TroubadourI'm pretty close to being finished with my latest novel. It's occurs in the afterlife, and it has sex scenes. It's not porn...I don't like the stuff, but it is quite explicit in places. One of my problems with all of my writing is how much description of what's going on in the scene around the characters do I include? I've been writing for years and have been published, but.... I also I have too much dialogue in other places. I know I need a sense of setting and that is there, but.... I'm at the point where I have to immerse myself in the scene, like as if I'm experiencing it myself and what exactly do I feel and see. My writing is fantasy, literary and magical realism. Any ideas?
-
Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!
The Final Flesh-out
- Thread starter Arranah
- Start date
psychotick
Auror
Hi,
Most of this is personal preference. Is it too explicit? For some readers it will be. For others it'll be not enough. Likewise too much description? Too much dialogue? Again there's no right answer. There are extremes which may push things to the point where readers are turned off. But mostly you'll notice if that happens.
Cheers, Greg.
Most of this is personal preference. Is it too explicit? For some readers it will be. For others it'll be not enough. Likewise too much description? Too much dialogue? Again there's no right answer. There are extremes which may push things to the point where readers are turned off. But mostly you'll notice if that happens.
Cheers, Greg.
Sorry, this will sound kind of flip, but as much as you need to get across what you intend.
What gets described is dependant on your POV character. We're seeing the story though their eyes, so what they're focused on, what's important to them, and way the world is described is focused through the lens of the character's personality.
A thief walks into a tavern, what do they notice? How do they see and describe things?
Compare that to a noble knight what do they notice? What do they see?
The thief may notice escape routes, expensive jewellery on patrons, and describe them all as potential marks.
The knight may notice the different house factions present, what types of arms and armor the other knights are wearing, and may refer to every one in the tavern as either lady or sir, regardless of if they're a bar wench or a high-born noble.
Also what gets described should also do one or more of the following, advance the plot, expand the word, reveal character, or reflect the emotional state of the POV character.
What gets described is dependant on your POV character. We're seeing the story though their eyes, so what they're focused on, what's important to them, and way the world is described is focused through the lens of the character's personality.
A thief walks into a tavern, what do they notice? How do they see and describe things?
Compare that to a noble knight what do they notice? What do they see?
The thief may notice escape routes, expensive jewellery on patrons, and describe them all as potential marks.
The knight may notice the different house factions present, what types of arms and armor the other knights are wearing, and may refer to every one in the tavern as either lady or sir, regardless of if they're a bar wench or a high-born noble.
Also what gets described should also do one or more of the following, advance the plot, expand the word, reveal character, or reflect the emotional state of the POV character.
Feo Takahari
Auror
If your characters are having sex and it's fun, don't be afraid to write sex that feels fun. A lot of "literary" writers seem compelled to make all their sex as clinical and disgusting as possible, as if to ward off any possibility that they might be writing porn instead of Necessary Sex That is Here Because It's Necessary. It's all right to have some playfulness and awkwardness and humanity in your sex scenes.
Of course, if your characters are having sex and it's clinical and disgusting, there are ways to approach that, too.
Of course, if your characters are having sex and it's clinical and disgusting, there are ways to approach that, too.
- Thread starter
- #5
Thanks, Greg,
I've written the sex scenes which basically told how the person was doing it. Then I thought, that's not what I want to get across here. So I toned it back a bit. Then I got a little high and replaced the mellow sex with the more specific again, because of my own needs at the time.
Of course, I write for the fun of it or because I really like to do it, so on some level I should enjoy everything I'm writing. Like all writers I suppose, I write because I feel an inner compulsion to do so. It just won't leave me alone, plus it's good therapy for all the ways I messed myself over, all the ways life messed me over and what I gained from it. Having a life where the stuff hits the fan a lot is excellent fodder for the writer. No matter how sucky it is, it's great.
I've written the sex scenes which basically told how the person was doing it. Then I thought, that's not what I want to get across here. So I toned it back a bit. Then I got a little high and replaced the mellow sex with the more specific again, because of my own needs at the time.
Of course, I write for the fun of it or because I really like to do it, so on some level I should enjoy everything I'm writing. Like all writers I suppose, I write because I feel an inner compulsion to do so. It just won't leave me alone, plus it's good therapy for all the ways I messed myself over, all the ways life messed me over and what I gained from it. Having a life where the stuff hits the fan a lot is excellent fodder for the writer. No matter how sucky it is, it's great.- Thread starter
- #6
Penpilot,
Thanks muchly. How about omniscient narrator point of view? Do writers you know employ that successfully? I like it in stories, a little tucked in here and there. But I've heard it's not good to do.
Feo Takahari,
Playful would be a good addition to what I'm writing. It's kind of heavy duty stuff in some ways. Plus, she has multiple partners. She feels conflicted about it - women often do. But she appreciates each guy for who and what he is and has been to her. I want to emphasize the conflict because without it there is no story. But putting myself in that position, I would also like to have fun with it.
Thanks muchly. How about omniscient narrator point of view? Do writers you know employ that successfully? I like it in stories, a little tucked in here and there. But I've heard it's not good to do.
Feo Takahari,
Playful would be a good addition to what I'm writing. It's kind of heavy duty stuff in some ways. Plus, she has multiple partners. She feels conflicted about it - women often do. But she appreciates each guy for who and what he is and has been to her. I want to emphasize the conflict because without it there is no story. But putting myself in that position, I would also like to have fun with it.
Omniscient can be a tough POV to use. The transitions from one character's thoughts to another can feel really jarring if they're not executed smoothly enough. Also there's an inherent distancing effect when that POV is used. This makes it more difficult to draw the reader in get them to experience the moment like they're there. Off the top of my head I only know of Dune that does this really well.
I wouldn't say it's not a good thing to do, but as I mentioned, there are just a few more challenges to using it. And the challenges aren't insurmountable. Some of the benefits to omniscient is it can be self referential and tease the audience about future events. It can also give you the feel of sitting by the fire and being told a story.
Deciding to use it or not, depends on how you want your story to feel and what you thing your story needs.
The opening prologue to Game of Thrones is written in omniscient, and is a good example of how the viewpoint can be close to the characters (still not as tight as 3rd though).
Yes, in the Game of Thrones prologue, that's exactly what it is...Martin provides a teaser, which shows the undercurrent of a main story the reader will not see for quite some time...but they know it's there. Readers know what's coming, but the characters do not.
We recently discussed this very thing at one of my live critique groups. My friend presented a novel opening that's 5 pages long and contains 5 different POVs, all told in close 3rd limited. My opinion, was that he used too many POVs. The piece was hard to follow because the viewpoint changed so rapidly. He insisted all 5 POVs (including a short POV of a bird) were necessary.
I suggested he try a close omniscient, just for the opening, and transition to the main story with close 3rd limited (his preferred POV style) in the next chapter. He told me he didn't feel ready to use omniscient because it's hard to do well. I agreed with him. So, I asked him how he planned on improving his skill with omniscient if he didn't practice omniscient.
You can't plant potatoes and grow tomatoes. He agreed that's what the story needs, but he was afraid to fail. But, failure is how we learn as writers.
What does it cost for you to experiment? Time and energy? Unless you're 80, you've got plenty of both.
Try mixing viewpoints as needed. Just save everything as-is first. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. But, you may hit pay dirt. And, no writing performed in earnest is ever wasted.
As a final note: It's not omniscient, but if you'd like to read an example of a writer switching seamlessly from 1st person to 3rd, read Patrick Rothfuss's Name of the Wind. You likely already have. I didn't even notice when I read it the first time, but in that story there are several shifts from 1st person (Kvothe's POV) to 3rd person, when the story shifts to Bast.
Point being, you always hear how you shouldn't mix different POV styles. That's a load of bullocks. It's just hard to do well. What isn't hard to do well in writing?
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #9
Penpilot
I agree omniscient narrator can be difficult. I've used it at times, in spots in my stories where I wanted to give an overview prior to getting into the protagonist's head. Did it work? I don't know. I've only published two books. And they were not best sellers. I've been writing for over thirty years, and at first I had no clue how to do anything. It's better now, but there are things I'm experimenting with just to see how it works. When I asked a famous comedy writer at a writer's conference once how he knew if something was funny, he said, "When people laugh." But most of us don't have the audience sitting right there, and most of us don't have best sellers.
I want my readers to get a full sense of setting, of place and at the same time I want them to feel what my protagonist is feeling. Which is why I like literary instead of actions stories. With action, I don't get enough of the feelings so I stop reading them.
T. Allen Smith,
In my first book I used first and third person. It was a true story, and I was not there when the murders took place. So when I described that, I employed third person. At several other times in the story I employed third person when I wanted to give background scenes and what made the killer the way he was. I clearly labeled them at the beginning of the chapters when I did this, so the reader was not confused. Most of the book was first person told from my point of view, since it was about my reaction to all this.
Now with fiction, it's different. There's a lot more freedom to tell the story. I experiment with each novel. I'm not 80, but I am probably ancient compared to most of you here. Still, I experiment, otherwise it's boring. Right now my issue is how much description bores the heck out of a reader. I don't want a James Michner kind of description. They put me to sleep. I skipped a lot and missed some main points. Thanks for the reading suggestions.
I agree omniscient narrator can be difficult. I've used it at times, in spots in my stories where I wanted to give an overview prior to getting into the protagonist's head. Did it work? I don't know. I've only published two books. And they were not best sellers. I've been writing for over thirty years, and at first I had no clue how to do anything. It's better now, but there are things I'm experimenting with just to see how it works. When I asked a famous comedy writer at a writer's conference once how he knew if something was funny, he said, "When people laugh." But most of us don't have the audience sitting right there, and most of us don't have best sellers.
I want my readers to get a full sense of setting, of place and at the same time I want them to feel what my protagonist is feeling. Which is why I like literary instead of actions stories. With action, I don't get enough of the feelings so I stop reading them.
T. Allen Smith,
In my first book I used first and third person. It was a true story, and I was not there when the murders took place. So when I described that, I employed third person. At several other times in the story I employed third person when I wanted to give background scenes and what made the killer the way he was. I clearly labeled them at the beginning of the chapters when I did this, so the reader was not confused. Most of the book was first person told from my point of view, since it was about my reaction to all this.
Now with fiction, it's different. There's a lot more freedom to tell the story. I experiment with each novel. I'm not 80, but I am probably ancient compared to most of you here. Still, I experiment, otherwise it's boring. Right now my issue is how much description bores the heck out of a reader. I don't want a James Michner kind of description. They put me to sleep. I skipped a lot and missed some main points. Thanks for the reading suggestions.
You might be surprised. Our membership has many, well let's say, "veterans of life".
I couldn't agree more. Constantly challenging ourselves is how we get better.
I think that's one of the hardest things to know as a writer. That and, how much information the reader truly needs. I depend on critique partners, live & fellow scribes for that knowledge.
Similar threads
