I didn't like The Wheel of Time series, or most other cash-cow drawn-out, cardboard-characterization series, so this is probably what makes me agree with some of these points where you didn't.
Prologues are almost always useless. There are some that are used to good effect, but most of the prologues I've ever read could have been left out and the story would have been much stronger for it. They're usually along the lines of:
Ancient Babylonia, 120394 BC:
Marcos cries, "NOOOOO". Love of his life dies. Thunder strikes. Readers yawn, because we don't know or care who any of these people are and can we please get to the story and start building hero love before we are asked to feel anything for him?
Terry Pratchett does good prologues because his are funny and introduce the world, not some extraneous character angst when we don't know the character well enough to angst with him or her yet. But still, generally speaking, prologues are sloppy and they are infodump. All that information can usually be worked into the main action of the book and with greater finesse, too, instead of just clobbering people on the head with it first thing.
Description is okay, but too much of it gets in the way of the story. There are quite a few books where the description actually trips up the action because the author has actually taken time to describe someone's clothes and Idon'tcarepleasetellmeaboutthepersonthey'rerunningawayfrom. I skim description and if there's too much, I lose interest. Description should be seen, not read. If it is in huge glaring lumpy paragraphs, the author is not talented enough to use it wisely. The best books I've read are where the author chooses the descriptive words with such care that you can infer WORLDS from just one well-placed adjective.
Copious amounts of description speak of lack of finesse and a use of too many words to compensate for that. The prose of details used sparingly is not dull, and it's not obnoxiously flowery either. The prose should not get in the way of the flow. The author should not like the sound of their own voice more than they like making the reader feel like they are in the world. If the author is trying to show me how many clever words s/he knows, this knocks me out of seeing the story.
Descriptions of people should be subtle. I HATE when there is a Description Paragraph for each character. It's better when the author works it into the interaction--it's harder, too, of course, but then that's why those subtle people are better authors. The author should not have to stop the story to say, "She had a brown pony tail and blue eyes and long legs and was a little bit plump." That's showing, that's lazy use of description. The author should say, "There was brown hair all over her coat, so she picked it off, and she thought about cutting it because it was obnoxious having hair that long." and then a little later on someone can say to her, "My niece has blue eyes, too." and then a little later on she can think, "Damn, I shouldn't have eaten that extra donut, maybe I could have fit into these jeans again." Description dump is just as big an annoyance as info dump. It ruins the flow of the story, the "movie in your head" quality. All personal details can be worked in without telling it all at once just for the hell of it. And any details that aren't relevant to the story or the immediate picture of the hero/ine can and should be left out.
Prologues are almost always useless. There are some that are used to good effect, but most of the prologues I've ever read could have been left out and the story would have been much stronger for it. They're usually along the lines of:
Ancient Babylonia, 120394 BC:
Marcos cries, "NOOOOO". Love of his life dies. Thunder strikes. Readers yawn, because we don't know or care who any of these people are and can we please get to the story and start building hero love before we are asked to feel anything for him?
Terry Pratchett does good prologues because his are funny and introduce the world, not some extraneous character angst when we don't know the character well enough to angst with him or her yet. But still, generally speaking, prologues are sloppy and they are infodump. All that information can usually be worked into the main action of the book and with greater finesse, too, instead of just clobbering people on the head with it first thing.
Description is okay, but too much of it gets in the way of the story. There are quite a few books where the description actually trips up the action because the author has actually taken time to describe someone's clothes and Idon'tcarepleasetellmeaboutthepersonthey'rerunningawayfrom. I skim description and if there's too much, I lose interest. Description should be seen, not read. If it is in huge glaring lumpy paragraphs, the author is not talented enough to use it wisely. The best books I've read are where the author chooses the descriptive words with such care that you can infer WORLDS from just one well-placed adjective.
Copious amounts of description speak of lack of finesse and a use of too many words to compensate for that. The prose of details used sparingly is not dull, and it's not obnoxiously flowery either. The prose should not get in the way of the flow. The author should not like the sound of their own voice more than they like making the reader feel like they are in the world. If the author is trying to show me how many clever words s/he knows, this knocks me out of seeing the story.
Descriptions of people should be subtle. I HATE when there is a Description Paragraph for each character. It's better when the author works it into the interaction--it's harder, too, of course, but then that's why those subtle people are better authors. The author should not have to stop the story to say, "She had a brown pony tail and blue eyes and long legs and was a little bit plump." That's showing, that's lazy use of description. The author should say, "There was brown hair all over her coat, so she picked it off, and she thought about cutting it because it was obnoxious having hair that long." and then a little later on someone can say to her, "My niece has blue eyes, too." and then a little later on she can think, "Damn, I shouldn't have eaten that extra donut, maybe I could have fit into these jeans again." Description dump is just as big an annoyance as info dump. It ruins the flow of the story, the "movie in your head" quality. All personal details can be worked in without telling it all at once just for the hell of it. And any details that aren't relevant to the story or the immediate picture of the hero/ine can and should be left out.
Diane Duane seems pretty spot-on to me.
Reply
Leave a comment