How to get good prose?

[JohannaK]

Zoolander is sooo 2001.

 

[Mouthwash]

What do you think when you write? Where does your mind go? I think the reason I struggle is because I'm an excellent reader- well-articulated thoughts go straight to the intuitive part of me. When I write I feel like I'm trying to convey something like qualia. Which is not to say that description is impossible, rather that I'm stringing together half-baked phrases and words because they are the first and only things I can make an association with.

So maybe I have a problem with analogy; I can't think of other concepts that can help me express my own better.

 

[sophie]

What do you think when you write? Where does your mind go? I think the reason I struggle is because I'm an excellent reader- well-articulated thoughts go straight to the intuitive part of me. When I write I feel like I'm trying to convey something like qualia. Which is not to say that description is impossible, rather that I'm stringing together half-baked phrases and words because they are the first and only things I can make an association with.

So I have a problem with analogy; I cannot think of other concepts that can help me express my own better. My phrase "economy of writing" in the OP is a perfect example of this sort of thinking, but it was plucked from a Stephen King book that was still fresh in my mind ('economy of killing', was the original phrase).

How much proofreading do you do? If you're spending less than twice as much time proofing as you do composing you're doing it wrong.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Fool, said my muse to me, look in your heart and write.

Owen's got it right. There's no such thing as writing; there's only rewriting.

 

[Mouthwash]

How much proofreading do you do? If you're spending less than twice as much time proofing as you do composing you're doing it wrong.

Quite a bit more. But most of it is spent nitpicking over whether this particular conjunction should be there, does it interrupt the flow of language, should these two sentences should be one, etc.

(Your quoted text would have been a nightmare for me.)

 

[Agent327]

It seems that I can't wrap my head around the art of writing well. I've read a huge amount and can read faster (naturally, with no speed-reading techniques) than anyone I've ever met, including adults. But this doesn't seem to have bled over into my own writing.

I actually write fiction myself, and do so reasonably well, but it takes like an hour to crank out a single paragraph. Usually each sentence gets written three times over and requires deep thinking to create in the first place. I'm simply horrible at diction, and it reflects in my posts. This is a sample of my attempt (via email) to defend US unipolarity in the modern world:

"We are so integrated with the world economy and political hierarchy that disregarding state power in favor of some categorical imperative would lead to global chaos."

Reading well and writing well are simply two entirely different skills. And I agree to what has been said about rewriting: there goes alot more rewriting into writing than there goes re-reading into reading - unless what you're reading isn't particuarly well-phrased.

(As for that particular sentence I don't quite see how it is supposed to convey a defense of US unipolarity. Also, it should read 'We are so integrated within...')

 

[Zkribbler]

...I actually write fiction myself, and do so reasonably well, but it takes like an hour to crank out a single paragraph. Usually each sentence gets written three times over and requires deep thinking to create in the first place. I'm simply horrible at diction, and it reflects in my posts. This is a sample of my attempt (via email) to defend US unipolarity in the modern world:

"We are so integrated with the world economy and political hierarchy that disregarding state power in favor of some categorical imperative would lead to global chaos."

Does that sound like someone who knows what he's talking about to you? The concepts are there, and the thought process is there, but the words aren't....

I'm referring to essays with a time limit. Essays without I blow off.

I'm confused. In the first paragraph, you talk about fiction writing. Later on, you talk about essays.

Essays, I wrote plenty of in college. I found most essay writing to be pretentious, I refused to conform, and as a result, my grades were not stellar. I'm not one to turn to for help with essays.

Fiction writing, I can help you with.

Essay writing is all about making an intellectual point. It's all in the mind. In comparison, fiction writing is about senses and emotions. Sometimes intellectual points wander in, but they are rare white buffaloes. You should have a point-of-view character, and you should be using the words that character would use. Few people speak as if they'd swallowed a thesaurus.

*****************

[BTW: Earlier in this thread, you asked what a clause is. I don't believe you ever got an answer. A clause is merely a group of related words. An independent clause is the same as a simple sentence: "The boy hit the ball." A dependent clause needs an independent clause to hook itself onto: "When the pitcher tossed a change up, the boy hit the ball." If you begin using too many dependent clauses, you weigh your sentence down and make it hard to understand. Better to break it up into a collection of independent clauses:

Now, the pitcher holds the ball.
Now, he lets it go.
Now, the air is shattered by the force of Casey’s blow.]

 

[Hygro]

What do you think when you write? Where does your mind go? I think the reason I struggle is because I'm an excellent reader- well-articulated thoughts go straight to the intuitive part of me. When I write I feel like I'm trying to convey something like qualia. Which is not to say that description is impossible, rather that I'm stringing together half-baked phrases and words because they are the first and only things I can make an association with.

So maybe I have a problem with analogy; I can't think of other concepts that can help me express my own better.

Your writing was always fine and is getting better. Keep editing, think about the reader and get comfortable.

 

[Borachio]

http://www.amazon.com/The-Elements-Style-Fourth-Edition/dp/020530902X

When I write a book I use only a handful of reference tools: dictionary, thesaurus, Gregg's Reference Handbook, Writers Market, and the Elements of Style. Strunk and White is a wonderfully-written, extraordinarily concise tool that pays homage to classic high-end English. It takes language insight to make this prediction in 1979: "By the time this paragraph makes print, uptight... rap, dude, vibes, copout, and funky will be the words of yesteryear." The book begins with eleven "Elementary Rules of Usage," and then continues with eleven more "Elementary Rules of Composition," and eleven "Matters of Form." Each is presented as a brief statement followed by another sentence or two of explanation and a few clarifying examples. This amazing compilation fills only thirty-eight pages, yet covers ninety percent of good writing fundamentals. My favorite section is Chapter IV, a twenty-seven-page, alphabetical listing of commonly misused words and expressions. Here's a trade secret: when my manuscript is "done," I then turn to this chapter and use my word processor's Find function to study every instance of all these problematic words and phrases. I never fail to find errors this way. Many great writers are so only because they've learned to make use of the best available tools. The end of the book contains an essay on "An Approach to Style" with a list of twenty-one "Reminders." Those who fight the apparently-natural tendency to go against these recommendations succeed as writers. Those who don't, fail. It's that simple. The single drawback of The Elements of Style is that it's too concise; it does not stand alone as an all-encompassing tutorial or reference guide. Many readers will seek other sources for more in-depth explanation of style elements. Despite that, it easily replaces ten pounds of other reference material. --Christopher Bonn Jonnes, author of Wake Up Dead.

 

[Kyriakos]

I'd say not think about the reader beyond actually being (reasonably) aware of what you write is signifying more or less clear meaning in the context you have in mind for your fictional work. Given the reader will pick up other things as well, it is crucial to have a core which is less fluid in what it can connote.

In the end, though, some people just won't like your work regardless of what you do, so you should never try to second-guess what others want or not. Ultimately if you don't get published in some printed media (eg a magazine, which is not having to base much reputation or money on any individual writer being printed there) you *might* want to look again into your overall way and style of writing, or meaning and reason for it. But things aren't as set, we are dealing with language and thoughts.

Most important for a writer is to express his/her sentiments and thoughts, and never try to go for some formula he/she may think is 'good'.

 

[Kozmos]

I have a stack of saved excerpts from my favourite books in a plain text file from my Kindle. I occasionally reference them on the rare occasion I write something.

 

[JohannaK]

I believe there is no single way to write well. When I feel like writing, I open the file and type away, constantly stopping, re-reading, deleting, re-writing. Occasionally there is that stroke of glorious inspiration and I just type and type without looking behind and, if I am happy with what I just wrote, I dont bother reading again. I usually do some fast reading in the next session, which sometimes ends up in scrapping everything altogether and starting anew.

The secret of writing is writing and re-writing until you are happy with whatever is on the paper.

 

[BvBPL]

Be sure to spend some time outlining before starting to write, particularly for non fiction pieces. This ensures that you spell out the logical process from a to b. this helps to prevent writing in the intuitive leaps you have when reading.

 

[Kyriakos]

I try to rewrite as little as possible, so i would just go back after the story is finished to change some repetitions happening while i was writing. Then only days later i would relook things and may change some wording here and there.
Other than that i only change stuff prior to sending something to a mag, or for a book collection. I'd rather deem a work a failure and write something other rather than try to rebuild most of the text.

 

[Mouthwash]

Reading well and writing well are simply two entirely different skills. And I agree to what has been said about rewriting: there goes alot more rewriting into writing than there goes re-reading into reading - unless what you're reading isn't particuarly well-phrased.

(As for that particular sentence I don't quite see how it is supposed to convey a defense of US unipolarity. Also, it should read 'We are so integrated within...')

Gaaah! Do not remind me of that sentence please!

Your writing was always fine and is getting better. Keep editing, think about the reader and get comfortable.

Thanks, but I'm aiming for much better writing. I want people to look forward to my posts because of it.

 

[warpus]

I have been wanting to write a short story as well, and I have a couple pages written, but I can never seem to get in a.. "writing zone". I sit there, writing this and that, and basically keep altering each sentence I write many times.. instead of just writing a whole bunch of stuff and then editing it later. I know that you're supposed to write drunk and edit sober, but it doesn't seem to work for me.. yet. The writing just doesn't come out that naturally. Maybe I just need to sketch out a better outline of the story I'm trying to write? It's sort of vaguely as an idea in my head - but not fully fleshed out - I always hope that my story will sort of evolve as I write out. Maybe I'm just not "designing" enough of it ahead of time?

 

[JohannaK]

You just need the ideas, really. You need to have the central idea for the story and then a general idea of the events that are going to take place. It works for me to come up with an idea for something and hold it and think it over and over before I start writing. Then you modify the idea as you write and see what works better. If you have been writing, have the idea yet dont know how to drive what you have into what you think, then delete and rewrite. It will probably work better.

 

[Tigranes]

Now, to consider the example sentence you provide us.

"We are so integrated with the world economy and political hierarchy that disregarding state power in favor of some categorical imperative would lead to global chaos."


To start with, all of its nouns, except chaos (and even it is iffy), are abstractions: economy, hierarchy, power, imperative. And these are modified with adjectives that only increase the level of abstraction: world, political, state. Only philosophers can process more than two abstractions per sentence. Ground your writing in concrete language, in things that your reader's mind can actually picture.

Wow, we got some really professional criticism here, CFC never seizes to amaze me with diversity and diapason of humans we meet at these forums.

 

[warpus]

@JohannaK I think my problem is mostly writing dialogue. I have ideas in my head, I know what's supposed to happen in the scene, but then I get stuck re-writing what people are saying, because it just doesn't flow right.. and doesn't lead to what I want it to lead to. I'll try again once I have a better idea for a story - maybe they have been too ambitious so far.

 

[Farm Boy]

Wow, we got some really professional criticism here, CFC never seizes to amaze me with diversity and diapason of humans we meet at these forums.

Gori is fantastic even if he's prone to flights of fancy. Occupational hazard of working around so many words? Double rainbow all the way.