These are bits and pieces from a potential story here. Whether the author wants to have the guy a part of their story is up to them. Gasps of all could be from the earlier excerpt. Maybe someone on stage is talking about the celebrity. Also when you said "disrupting that meaning," many other readers believe the contrary.
My question is, why are you arguing against one particular reader's reaction? As a reader, @ChickenFreak reacted, and then, as a writer, gave explanation into why. It's all perspective. Still many experienced writers and/or avid readers would food the rewrites more convoluted if presented in larger sections of similar style. Not to mention the fact that the rewrites create a coherency problem, instead of solving a detail problem. Everything you add should add to your intended meaning. If it doesn't, it becomes superfluous and readers will either ignore it or be bothered by it.
I could write a book about a character staring at a wall if I wanted to. Whether readers would be able to make it through without dying of boredom is another matter entirely. I'm curious, who's feedback indicates that the jarring of the narrative voice is a positive thing? Here you have input from several readers none of whom find it positive. If I had heard nothing positive and several negatives about a certain technique I'd personally be inclined to rethink it. Readers can't read your mind. We can only go by what you give us. Hence if you talk about the stage rather than whats occurring on the stage we'll conclude that the stage is the most exciting part of the scene.
For the first example, chickenfreak said it has coherency problems. For the second, he said it was distracting. Using this website's imagery is up to the writers. Whether you add it like I did, or you add a little imagery, it is up to the writer. Understand that the rewrite were based on what I thought would be good. It is an example. I'm sure if you used the website, you would come up with a better example. When you say everything I should add should be for meaning, I agree. This is my fourth time using the dictionary. Overtime, just like my writing skills, I will have better examples.
Firstly, please explain how it is jarring. Then, explain how the bold parts can be improved. The technique in which you decline, is your choice. However, you haven't tried it yourself, nor have they. They've criticized my attempts but not once did they try it themselves (going to the website and trying it they why they like to). Again, here is the first example but improved: We met at the concert and took our seats. Murmurs filled the air as we patiently waited for the celebrity to come out on stage. “I’ve been waiting for this forever,” she said, holding my hand. A smile appeared on my lips after I realized being here with her was my remedy. Paying the money that I did was well worth it. Without hesitation, I took her in my arms, and the crowd seemed to disappear.
But why would I try having someone else write my imagery when I can write my own? I write to complete *my writing*, not someone else's writing. A paint-by-numbers kit might help a painter produce work faster, but I don't think that he's going to think that's a good enough reason to use one.
But a new writer can get ideas, learns ways to incorporate imagery, and feel more comfortable with the art. Many of my friends have used it. It has improved their writing. Almost like connect the dots, you got to start somewhere. It helped with writers block, when I was stuck on a subject and so much more.
There's a difference between copy and pasting imagery and using sites like that for ideas or the construction of imagery. For example you may take "the stage stood proud in the center of the scene" and think about what kind of imagery it creates rather than copying and pasting it, you may decide to use the description of the stage as proud for whatever reason but copying and pasting stuff that sounds pretty at the expense of the tone of a piece doesn't help you learn to write. Personally I find it quicker to come up with my own imagery than to sift through tons of imagery created by other people that may or may not fit the scene.
I would make the following comments: Your writing is pretty good, but you know there is a problem. That is why you posted, but you are struggling to identify that problem. Who are your characters? That is your main problem, You need to KNOW them even better than yourself. Once your find your characters you won't be struggling to put actions with dialogue. Your characters will do it for you. Think too about relationships between characters - how do they perceive each other, and also settings - where is this happening? What's going on in the background? Consider actions that are continuous or repeated throughout the scene - not just on a line by line level. You need to invest more time into knowing your characters and and the situations you put them in. Do that, and your characters will leap out of the page and help to write your story for you.
This thread has been very helpful so far. Thanks everyone for participating. Writing exceptionally well is exceptionally challenging. I have the feeling I'll still be learning how to write well even at the end of my life
TDF, you already can write well. All you need is a few new techniques and your writing will be even better. Writing techniques are something that can be learned very quickly, so don't go beating yourself up.
I'm not beating myself up, (really I'm not), I'm just saying that it's amazing how MUCH there is to learn about the craft and even after you learn all the core stuff, the subtleties go on forever. If legendary writing was easy, everyone would do it. I (perversely perhaps) find myself enjoying the challenge.
Since others have given more in-depth analysis already, @TDFuhringer - I'll add one thing, which is, you use far too many tags and details! Just skim the dialogue yourself - the names Rat and Orgull are mentioned in EVERY line! That's part of the clutter. (by every line, I mean that the names alternate) @jaime - I'd listen to the advice being given you - they're right. Your own writing on more than one occasion in this thread was *better* before you played with it on that imaginary dictionary site of yours. I'm not saying it's a bad thing to use it for some inspiration, but the way you've communicated here, you make it sound like you just go through the site and copy and paste. That's no way to inspire yourself or to improve. But maybe that's not how you use it, who knows? If you use it only when you're really stuck, I think that's fine. But there's value in being confident in your own writing too, and not resorting to copy and pasting other people's phrases. And when you do lift a phrase, make sure you tamper with it - play with it until it fits what you wanted. Sometimes you see a good phrase, and actually, when you think a little more about it, the good phrase can inspire your own even better phrase. The one you come up with may bear no resemblance with the one you copied, and that's just fine too. If I might suggest something, I'd say go and read good novels - works by authors you admire and enjoy. If I were you, start lifting phrases from *there*. FAR more productive, and trust me, you get some pretty damn good stuff that's a million times more original than anything on that imaginary dictionary site (yes, I've looked at it briefly, and I've also seen the phrases you chose from there from your samples - so far, they are extremely generic and slightly cliche. Not terrible, but by no means noteworthy. The kinda thing I might expect a 14-year-old to write in their creative writing homework, perhaps) For myself, for example, I'm reading The Fault in Our Stars by John Green right now. "Fault in our stars" - what a gorgeous line. And yes, I totally intend on stealing it, when the occasion arises For the first time, I read the line "He cut me a glance" - to "cut" a glance. Now, I've never seen that before and I *love* it. (from the same book) Gonna use it for myself at some point too. Maybe keep a notebook and jot down inspiring words or turn of phrases as you read But as for imaginary dictionary - I don't see too much value in it. For school, yes, I think it could be a useful tool for training up your descriptive skills. But on this forum most of us are aspiring writers - we're looking to get published - so perhaps that's why there seems to be an overall negative reception to the site. Not to say it's bad, but it's meant for people of a different skill level. After all, you yourself said - it's meant for new, upcoming writers.
Yeah, I got into the habit of doing that because I use A LOT of dialogue and my pet peeve is not knowing who is talking. Makes me crazy. Of course, in this scene, since there are only two people present (for now) I could use their names less.
Intriguing. However, if I placed two paragraphs here, right now(without bold), would you then be able to tell which is taken from imagerydictionary.com and which is not (my own)? For example: good advice
I read through other comments and I'm pretty sure no one has said this. If they did, my apologies. Written dialog should not mimic actual speech; it should capture the essence of speech. The exchange you posted recreates the back and forth nature of an actual conversation and in short bursts this is okay, but when it continues past a few lines, it becomes very difficult to read. Jannert condensed your lines very well when he gave an example of a possible edit. His edit sounded so good because he took out the back and forth and focused on the essence of the conversation.
I would like to thank you for posing the questions you have posed. I am learning quite a bit from reading threads you have started. Thanks TD.
Even if we did not know what came from where, most of us would still, quite easily, be able to point out bad writing, over-done imagery, or essentially novice writing. I'm not claiming to be a pro by any regard, but I've learned to notice some things, and I would have noticed your less-than-stellar revisions without them being in bold. Having perused your website, There are some interesting phrases in there, but on the whole, what I really see are a bunch of "writing phrases" that can potentially delineate a natural voice. It doesn't read as smoothly as it can. When building good prose, the aim is not to use clever turns of phrase, but to create a smooth and fluid voice that is the most appropriate for what is being conveyed. I don't intend to make you look or feel bad about your writing, your ideas or whatever, but the truth of the matter is that content is more important than "color." By that I mean, your first aim should be to decide what needs to be said and how to say it the most simply and clearly. Only then should you consider the aesthetics, and only the ones that make the writing more precise and add more satisfying detail where it can be best appreciated. Further, new writers should not be learning phrases from sites like this. These types of sites perpetuate the wrong philosophy about writing, which is that the more creative way to say things is always better. Beginners fall into this trap and churn out purple prose. I know because I've done it and have been told so, and I have seen it elsewhere too. Another member, by the name of JayG, usually makes a good point about how one is trying to tell the story. You to tell a good story, there must be a balance between showing and telling and often times new phrases are a weak attempt to add show to otherwise telling prose. Moreover, it is more important that new writers break the habit of trying to "write creatively" and get into the habit of writing clearly and with purpose and with passion. They must also get into the habit of reading widely, particularly modern fiction, so we can break away from archaic, out-dated styles and conventions.
I checked out the Image Dictionary and found it to be... kind of disturbing. When the phrases weren't cliche - fluttering her lashes, they were trite - eyes rolled up into his head. When something okay came up - Haunting eyes illuminated by the dancing fire flames ( okay, but not brilliant ) .... even if it is okay, it's still someone else's vision. The worst thing is you're cheating the development of your own writer's voice, which is all about your choice of words and phrases. The best thing to learn from this site would be to take their master list and make your own Image Dictionary - filled with your own descriptions. Even if you've never seen a real rainbow the internet is full of pictures and video enough that a writer can create their own descriptions. And even if the initial descriptions come out lame... they won't be any worse than the offered lists.
Plug and play is the perfect formula for bad writing. Why do you think most experienced writers tell beginners to put away the thesaurus? Looking up "better" words is not something one should be thinking about, but learning better craft. That does not entail utilising a thesaurus of cheesy phrases. The fact that something appears in a book is probably the reason it appears on sites like that. I'm not going to tell you what resources to and not to use. But I'll say this: without the proper experience with language as a whole, especially in fiction writing (which is something that must be learned as distinct from simply "writing a story"), resources like this will generally delineate one's writing. You'll learn what is good or bad in workshops and through practice. Like I said, whether you got it from the webpage or from you imagination, if it doesn't work, readers will either skip over it or be bothered by it.
