of success than writing crap.  I tend to think that it does, but I have no data to back up my opinion.

My planned path to success is as follows:

1. Write really good stuff.
2. Have that stuff professionally edited and published with the best quality that I can afford.
3. Submit it to every person that I can find who has a blog and hope that it gets noticed.
4. Go back to step 1 with another book.

As one of those people with a blog, I gotta say that I'm a reader who notices all that little stuff.


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 27, 2013)

Brian, your post implies, rather strongly, that people who don't read the way you do are behind you as readers and haven't managed to progress past the point that you left behind long ago. That's a pretty condescending and not to mention inaccurate viewpoint, don't you think? One might just as easily argue that being unable to read a work without being hypercritical is a step back, as compared to people who can move between critic and reader as they see fit, or who can find value in different works for different reasons.

I prefer to simply view readers as having different approaches to reading, each being fine so long as they derive personal enjoyment from it, rather than look at it as "oh, those guys are how I was before I became so advanced and 'discerning.'"

Or maybe I'm misreading your viewpoint.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jan 27, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> Brian, your post implies, rather strongly, that people who don't read the way you do are behind you as readers and haven't managed to progress past the point that you left behind long ago. That's a pretty condescending and not to mention inaccurate viewpoint, don't you think? One might just as easily argue that being unable to read a work without being hypercritical is a step back, as compared to people who can move between critic and reader as they see fit, or who can find value in different works for different reasons.
> 
> I prefer to simply view readers as having different approaches to reading, each being fine so long as they derive personal enjoyment from it, rather than look at it as "oh, those guys are how I was before I became so advanced and 'discerning.'"
> 
> Or maybe I'm misreading your viewpoint.



Perhaps you're inferring an intent that I wasn't trying to convey - not that I find any accusation of condescention on my part particularly troubling as it is, perhaps, a tendency of mine.

From my perspective: When you start doing any activity, you don't have much discernment because you have no experience with which to judge.  As you gain experience, that experience necessarily shapes your tastes.

If I were in high school and a QB were to throw me a football, I'd think, "Wow, that guy throws hard and is really accurate."  If I somehow then later in life ended up with Drew Brees throwing to me, I'd (after icing my hands) probably think, "Wow, HS me had no idea what hard and accurate is."

Again, I feel that this applies to any endeavor.

I don't see this as a particularly controversial or condescending viewpoint.  SO, one of two possibilities: You either read something there that I didn't intend or this viewpoint is actually controversial/condescending.

Perhaps the key to the issue is:



> that people who don't read the way you do are behind you as readers and haven't managed to progress past the point that you left behind long ago



This seems to imply that I feel that everyone should have the same opinions as I do.  This is not the case as writing is extremely subjective and no two people share the same experiences.

Regardless, I think that the overall point stands: You can certainly please a portion of the reading population by writing complete crap; I'm just not sure that this is a good aim for a writer or a particularly good way to try to achieve success in the marketplace.


----------



## Philip Overby (Jan 27, 2013)

We can break-down semantics here, but what really constitutes "crap?"  Some may think the books you read are crap because they're too difficult or they don't like the subject material.  There are so many factors that come along with reading a book that it's impossible to discern what is "good" and what is "crap."  It's all subject to opinion.  This is what these conversations always seem to break down to:  opinion vs. absolutism.  "There is no perfect way" vs. "There is a perfect way."  

As far as Brian's beliefs on writing, I think he makes excellent points in his rules on writing thread about what is a pretty good path towards writing to the best of your ability.  Problem is, not everybody follows good writing habits and they are successful in spite of them.  Does this mean they're "crap?"  No, it means that they found perhaps a different way to connect with an audience.  

I've experienced the same thing.  I've read books that I read when I was younger and thought "Hmm...that's not very good."  But therein lies my error.  It WAS good because I liked it when I read it.  And that's what (most) books are about. At least as far as the fantasy genre goes.  People read fantasy to enjoy it, not necessarily pick it apart.  If I enjoyed the books when I was 15 then they did their job.  I agree that certain books may appeal to 15 year old Phil that don't appeal to 30-something year old Phil.  My main concern with reading and writing is to make it as good as possible *at that moment.*  I think something that severely limits new writers is this need to be perfect right out the gate.  Sometimes you need to stumble and falter to learn what works best for you.  Even everything you perfectly polish now might look like crap to you in another 5 years.  It's impossible to live up to certain standards.  But I admire anyone that attempts to.  Just for most people, it's best not to obsess over too many matters when writing OR reading.


----------



## CupofJoe (Jan 27, 2013)

Like the old joke says...


> How do you get to Carnegie Hall?
> You gotta practice.


I have heard of the 10,000 hour rule [it takes a long time to make an "expert"]; while I might not go with an exact number, I think the concept behind it is valid.
You get "better" [closer to what you want to write] by writing; learning from others that you think have something to teach you and then writing again.
Better and expert for me are all subjective terms...


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jan 27, 2013)

Phil the Drill said:


> We can break-down semantics here, but what really constitutes "crap?"  Some may think the books you read are crap because they're too difficult or they don't like the subject material.  There are so many factors that come along with reading a book that it's impossible to discern what is "good" and what is "crap."  It's all subject to opinion.  This is what these conversations always seem to break down to:  opinion vs. absolutism.  "There is no perfect way" vs. "There is a perfect way."
> 
> As far as Brian's beliefs on writing, I think he makes excellent points in his rules on writing thread about what is a pretty good path towards writing to the best of your ability.  Problem is, not everybody follows good writing habits and they are successful in spite of them.  Does this mean they're "crap?"  No, it means that they found perhaps a different way to connect with an audience.
> 
> I've experienced the same thing.  I've read books that I read when I was younger and thought "Hmm...that's not very good."  But therein lies my error.  It WAS good because I liked it when I read it.  And that's what (most) books are about. At least as far as the fantasy genre goes.  People read fantasy to enjoy it, not necessarily pick it apart.  If I enjoyed the books when I was 15 then they did their job.  I agree that certain books may appeal to 15 year old Phil that don't appeal to 30-something year old Phil.  My main concern with reading and writing is to make it as good as possible *at that moment.*  I think something that severely limits new writers is this need to be perfect right out the gate.  Sometimes you need to stumble and falter to learn what works best for you.  Even everything you perfectly polish now might look like crap to you in another 5 years.  It's impossible to live up to certain standards.  But I admire anyone that attempts to.  Just for most people, it's best not to obsess over too many matters when writing OR reading.



I must say that I disagree pretty much completely with this.  

Firstly, my opinions are probably shaped a lot by my profession.  

I can't just wake up one day and say, "Hey, I think I'll be an engineer and start charging people for my services."  Instead, I had to go to school, work under an engineer for a while, and get a special certification.

Not so for writing.  Anyone can simply put stuff down and try to charge money for it regardless of the quality.

On one hand, I'm all about letting the market decide.  If you can find an audience, your work obviously had merit.  On the other hand, the noise produced by so many choosing to put work out there, some of extremely low quality, makes it more difficult for others to get noticed.

It brings up a lot of subjective questions:

1. What should an author's objective be, to produce quality material or to produce material that sells?
2. Is there any ethical obligation to make sure your material is of a certain quality before trying to charge money for it?

I'm not sure that there are absolute, objective answers to either of those questions.  But, from the opposite perspective, I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing to advise perspective authors that they need to consider these issues.  There are certainly going to be people in the reading audience that are going to be judging based on them, and they need to be prepared for that judgment.

Secondly, it is possible to produce complete crap.  Not every word that is produced by anyone has artistic, or any other kind, of merit.  It would kinda be like me thinking my toddler's finger painting deserves to be displayed in the Louvre because it's "art."  There is training, a learning curve, and talent involved even in producing art.

While, like Phil, I don't want to discourage anyone from trying, I would like to encourage them to make sure, by some external criteria, that they're ready before trying to charge money for their work.


----------



## WyrdMystic (Jan 27, 2013)

I'm not sure that was exactly Phil's point (correct me if I'm wrong) - I think what he's getting at is there is a difference between pure crap and what people think is crap based on their own preferences.

Also, that there is more than one way to skin a cat, so to speak. You can follow rules to nth and still produce crap, likewise you can shirks the rules altogether and manage to pull of something fresh and exciting. 

At the end of the day, if someone likes your story and are happy to have paid for it - it doesn't matter what rules they have and haven't followed because the author has succeeded in what they set out to do - entertain.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jan 27, 2013)

WyrdMystic said:


> I'm not sure that was exactly Phil's point (correct me if I'm wrong) - I think what he's getting at is there is a difference between pure crap and what people think is crap based on their own preferences.
> 
> Also, that there is more than one way to skin a cat, so to speak. You can follow rules to nth and still produce crap, likewise you can shirks the rules altogether and manage to pull of something fresh and exciting.
> 
> At the end of the day, if someone likes your story and are happy to have paid for it - it doesn't matter what rules they have and haven't followed because the author has succeeded in what they set out to do - entertain.



I don't think anything that I wrote contradicts that idea that writing is subjective or concerns "rules" at all.  I'm simply advocating that, if you want to charge for your work, perhaps it's a good idea for you to seriously consider whether that work is truly worthy of people paying money for it and seek an external method of validation.


----------



## WyrdMystic (Jan 27, 2013)

Sorry, i think I was thrown by the bit where you said 'I must say that I disagree pretty much completely with this. '

The only people who will decide whether your work is good or not is your readers. How much effort uou put into external measures is questionable, and I would say its to protect the author perhaps more than the reader.

External measures are subjective in themselves. What a writer does and doesn't want to do before putting themselves out there is completely up to them and they shoulder the risk themselves.

Saying that, i personally think getting feedback is good, but i've also had feedback from both ends of the spectrum and everywhere in between so I'm not sure it has been a useful way for me to measure the quality of my work, even though it has helped me consolidate what I do and don't know or think and help me define my audience better.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jan 27, 2013)

WyrdMystic said:


> Sorry, i think I was thrown by the bit where you said 'I must say that I disagree pretty much completely with this. '
> 
> The only people who will decide whether your work is good or not is your readers. How much effort uou put into external measures is questionable, and I would say its to protect the author perhaps more than the reader.
> 
> ...



Again, I come from a perspective where a certain measure of professionalism is expected.  I understand that not everyone shares that viewpoint.

I don't, however, feel that it is condescending for me to say, "That author is publishing something that I consider to be unprofessional crap for these reasons...." 

I do not feel that I'm the only person who is going to express that opinion, and, for each that says it, there are probably a lot more that say it.  I think that any author needs to be prepared for such opinions to be expressed.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jan 27, 2013)

> There's one thing I'm asking myself though, from the perspective of a reader. Are they really so quick to put down a book because it has too much description, unnecessary uses of the word "said", passive sentences, telling and so on?



Getting back to the OP.

I tend to approach writing from two different directions: I like both to study the theoretical/philosophical side of what is "best" and ethical AND I like to think about what is the best way for us to turn our "hobby" into a money making venture.  The two sides sometimes contradict.

I think that the optimal path to success is maximizing profits.  That means putting in the absolute minimal amount of effort required to produce something that is going to sell.  To do that, I think you have to consider your audience.

That audience varies a lot in tastes and discernment depending on what you're trying to do.  A reader who is an English teacher is going to be a lot less forgiving about grammar than one who isn't.  Some people may love anything with unicorns; others will avoid your story like the plague if there's a mention of a unicorn.

it seems like a good path to getting noticed is bloggers that promote independent authors.  I think that these bloggers are in some ways very tolerant of technical issues and, in other ways, require strict adherence.

Think about it from their perspective.  If you're a book blogger, it's because you love books, and you're looking for any good story.  On the other hand, if your blog has any measure of success, you're being innudated by self published authors trying to promote their work.  They have far more submissions than they can ever read.  Therefore, they have to develop a quick method of separating the wheat from the chaff.

I think to reach that audience, you have to grab their attention immediately and have the start of your book be pretty darn sound.

Not all technical issues are created equal.  The use of "said" is not likely to turn them away nearly as quickly (or, admittedly, at all) as starting your masterpiece with ten pages of passive, telling description.  

So, yes, I think that some technical issues are very important as some speak directly to your ability to achieve engagement.  If the reader can't get into your book, you've lost the sale.

On the other hand, if you can achieve engagement, the rest doesn't matter all that much.  If I'm engaged in a book, I don't notice the flaws.  It's when the author loses that engagement that the issues start standing out because my mind is out of the book and I'm looking for the issues that caused the lack of immersion.


----------



## Amanita (Jan 27, 2013)

I'm happy that my post has sparked such a vivid discussion. 
I certainly agree with the opinion that self-published authors need to make sure that they're offering work up to certain standards. If a book is published traditionally, the editiors (hopefully) reject anything that's badly flawed or ask the author to improve if they think there's still hope. In case of self-publishing, this level of control is missing.
Still, I think in some cases, it's up to debate if anything that doesn't follow some rules is "crap" right away. I've always been quite fond of adverb use in my reading,  things such as "he said calmly", or "he shouted angrily". Reading this piece of advice over and over again, I've been trying to leave them out of my own writing but I'm still not entirely convinced that it's better that way. 
I'm really not sure if it's really the most productive approach to force the reader to figure out too many things on himself so that there are no "unnecessary words." 

Unlike someone else on this forum, I think it was you BW Foster, I'm not happier if an author explains as little as possible. I've often been frustrated by fantasy stories which have hinted at something interesting but never explored it. To me as a reader, this doesn't show that the author did a good job keeping to the relevant, stuff but it makes me think that he probably hasn't thought this out himself. Sometimes, I'm imagining things myself in such cases but that never really satifys me. If I read a story by someone else, I want to know what this other person imagined and not be left with my own imagination. 
These are questions where I really don't think that there's an objective right or wrong. There are good and bad ways of explaining something in a book of course, but they don't always have to do with the amount of explanation.


----------



## Xaysai (Jan 27, 2013)

> Unlike someone else on this forum, I think it was you BW Foster, I'm not happier if an author explains as little as possible. I've often been frustrated by fantasy stories which have hinted at something interesting but never explored it. To me as a reader, this doesn't show that the author did a good job keeping to the relevant, stuff but it makes me think that he probably hasn't thought this out himself. Sometimes, I'm imagining things myself in such cases but that never really satifys me. If I read a story by someone else, I want to know what this other person imagined and not be left with my own imagination.



I don't want to speak for Brian, but I don't think he's advising anyone to "explain as little as possible".

I think it's more "use as few explanations as possible while still being the most effective you can be." 

He's talking about efficiency.

Personally, I feel as though there are diminishing returns on words in a sentence. Once you go past a certain point, you are no longer adding to the experience, just to the word count.


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 27, 2013)

Xaysai said:


> Personally, I feel as though there are diminishing returns on words in a sentence. Once you go past a certain point, you are no longer adding to the experience, just to the word count.



I don't think so. I think it comes down to the stylistic effect you want to achieve. You could re-write Mervyn Peake's Gormenghast novels in the style of James Patterson, but it would be at terrible cost to the work itself. The language and Peake's use of it make it a unique experience.


----------



## Xaysai (Jan 27, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> I don't think so. I think it comes down to the stylistic effect you want to achieve. You could re-write Mervyn Peake's Gormenghast novels in the style of James Patterson, but it would be at terrible cost to the work itself. The language and Peake's use of it make it a unique experience.



Right, but his style is adding to the experience.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jan 27, 2013)

> I'm not happier if an author explains as little as possible. I've often been frustrated by fantasy stories which have hinted at something interesting but never explored it. To me as a reader, this doesn't show that the author did a good job keeping to the relevant, stuff but it makes me think that he probably hasn't thought this out himself. Sometimes, I'm imagining things myself in such cases but that never really satifys me. If I read a story by someone else, I want to know what this other person imagined and not be left with my own imagination.



Amanita,

A lot of "rules" are contradictory.  I firmly believe that a fundamental principle of engaging writing is clarity.  On the other hand, going too far with clarity leads to over explaining, which is just as bad.

I don't see the question being should you be clear or should you not over explain as much as how do you find the correct balance.



> Still, I think in some cases, it's up to debate if anything that doesn't follow some rules is "crap" right away.



I don't think that I ever wrote, and I didn't mean to imply, that writing is crap simply because it doesn't follow some rules.  Two important takeaways:

1. It is possible for writing to be crap.
2. What is crap writing is entirely subjective.

For me, writing is crap if it completely fails to engage me (oversimplifying here.  I can note really good prose that I think is good enough to engage others even if it doesn't, for whatever reason, engage me.  I'm just trying to say that it's my main criteria.).  Most of the time, if writing fails to engage me, I attribute, rightly or wrongly, that inability to a failure to uphold certain "rules."


----------

