Do you ever...

[MadMadys]

Truthfully, at this point, I beginning to think that I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You lost me.

This is that face in the palm type of moments I think. Remember math class way back when? Order of operations being doing one thing and then another and another in a particular order? When you say you value one aspect, say description, over another, you are setting up your order of thinking. Priorities that you keep to when you write. Does that make better sense to you?

I define clarity as: the reader easily being able to figure out what is happening in the story. The author is getting the point across. How do you define it?

This should blow your mind. I define clarity as: "the reader easily being able to figure out what is happening in the story. The author is getting the point across." As I said, clarity and rhythm are basically the same thing. If you're being unclear then your story simply won't "flow" or "work" or whatever other word you want to use to describe it. In other words, if you are truly being clear then your writing has that rhythm.

I think where the division is coming is not in defining clarity but how it is achieved. Now this is me interrupting what you've said so correct me if I assume incorrectly. You think that getting the words down, the descriptions and emotions that you want to convey is enough. While that is definitely where you should begin to mold a story from I would keep going and say without a good "rhythm" all you have done is put lots of thoughts down on the page.

I think that, if I at all understand what you're talking about, we disagree greatly about the importance.

If it makes you feel any better, I'm starting to have trouble understanding what you're getting at too!

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

As I said, clarity and rhythm are basically the same thing. If you're being unclear then your story simply won't "flow" or "work" or whatever other word you want to use to describe it. In other words, if you are truly being clear then your writing has that rhythm.

Gotta go with BWF on this one.

Clarity is writing in a way that a reader will interpret the words as the author intended.

Rhythm has more to do with pacing & the intentional varying of sentence structure for an effect. Do I want to write in repetitive patterns to lull the reader into a false sense of expectation just to snap them out of it with a sudden twist? (paragraphs of long sentences followed by a short sentence to promote a feeling of sudden tension for example).

Perhaps you could define rhythm as a component of authorial voice & style. I don't see the link to clarity though.

 

[MadMadys]

Perhaps you could define rhythm as a component of authorial voice & style. I don't see the link to clarity though.

I suppose it may have to go as a "agree to disagree" sort. I can't see clarity not linked to rhyme in a story. Pacing is definitely a large part of how I view rhythm or flow in a story. But again, I think I'm looking a bit larger picture, or novel, here. Clarity is how the reader interprets the whole story, rather than just the words. By that definition, as I'm understanding it from you, sections of a story can be clear but the overall construction is left up in the air which is where I view it from.

All in all though, lovely discussion!

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

I think I understand where you are coming from now. In a macro view, all the elements of writing, including rhythm lead towards the reader's ability to digest the story as the writer intended. Am I on target there?

If that is the case, I wouldn't argue with you. I'd only say that clarity for me is a word choice, sentence structure, paragraph structure issue which eventually leads to a whole. So it's more on the micro level for me.

 

[BWFoster78]

Remember math class way back when? Order of operations being doing one thing and then another and another in a particular order? When you say you value one aspect, say description, over another, you are setting up your order of thinking. Priorities that you keep to when you write. Does that make better sense to you?

I get order of operations; I'm just not quite clear how it impacts clarity.

What I've gathered is that you define the operations as: dialogue, action, and description. Somehow, if I'm interpreting you correctly, the order you use these impacts clarity, which you define much as I do.

I'm not really getting you on this point.

I could use straight narrative and tell you a story. I don't think you'd get a lot out of the story. I think it would be flat, lack emotion, and not engage you, but I think you would be clear on what happens. Thus, clarity would be fine, all the other elements would be lacking. Similarly, I've seen stories that were perfectly clear that utilized solely dialogue.

I don't get how order of operation impacts clarity if you define clarity as you stated. Perhaps in saying this:

The author is getting the point across."

You define "point" as the full context including feeling the emotion in the writing on a level beyond understanding what the characters are experiencing. If that is the case, I'd say that the definition of clarity is part of our problem in mutual understanding.

I tend to think of clarity as being able to understand what is happening.

Again, though, even if we accept your presumed definition, stories using solely dialogue can certainly be clear.

You think that getting the words down, the descriptions and emotions that you want to convey is enough. While that is definitely where you should begin to mold a story from I would keep going and say without a good "rhythm" all you have done is put lots of thoughts down on the page.

Frustratingly, I'm not sure.

My opinion is that the "order of operations" (if defined as the order in which you use dialogue, action, and description) doesn't have a discernable impact on being able to tell a good story that engages the reader and evokes an emotional response. If you feel differently, I'd like to gain an understanding of why you feel this to be the case and how you would use order of operation to so shape a story.

All in all though, lovely discussion!

Yay! Something on which we can agree!

 

[BWFoster78]

Gotta go with BWF on this one.

Cool! Thanks.

 

[BWFoster78]

I love a good debate.

Good. I hope you were not harmed in any way during the hijacking of this thread.

Sorry.

 

[Twook00]

All good here. That was my evil plan all along... :devil:

 

[Feo Takahari]

Just a guess, but could part of the issue be confusion of clarity with readability? A dry history text may be well-organized and plainly stated (clear), but boring to the point of impeding comprehension (poor readability.)

Personally, I tend to fit everything I write into patterns of iambs (alternating unaccented and accented syllables--da-DA da--DA.) Good enough for Shakespeare is good enough for me.

 

[Anders Ämting]

... catch yourself adding words to a sentence simply because they sound like they should go there? As if without them, the rhythm will be off and the sentence won't read right?

All the time. Though, I also remove words for the same reason.

 

[Ghost]

I like what Caged Maiden said. It seems to me that good rhythm is a building block for good pacing.

... catch yourself adding words to a sentence simply because they sound like they should go there? As if without them, the rhythm will be off and the sentence won't read right?

I do it with entire phrases. I overuse repetition because the rhythm appeals to me, but my streamlined versions usually read better. With experience I might learn how to play with repetition in a subtler way.

When I don't like the sound of a sentence, adding a word (or phrase) doesn't help. I try rephrasing the sentence while retaining the meaning. If the rhythm feels off, maybe the sentence doesn't flow well with the others around it? I should look into that.

 

[Twook00]

For me, it's sometimes a single word that throws me off. In fact, I read a sentence in a short story recently where the author said The lace at throat and wrist would have cost a fortune... and it bugged me for some reason. I wanted it to say The lace at his throat and wrist.... It's crazy that one word would bother me so much but it did. That said, it was an unnessecary word so I understand why it wasn't used.

I know... It's crazy.