Novel Purple Prose: The Good(?) and the Bad

Waiting for revision. . . .

 

This, I think, is what Castle is talking about, when he says that people see things differently from one another.

I think that this is a BEAUTIFUL piece of writing, and I say this even while being ignorant of several of the words' meanings.

 

Surely you jest, my friend.

This is a train wreck. Totally self-indulgent writing:

*checks calendar for April 1...nope, that doesn't explain it*

 

Not at all. I am particularly-- enamored, of this part:

". . . once or twice when she was bending forward to whisper girlishly. . ."

The, I dare say, delicate descriptions add a very blatant atmosphere of gossip and girlishness to the whole scene.
The words I could NOT understand turned out to be one word which is not in my dictionary, (pomme) and another which describes a Persian girl or woman.
The other words were either obvious, (flounce, antique, plaster) or very apt, (tulle, which describes the material and furthers the feel of the writing; I am glad I looked up this word).

I think that writing gets unfair treatment, sometimes.
This piece wrote everything with appropriate wording, even if it was more atypical.

Now, something like this:

The perambulation of the pedal extremity is being impeded by the insertion of a foreign, botanical offshoot,

is verbose and unnecessary.

Simply saying, "He has a splinter in his foot," would not only suffice, but be more effective and comprehensible.

But using the word 'tulle' because that's the proper word for the material? I fail to see how that is self-important or otherwise poor.

 

Honestly, I thought that sentence would make a great entry in the Bulwer-Lytton contest. Flounced is what makes it, flounced and the awkward ending.

 

Is this hedged with sarcasm? Be aware that I am not asking if you are serious, because you very well might be, but is there hint of-- teasing?

 

"She was wearing a dress of pale yellow tulle finished with antique lace that flounced around her shoulders and came, once or twice when she was bending forward to whisper girlishly, a little closer to the buttery plaster of pommes parisienne than Penelope would have wanted her own dress to."
---------

The author's comparing her yellow dress to a fancy potato dish! It's all exaggerated and such: buttery plaster of pommes parisienne

And then the alliteration is so over the top: plaster pommes parisienne Penelope

It all sounds ridiculous. I admit it sounds it even more so because of the suffocatingly romantic way she's writing. Anyway, just my opinion. Pretentious, mayhaps?

 

No, I'm completely serious, but the contest I mentioned isn't. The Bulwer-Lytton honours the worst opening sentence to a novel. When I read this sentence, I laughed. Marina seems frustrated by it, and you seem to like it. Different people respond very differently to the same set of words.

 

Agreen: I totally agree!

WF ought to have a Bulwer-Lytton type contest along w/the poetry & short story ones.

 

I was HOPING we could avoid the word 'pretentious,' because it assumes that every piece of mediocre writing hedged with large words is written that way because the author is a self-important, ostentatious creep.

I will admit that 'buttery plaster of pommes parisienne' doesn't make a LICK of sense to me, but if it's merely saying that her dress was almost touching a potato dish, then I can't see how that is COMPARING the dress to the dish.
Also, if 'pommes parisienne' is a dish, then this makes a whole world of sense that I am even MORE unable to see as pretentious or ostentatious.

 

Sorry, I was teasing because I know of your hatred for that word [you wrote about in your blog].

 

*Flinches* Gah, should have realized.
Oh, incidentally, if you read my journal entry (and enjoy it) then I would appreciate a comment. Even if it is just a, "Good entry, bye."

Lets me know I'm loved and adored by adoring and loving fans.

 

"Purple prose" doesn't mean having vast vocabulary. It's about stuffing every sentence with meaning so much that the sentence becomes a conglomerate of long winding passages and sentences that do not boost the story along. The whole picture is lost, and, frivolous, trivial detail about things outside the story is naively stressed. It's the "boy, look at me" mentality, all writers degrade themselves, occasionally, to show off. "Look at what I can do!"

Purple prose is like watching the movie, Alexander.

 

I would consider the excerpt posted to be purple prose because there's a simpler way to say it without losing the atmosphere of the writing.

"She was wearing a dress of pale yellow tulle finished with antique lace that flounced around her shoulders and came, once or twice when she was bending forward to whisper girlishly, a little closer to the buttery plaster of pommes parisienne than Penelope would have wanted her own dress to."

That could easily be rewritten as something simpler, like "She was wearing a dress of pale yellow tulle finished with antique lace that lay across her shoulders and came, once or twice when she was bending forward, a little closer to the pommes parisienne than Penelope would've wanted her own dress to."

There's not a lot I'd take out of the sentence, but there are some words that are unnecessary. Why does the lace need to flounce? Why do we need to know the dish is buttery? Isn't that implied by the kind of dish it is? That's why I personally would consider that a good example of purple prose.

~Lynn

 

I'd go even further, but I'd keep the word "flouncing."

She bent over, pale, yellow dress flouncing.

Done. How much simplier is that?

 

Because the (off) topic has come up in various other threads lately, I thought that perhaps it deserved a thread of its own.

Cogito has stated that purple prose is, by definition, undesirable. I don't think that's quite accurate. Sorry, Cog! I rarely disagree with you, so I looked it up to make sure. My understanding is that it is, by definition, excessive. That need not be derogatory; there is such a thing as desirable excess. I think most people will agree that Nabokov's Lolita was profoundly excessive, but delightfully so. Others simply hate it.

My consumption of good purple prose is like gorging myself on fine chocolate; it can be sickening, but oh, so good, I just can't stop! There is probably a better term for the sweet excess of Nabokov's work, but if so, I don't know it. What is the word for “sickeningly sweet in a good way”?

From dictionary.com:

I should say that I have found published authors who take Cogito's view of purple prose (actually, many do), but there's no absolute, authoritative definition to say that it's bad. At least, I haven't found one. The term seems to be rather obscure and subject to opinion – a recipe for debate, if ever I've seen one.

Here's a commonly cited purple prose line from Edward Bulwer-Lytton's “Paul Clifford”:

I think most people on this forum (myself included) would recommend shortening it. This is very sound advice for beginners. It's extremely unlikely that any unknown writer would ever manage to publish a book in today's market with an opening line like that! He could have just written, “It was a dark and stormy night” and it would have worked just as well.

However. . . I rather like the line as it is!! I actually think that shortening the line only cheats the reader of this author's vivid imagination. The ultimate point is that there's a time and a place for purple, and there is, undeniably, a certain skill in wielding such unwieldy wonders. It is also highly subjective as to whether or not it's actually good, even when skillfully executed.

The problem with beginners who write this way is that their phrasing is almost never skillful. In fact, it's always downright dreadful. I've never seen any successful attempt, and I've read a lot of this stuff on many writing sites. With that in mind, I think it's a better game plan to start at square one; work on developing a more concise, publishable style, get your name out there, and work your way up to that purple hue you love so much.

But, I digress (in the spirit of my thread).

Questions:

Do you think a beginner can actually make a name for himself by going purple? Bear in mind that most publishers won't look past the first line.

Who publishes this stuff? Are there any good publishers that an unknown might actually have a shot with? (yes, I realise this one belongs in the publishers forum, but is it really worth making two threads? Forum mods decide.)

What are your general views on purple prose? Is there such a thing as 'good' purple? If so, what defines it? I have noticed that most styles are very distinct, and it can be hard to pin down exactly what makes it good.

And most importantly. . .

What are your favorite purple prose (or 'delightfully excessive') books/authors?

Feel free to comment however you like. The only question that matters is the last one, cause I'm jonesin for a fix.

 

A writer should seek to write to express himself, not to make a name for himself, but I do think that even in this A.D.D. culture, if I may use that term , one can still be published by writing what is considered "purple prose." An example might be Fahrenheit 451 and Brave New World, both of which were published only in the last century. However, writing well requires skill, and this goes for if you're a writer inspired by Victorian literature or 20th century literature.

I think this question can be asked to about any writer. Getting published is tricky business. It took Stephen King years to get published and he certainly isn't known for elaborate writing. I think getting published just requires good writing, but if I'm wrong, shame on the publishers for succumbing to trends.

From what I've seen, it gets a lot of flack. I grew up with the likes of Melville and Dickens and Emerson, and I didn't think there was a problem until I was introduced to the internet and this ugly, redundant, belittling term. I have a friend, who is self-published, who agrees with me on this point, of all the points we normally disagree on.

I have a number of them, but I really love Walden and Civil Disobedience. I also like Nature by Ralph Waldo Emerson. I like Moby Dick of course, and I enjoy everything by Charles Dickens.

 

Also see comments on this topic here:
http://writingforums.org/showthread.php?t=20342&highlight=PURPLE+PROSE

 

Ray Bradbury was a well known author long before he published 451. I'm not sure about the other, but I assume it's the same story. I'm sure that it's no problem for a household name to push whatever kind of ms they want. If one publisher won't take it, another will. However, I think a beginner has roughly a snowball's chance in hell.

The best plan, as I see it, is to get your name out there, show that you actually know your stuff, and you are much more likely to be given a chance to develope a more controversial style (and get it published). Just climb the ladder, so to speak.

And, of course, Charles Dickens could do no wrong! An excellent writer.

 

Maybe. It'd be probably be extremely hard though. Of course, a beginner could make a name for himself by going purple if the writing is atrociously bad and everyone only knows him because of the purple prose. Paolini is an example I'm thinking of here - those who hate his writing state purple prose is one of the main reasons.

Purple Prose is, of course, a stylistic thing - which was why it was acceptable in the Victorian era, when, well, it was pretty much the norm, in my opinion. Myself, I don't explicitly hate purple prose, but when I come across a long description of anything, I usually skim through it and only go back to it if I'm confused (which I'm usually not, anyhow). Theoretically, good purple prose for me is purple prose that contains some element of - for lack of better word - unusualness. Something weird, not ordinary, special, unique, whatever - basically anything that would make me think "Wait a moment, what the heck was that I just saw?" Frankly, however, most - if not all - purple prose probably can't do that.

I hate anything from the 1800s, only because of the excessive description and the fact that they sometimes take entire pages just to describe a few things. Personally, though, I have a great respect for Mark Twain. I just don't like reading his 1800s style stuff. Dickens I also have respect for. But I just don't like reading the Victorian style, period.


Actually, as an additional note, I think purple prose can work in the hands of an extremely skilled writer, especially when it comes to an emotional scene. Note, however, I said an extremely skilled writer. In my opinion, if you can somehow use the overwhelming nature of the purple prose to show the intensity of the emotion, that's great. Frankly, however, most times, that is an extremely difficult feat to pull off, so it probably will happen very rarely in practice.

 

Kas, I hear what you are saying. However, your interpretation of the definition is in error. By labelling something purple prose, the speaker is expressing disapproval. There is no such thing as good purple prose. There is only disagreement over whether a piece of writing is or is not purple prose.

It's like asking someone if they approve of behavior they call reprehensible. The term itself encompasses disapproval. There is no such thing as acceptable reprehensible behavior, by definition.

 

I can't say much about Paolini, as I've never read his work, and probably never will. I've heard that it's even worse that the movie, and that frightens me.

I get what you're saying about describing strange things, though. So-called purple prose can have a great effect there. The applicability of a descriptive style really depends on the content. A good example of where it doesn't fit (imo) is in standard fantasy - something I see often on writing sites, including this one. If there's nothing special going on, I really don't want to read a nauseatingly poetic 300-word description of some grass and a rainbow.

I can respect that. It certainly isn't to everyone's liking. I would actually say that it is somewhat of an aquired taste, though some will always hate it, and that's fine. That is also part of the reason publisher's are hesitant to accept it, I think (aside from the fact that most of it is terrible). Most big publishers seem to have little interest in niche markets.

I agree with that completely. The problem arises when aspiring writers fail to realise just how difficult it is to pull this off.

 

I also understand what you're saying, Cogito. So please, give me a better term. Have you read Nabokov? Using one word, how would you describe it?

 

When looking up a dictionary term, there are shades of meaning that can be lost. That is why people who learn words from a thesaurus often misuse tem, even if they look the word up in the dictionary as well.

You have to understand the connotation of a word as well as its denotation.

Purple prose is purple prose. And part of the term's connotation is inherent disapproval.

 

Perhaps we should say that the discussion here is about why prose perceived as purple prose could still be good, could still work, even if it has the qualities of purple prose, anyhow?