Zestful Blog Post #219
A comment on my post ‘Extrapolation for Writers’ asked about
sharing enough versus oversharing—a question of detail. What’s the perfect
amount of detail to give your reader? You want enough so that he feels fully
anchored in the scene, yet not too much that he gets bored or restless. (Thanks
for prompting this post, Liz B.)
Of course, readers’ tastes and preferences vary, so Leo
Tolstoy’s War and Peace, with its
surpassing level of detail, is one reader’s heaven, another’s hell. Gregory
McDonald’s Fletch books, with their
paucity of description (yet fast action and plentiful dialogue), might
represent the reverse. So, we are left with subjectivity.
I’ve thought and thought about this issue, and have come to
realize that to get it right, an author needs experience writing and reading,
especially close reading. And while there’s no master formula, I’ve come up
with a couple of guidelines. Stick with me.
First, experience. A professional author must read not only
for pleasure, but for self-education. That might seem obvious, but I’m always a
little surprised when I’m discussing books with an aspiring author who says, “Oh,
I didn’t like that book. Couldn’t get into it. Why? I don’t know why.” Or, “I
just love all her novels!! Always have. Why? I guess—well, I can’t really say.”
Bear down when you read. Intuition is good, but don’t stop
there. Drill into what makes a passage work or not work. Very often, you
respond to the details of a scene, whether in description or dialogue.
(Examples to follow.) There’s no right or wrong here—just what seems right or
wrong to you. In this way, close reading helps you get to know your own style.
I keep recommending the practice of copying passages of good books, longhand or
on the keyboard. I call it ‘Writing with the Masters,’ though I’m not the first
to ever think of it. And keep writing, and keep showing your work to readers
you respect. Listen to what they say.
Going, now, beyond those general admonitions, which really
apply to any aspect of writing, and into the showing of details. I’m a believer
in learning from examples, so here are some:
Which of the following three do you prefer?:
“Consider it a loan, then,” I said. “Let’s be real.”
She said OK.
“Consider it a loan, then,” I said. “Let’s be real.”
She blew a strand of her dyed-red hair out of her eyes and poured
some brandy into my coffee cup. “All right, then.”
“Consider it a loan, then,” I said. “Let’s be real.”
She got up and went to the cabinet above the sink on the
left-hand side. She opened the cupboard door with her right hand, took out a
bottle of brandy with her left, and returned to the table. She took the cap off
the bottle and tipped it so that some brandy ran into my coffee cup. After that,
she set the bottle down on the table and sat down. The chairs had blue vinyl
coverings. Blowing a strand of her dyed-red hair out of her eyes, she said, “All
right, then.”
We agree. Number two, right?
The key I’ve used for so long that it’s become almost
unconscious, is to give at least one, and rarely more than two details, per
chunk of story. The first example above gives zero details. The second gives
two: the dyed-red hair and the pouring of the brandy, which bring that portion
of the scene to life. The third gives like a thousand, and the preponderance
makes the passage heavy and boring. (The second passage is from a long short story I’m finishing
up, involving Lillian Byrd and some deep trouble…)
Furthermore, I’ve found that pace is an important regulator
for making decisions about detail. If you need to pick up the pace, just show
us the punch to the jaw and get on with it. But if things are moving along
nicely, you might have the punchee see the fist coming as if in slow motion,
before knuckles contact lower mandible. If the punch is going to be an
important one, and the action has already
been fast, you might wish to decelerate further by having the punchee also
realize his back is already against the wall, and it’s going to be impossible
to roll with this one—just gonna have to brace for it and keep looking for a
way out. And then the impact, and you might want to describe the feeling of
that.
So, in sum:
Give at least one or two details per chunk of story (and of
course you are the one to decide what makes a chunk);
When in doubt, limit
yourself to one or two details per chunk; and
Permit pace to help with decisions of detail.
And that’s enough for today. Is there anything you’d like to
share about this topic? We’re all keen to learn!
Lastly, a note from one of us. Faithful reader and commenter
BJ Phillips has a new novel out called
If you’d like me to mention your new book, just shoot me an
email with a link. And if I’ve overlooked posting your link, please nudge me
again. It was inadvertent.
To post a comment or question, click below where it says,
'No Comments,' or '2 Comments,' or whatever. [photo by ES]
If you'd like to receive this blog automatically as an
email, look to the right, above my bio, and subscribe there. Thanks for looking
in.
Great advice! I often feel like I'm including too many or two few details. One or two per chunk...perfect!
ReplyDeleteGlad this resonated with you, Naomi! Thanks for stopping in.
DeleteThanks for the link to Snowbird Season, I enjoyed reading it and I also read Book 1 Hurricane Season. B J Phillips is now on my list of “to read” authors. Authors need all the exposure they can get to new readers, but as a reader its great to be introduced to new authors.
ReplyDeleteElaine, that's wonderful!! BJ, you've got a fan here.
DeleteElaine, I'm so glad you enjoyed my books. And Elizabeth, thank you for the shout-outs on both of them.
DeleteTotally welcome.
DeleteThis post is especially helpful during my revision rounds. Thank you, Elizabeth.
ReplyDeleteGreat, Liz! You're welcome as always...
Delete