Am I correct in assuming that writers want their language to be powerful? This raises a couple of questions. How do we achieve forceful prose? How is this power achieved? It is through the depth of characters? Is it through the words alone? Is it through a plot that captures the readers? And is this a power we wish over our readers? Do writers seek to be powerful?
Where is the balance between wanting our reader's attention and expressing ourselves - just saying what we want to say?
I think you need to distinguish between language and writing. Powerful writing can encompass much more than the use of language. Asimov's use of language wasn't exceptional - he's not known particularly for the quality of his prose, but he's known for the power of his ideas. In a similar way, a plot, or in depth and interesting characters aren't really a function of language, but a function of plot and characterisation. But we do want our prose to captivate readers. And that comes down to word choices (as well as language structure, but for the purposes of the conversation, I will skip past that for the moment). We often talk about using strong verbs instead of weak ones. Language, or words, are ultimately used to communicate ideas, and some words are stronger than others because they convey more powerful ideas. To take a simple example, "He ate his food quickly" vs "He wolfed down his food". The second is more powerful because it conveys more ideas than the first as well as more powerful imagery. To take an example where word choice (and sentence structure) is more important than the other factors - my Fael the Apprentice story really only works because of the elevated, archaic and overcomplicated dialogue. It's not an especially eye-catching story otherwise - the plot isn't original, the characters are all pretty much tropes and so on. But (I hope) the word choices made them become more interesting characters. I could write the same thing with more conventional language, but I suspect that would make it fall flat on its face in the entertainment stakes.
Very well said, very insightful. Some writers are idea-powerful, and some are prose-powerful. This gives me a lot of food for thought. I Googled "Writers with great ideas but weak prose" and got a Reddit thread - which mentions Sci-Fi as a genre - in some cases - fitting this description When I Googled "Writers with strong prose but weak ideas" - I didn't get any results But "Writers with strong prose" got another Reddit thread - and after reading it I am motivated to read Steinbeck! Yes, totally agree, and they say passive voice weakens the writing, too I've read your story, and it is captivating. I see here the way you have described the dialogue, but I think an important point to make is that your dialogue was always understandable and made sense.
Nouns and verbs with sporadic modifiers. The less clutter, the better. He prose was terrible. Absolutely, unforgivingly terrible. Unreadable in my opinion. I've read ingredient labels that hit harder than he.
I never like the word 'power' I believe you can move a reader through subtle influence. Power to me is like ramming words into someone in hope that the 'feel' this anger or pain whilst influence is a chat, is therapy, is finding that understanding of what you can share with a reader. I dont necessarily subscribe to the view that a writer needs to be powerful... i often see that a writer wants the reader to understand. This is something of a balancing act. I have been (still am) working with a writer (you will know of them Louanne) and i find them to be a very gifted writer. They are very forward with emotions grabbing a reader by the throat to plunge them into the thoughts of this voice. The writing and style is great, the thoughts are striking and they make me wonder how close to the truth are the words. Powerful? Yes. But is it for everyone? For me? The first question ... no. The second ... is something i am still wondering. Why? Because powerful writing comes at a cost. I view reading as learning and an escape. Through story you can see how someone overcame, you can see the greatness in being moved in feeling emotions yet too much of the same thing can plunge someone into dark spaces they wished to leave. Power without a gentleness, I believe, isn't always a good thing. I think this is very true. I have read, watched countless of these 'writers' who 'teach' new writers these 'secrets' to good writing and I do agree that there are certain things writers must adhere to, there are many I do not agree with at all. To tell a little story. There is this beautiful flower who didn't think she was very pretty. Everytime she looked across the field and was ashamed by the bright colours of others with their friends on the other side. They would gleam and talk about their beauty, alluring passersby who spoke glowingly about this view. It made our little flower quite sad. Sat amongst the hated weeds and thorns of the marsh, she still tried to stand up tall only to never lift her head as high knowing she could not compare to others. Till one day a man walked by and commented to his friend that this she was the most beautiful flower he had ever seen even glancing over at the fields of colour on the opposite side. He took a picture posted it everywhere... it made the flower shine. The man bent down to the flower and told her, "smile and keep growing, be the beautiful you." And when he left, the flower realised that beauty comes from within. A pointless little story right? But what i wanted to highlight is that it is often in the set-up, the building of a story that leads to a line that can grab. I've read stories from authors and new writers who display such great control of their story and wordplay that I pause and be amazed at what I can never do (the fields of flowers) yet i have read stories that lulled me into a calm and tapped me with a smile, taken back by the power of one simple line that lifted this whole story from a good one... to a memorable one. Some the impactful stories I read are rarely ones with the greatest prose or powerful statements and lines... but ones which tugged at the heart and showed me a way in which I can use my limited abilities to try and create stories for others to remember. A powerful piece of writing doesn't always stay in the mind. Subtle and a gentler approach, I feel, can stay with a reader.
It really depends on the kind of story you're trying to write. Sometimes you *need* that impact, either to create a gut reaction or to build tension. If you're writing horror, or epic fantasy, you need to make the reader feel that atmosphere, often to make the reader feel the hopelessness. If you're writing "good" ending, the payoff comes later, and this increases the payoff. If you're writing like Lovecraft, you need to make the reader feel the fact that humans are a tiny speck in the vastness of the cosmos.
@Hideoshi - thanks so much for your thoughtful comments. This opens up questions about the nature of a writer’s power – and how it is used. Is the writer approaching from a place of kindness and compassion? I read once that “writing is an act of sharing” – a generosity on the part of the writer to the reader. In this act of sharing, a connection is made. Is that power? Consider your story of the flower. It has power – a gentle power – the power to move the reader. If a piece of writing does not move (either emotionally or intellectually) the reader at all, does it even have power? In my mind, this opens up a discussion about “truth’ in writing – If the writing conveys a truth – it becomes more powerful –
But then again, there’s Jack Kerouac, who said, “It ain’t whatcha write, it’s the way atcha write it.” I did try to read Kerouac once, but lost interest. But I can think of one book I’ve read where I couldn’t get enough of the beautiful, musical language – it made all the difference - and that is John Cleland’s Memoirs of Fanny Hill – which you can read for free on Gutenberg – https://www.gutenberg.org/files/25305/25305-h/25305-h.htm But I have always had a thing for the 18th century.
Yes, what you need for horror to be powerful is unique to the genre - tap into the reader's primal fears, twists and turns and suspense, and lots of danger that get's the reader's heart racing....
Consider Hemingway's famous six word story: For sale, baby shoes, never worn. It's only six words, but it has a lot of power. It's not gentle, and it's not supposed to be. It's not complex prose. But it's powerful because it creates a connection with the reader that most of us can understand. Does Hemingway have a responsibility? I would say not. For some people who have lost children, it may cause them distress but it is not Hemingway's responsibility to create a safe space for them, and neither is he deliberately setting out to upset them.
Yes!! It's all about the connection. And I would go one step further, and say that's what makes it Art. I spent some time on the Art Thread defending Tolstoy's definition of art - that art consists in the connection between the artist and the receiver of the art. That's the power of art - whether it is fiction, or a painting, or a piece of music. The separation between the artist and receiver is destroyed.
Your reply made me think back to a short clip I saw many years ago: Neil Gaiman talks about honesty and this is something I can connect with. Honesty... truth... words I find interlinked but I guess it is how a reader views a story. This going back a year or two, but I was chatting to a writer about their work and they said they found it really interesting in getting feedback from a story they wrote because the reader (also a writer) commented on a part of their story that they didn't really take much notice of. They said that the reader connected with a passage more so than main theme and for the writer, it made them see story differently. It was more of the case that every reader, every individual are carry experiences unique to their own lives and what connects to one may not be with the other. As they told me this, I reflected more on this in that I don't worry too much about 'power' in writing but focus on creating an emotional tune for a reader. What they make of the story is open to them... as, I believe, there are no right or wrong answers. I liken this to music. If someone hears a happy dance tune and loves it ... but also loves the somber poignant base of the booming orchestra ... who I am to say that is wrong? Each has a place in a reader's heart. Which leads to ... I read this as something very soft, very subtle... almost at a whisper. I don't think it has any power... but opens a door for a reader to wonder. I believe in simple writing because this evolves many emotions in the most basic form. Again, this maybe a personal thing and maybe more in tune with how a writer and reader views a story through their experiences. I'd argue that the 6 words are incredibly suggestive and the power is hidden because of the commas rather than the use of full stops. Ie. For sale. Baby shoes. Never worn. Commas extends the sentence, making a reader join up ... create images in their minds whereas what I wrote above are short statements. Powerful messages because each 2 worded sentence is ended and a new one beings. The difference (in my view) is that that is making a powerful statement, the original ... was a lot more haunting and sorrowful.
I'm with you. The writer's responsibility begins and ends with "write something that doesn't suck." Whatever readers do with it is on them. It's entertainment. Sure it can inspiring, enlightening, or (insert flowery adjective), but it's still entertainment. Forgetting that is a great way to write something that sucks.
Begins, maybe, but I’ve no doubt that there are, and have been, writers who do not agree that their responsibility ends there. The list of writers who have written fiction of substance is long. Actually, I’m not sure that “responsibility” is the best word for what motivates a writer – since it conjures up the idea of obligation – and the relationship between writer and reader is not one of “this is what I owe” but one of “this is what I freely offer.” If that makes sense. (Maybe I am agreeing with you?) Well, of course, no-one wants to read a theoretical treatise when they are looking for a good story. But a good story can still have something important to say.
If it didn't have substance, it would suck. If a story doesn't have something to say, it sucks. It doesn't have to be profound or anything, but it needs to say something.
Read Steinbeck!! I challenge anyone not to love Cannery Row and its follow-up Sweet Thursday. On the topic generally, language is the medium, whether aiming for high art or low thrills. It's what we've got to work with, word choice, word order, finding the unique voice for each story, putting words into sentences and sentences into paragraphs and paragraphs into order that seizes attention, makes it interesting above all and compelling for the reader. Different stories demand different approaches and different writers will employ the pieces of the medium differently. For which we should be thankful, else it would get very boring very quickly. The writer can't dictate reception once it's out there. If it carries an impact, that will be a function of the skill of the writer in putting their thoughts out in a manner that resonates with a reader and the individual experience and personality of the reader, neither one commands the other, but may exert more subtle influence. I don't care much for plot and I don't care if those astronauts manage to blast that asteroid or crash on take off, as long as it's given me something that makes me think or care about the characters and is written well, which means different things depending on the character of the story. Hemingway and Lovecraft are not in conflict and the same reader can enjoy both. A story that recounts a series of things that happened, however interesting, holds little interest for me if there's no flourish to how it's written, however much that might vary.
I have just downloaded it from Amazon. 99 cents on Kindle! Thanks for the recommendation. I can always rely on you for a broad-minded opinion, and once again you do not disappoint. I wonder .... are our readers like us? Those are the two necessities from my reading too - make me think, and make me care about the characters. have you read Fanny Hill?
