?

[maychorian]

I tried that writing analysis thing that's going around and keep getting different results for different stories. But the three that pop up most often are Margaret Atwood, Chuck Palahniuk, and Vladimir Nabokov. I feel like an utter plebe, because I haven't read anything by ANY of those three. (And I read a lot, or at least I used to.) Can my

Comments

[jones6]

I haven't read Nabokov or Atwood (although I have The Handmaid's Tale ready and waiting once I finish everything else I am trying to read), but I can tell you about Palahniuk. He uses a lot of short sentences and repetition of phrases and sentences throughout his works, and more verbs than adjectives. He writes a lot about people on the outside of society, and also does some horror writing. He loves plot twists. If you want to read something by him, Fight Club* is the one people always talk about, and gives really good examples of the things I mentioned above. Rant is a good example of his more weird and absurd writing.

*If you haven't seen the movie of Fight Club yet, read the book first. It's much better.

[maychorian]

Ah, thanks for the info! I've seen Fight Club but haven't read the book, but I've heard it's good. I guess I could see how some of my style might be similar to his, but definitely not all of it.

[jones6]

No problem :) You should totally read the book, it's awesome. I didn't really think your style was all that similar, but that's could be more a case of differing subject matter. I got him as well, and while I can see some of the same characteristics - a proliferation of verbs, for one - I don't think my writing's much like his either, so the analysis probably isn't all that in depth =/

[lexhibition]

I have no idea how that writing analysis thing works, because I got James Joyce on quite a few things I've written and, um, no. XD

I wouldn't say any of their writing styles are very similar to yours - especially not Chuck Palahniuk! lol (if you want a quick and simple way to check his style, lassiterfics apes it pretty brilliantly in this.) BUT you should totally read some Margaret Atwood! Oryx and Crake, The Edible Woman and The Handmaiden's Tale are all especially amazing, but everything she writes is good.

[maychorian]

Ooh, thanks for the recs! :D I really do love books. And I'm somewhat relieved that you think my style isn't very much like Palahniuk, thanks. ;)

[sinnerforhire]

I got Chuck Palahniuk for two fics that were written in a childish style and one comment fic, so I'm guessing simple language and sentence construction are characteristics of his writing, because it certainly has nothing to do with subject matter.

[maychorian]

Yeah, I looked him up on Wikipedia and that definitely seems to be the case. Our styles might be slightly similar, but I have a feeling that it's a very shallow similarity.

[unstoppablei]

Hi there! New friend speaking :-)

First of all, I don't think any of these are really close to your writing style, but I will throw in some thoughts on the authors themselves/book recs (because we all love book recs)...

Margaret Atwood is amazing. Sometimes a bit long winded, but amazing. I agree with the above poster that Oryx and Crake is beautiful (it's one of my favorite books), and The Handmaid's Tale is good too, if you're okay with crushing depression. I also really enjoyed The Robber Bride.

Palahniuk has a very specific type of writing, (simple, short sentences, repetition of phrases, irony) and he LOVES twists, to the point that if you are reading a book of his you know it will have a twist. I'm not a huge fan of his -- I feel like his work tries a little hard to be edgy, you know? But I enjoyed Survivor.

Annddd...hello! *waves* Nice to meet'cha.

[maychorian]

Ah, thank you! :D ::waves:: I'm glad to hear from you here. (Sorry I didn't respond to your PM--been a little busy lately.)

Thanks for the info! I should definitely check them both out.

[amberdulen]

I haven't read any of them either. But I'm pretty sure the meme only looks for sentence length, paragraph length, and the occasional keyword, so there you go.

[maychorian]

Yeah, I think it's a pretty shallow analysis. Kind of fun, but definitely not trustworthy.