Search
  • Blog
  • Books
  • Publications
  • Bio
  • Contact
  • Sign in
Close
Menu
Search
Close
  • Blog
  • Books
  • Publications
  • Bio
  • Contact
  • Sign in
Menu

Ksenia Anske

September 21, 2013

Descriptions vs commentary, or what to edit and what to leave

by Ksenia Anske


Photo by Joel Robison

Photo by Joel Robison

Photo by Joel Robison

Photo by Joel Robison

I have recently come across this very curious realization, while editing 2nd draft of Rosehead and reading every day, such books as Discworld series and The Cuckoo's Calling and The Ocean at the End of the Lane, as well as honestly trying to read a few indie books (just poked around on Amazon, reading first pages to see if the stories would grab me). One of my pet peeves is excessive descriptions, and most of my editing consists of cutting these, but what I discovered, with glee and glum, is that those indie writers whose books I tried reading suffer from the same! There is this incessant need to describe everything that happens, and, on top of it, this tendency to use same words within a paragraph, instead of varying the vocabulary. But when I read the above mentioned books, even The Cuckoo's Calling's descriptions (and there were many of them) didn't feel excessive. So I was like, WTF? What's the deal here? I think I got what the deal is, this week. I say, I think I got it, because I hope I did, maybe I'm totally wrong, but I have applied it to my editing and it seems to be working, so I will share here with you.

Cut descriptions, replace with commentary. So I'm probably not being very clear by what I mean with this word, commentary, but I will try my best to explain. What I mean is, it's one thing describing the facts about what is happening, how did the scene look, smelled, sounded, etc, and it's a completely another thing commenting on it, as in, injecting into it your own opinion, so suddenly the sky doesn't just look blue, it looks blue like the sea, or a forgotten memory blue, or blue that's the color of your neighbor's undies. You see where I'm going with this, right? When you just say blue, and you can also say cobalt and whatever other word you find in a thesaurus, it's just a fact, it's boring, and when there is a lot of it, OMG, it's double-boring (yeah, I know, I needed to cut out more of water descriptions from Siren Suicides, oh well, I learned my lesson). Anyway, this is part of this meat that people love about writers, it's that style, or that tempo, or that characteristic way of writing that we fall in love with and come back to, to read more and more. When you read your own draft and go through descriptions, ask yourself a question, do I really need it here? If you doubt it even for a fraction of a second, cut it. I'm serious, cut it. Make it gone. But if you want to keep it, consider switching to commentary and injecting your own opinion, within the tone of your book (like, you wouldn't call a car blue like your neighbor's panties if it's a YA book, right?).

Whenever you can, comment, comment, comment. I guess this is what makes writers writers. We have this ability to take stuff in, process it, and then spit it out in the form of the stories. Those stories become ours, and because we have to visualize the stories, along with action and dialogue, we have description, to show the reader how everything looks and feels. We can be very literal about it, but nobody wants to read literal stuff, that's what dictionaries are for, or boring text books. Stories, short stories, or long stories like novels, are meant to be interesting, enthralling, enlightening. And how to do that? Well, by creating this alternate world, of course. And how to do that? Oh, simple, make it yours, inject yourself into it, and that means, show the reader how you see that world. This is separate from plots and character development and all that other smart literary stuff, by the way. This is purely about painting the world, about descriptions. For example, I just got done reading The Ocean at the End of the Lane by Neil Gaiman, and I'm in love with his descriptions. Why? They have his flavor. He describes sudden sinking into water as if one stumbled into the pool backwards, experiencing that feeling of surprise. What exactly is this? Commentary. You could describe the facts, as in, his clothes got wet, his skin felt cold, water gurgled in his ears. That's boring and long (another problem with descriptions, namely, their overwhelming length, stems from this). But with one commentary you can make us feel how it feels, and it's not boring and not long and awesome.

Cut out repetitive words from descriptions. I don't know if this is just me, but I noticed it in other indie books too. For whatever reason we tend to use same words in one paragraph, as in, "The trees swayed in the wind." Imagine you have a character waiting under those trees, you might say, "She swayed in the wind, waiting." I'm not kidding, I've seen it over and over and over again. Why do we do this? No idea. But when editing, I am now watching closely for these guys and make sure to replace them with similar words in meaning, or even restructure sentences altogether to avoid repetitions. For example, this is my favorite, "She stood up." You can only say "stood up" so many times, so you can say "she straightened" or "she got to her feet" or other variations. I'm curious, do you have the same problem? I find that I mostly do this in my descriptions, struggling with common verbs that are used a lot, just picking one word and milking it until it becomes annoying because I have used it so much. 

Keep them short, stupid. Okay, this is more of a reminder for myself. I have stolen this from "keep it simple, stupid" phrase, but it's true. You don't need long descriptions, unless they are paramount to the story. Short and simple beats long and complicated. You don't even need some amazing vocabulary. All you need is, your own commentary in it, something that rings true for you. Because if it rings true for you, it will ring true for your reader. Think of it this way, instead of showing the reader the scene, make the reader feel the scene. It's kind of like going a layer deeper underneath the famous rule of "show don't tell", it's like "make them feel, don't just show". You of course need to apply the usual 5 senses in all descriptions, like seeing and hearing and smelling and tasting and touching, but now you know how to pick between them (I mean, you can't keep describing everything with all 5 senses, otherwise your book will be one endless description). Make a strong commentary in the description, make it connect in the reader's mind with a strong emotion. Maybe it's the way the sound sounds? Or the way taste tastes? Or the way smell smells? For example, you can say, "his room smelled like cigarettes and stale beer and unwashed laundry" (see how long this is?), or you can say, "his room smelled like a cheap motel". Boom. It makes you feel it, doesn't it? It makes me feel it too, ewww, I think I even smell it now.   

Well, this is the highlight of my epiphany. Whaddya think? Have similar experiences? 

TAGS: description, commentary, editing, editing process, repetition


January 25, 2013

Get better at WRITING by picking up patterns while READING

by Ksenia Anske


So many books.jpg
So many books.jpg

Photo by Minnea

I write every day and I read every day, because Stephen King said to do so in his book On Writing. I used to not allow myself read fiction, I used to read books about writing. I thought reading a lot of fiction was a waste of time. I was wrong, very very wrong. So I've abandoned reading books about writing (King's On Writing being the exception), and started reading novels exclusively. And, you know what? I'm learning more about writing by reading actual fiction! The more different books by different authors I read, the more I start seeing patterns everywhere - in story, dialogue, beginnings, endings, character development, descriptions, plot, you name it. Here are a few:

Dialogue is all about repetition. My biggest fear is writing dialogue. English is not my first language, and I'm terrified that I won't be able to capture English talk with the ease of someone who was born and grew up in an English speaking country. So I'm trying to pay extra special attention to dialogue in the novels. And I noticed a pattern. At first I thought it was a one time occurrence, but when J.K. Rowling, Haruki Murakami and Chuck Palahniuk all did the same thing, I thought, wait a minute. These authors are so different, how come they do the same thing? You know what it was? Repetition. Roughly the formula goes like this: Take 1 idea that the character is trying to communicate and break it into 3 sentences. 1st one starts the idea, 2nd one picks up where the 1st one broke off, repeating its end, and then the 3rd one picks up where the 2nd one broke off and concludes it. Seriously. Do we really talk like that?!? I've been scratching my head ever since, but I tried it, and it works.

Here is an example from Wolves of the Calla by Stephen King, when Jake asks Roland for a Ruger, explaining why he needs it: "I'll put it at the bottom of my bedroll and wrap it in my extra shirt. No one needs to know it's there." He paused. "I don't want to show it off to Benny, if that's what you're thinking." See how one idea has been spliced into three statements, one picking up from the end of another? And how each next one let Jake assert what he meant? I get goosebumps when I see stuff like this. And I see it all the time. 

Instances of plot summary throughout the story. Ok, this is a weird one, because I didn't see it at first, but then started noticing it more and more. Here is what it is. About several chapters into a book, the author will find a way to inject a quick summary of the plot, as in, so and so did this, and then so and so did that, and then they bla-bla-bla. It is usually in the dialogue or in the main characters thoughts, when the character finds herself or himself in the throes of indecision. Sometimes it's in a general description. This is clever, because often readers forget what they've read before and this little snippet roots them back into story, but also shows the humanity of the character, because in real life we tend to forget stuff and repeat to remember. Fascinating.

Here is an example from The Casual Vacancy by J.K. Rowling, from page 46, nicely summarizing what happened before and at the same time advancing the story: "The announcement of Barry's death on the Parish Council website sank with barely a ripple, a tiny pebble into the teeming ocean. All the same, the telephone lines in Pagford were busier than usual this Monday, and little knots of pedestrians kept congregating on the narrow pavements to check, in shocked tones, the exactness of their information." 

Everything is explained. Actually, everything is explained to the point of you knowing what will happen but not knowing how it will happen. This boggled my mind for the longest time. I was wondering, wait, what about suspension? And then I understood that suspension is not about withholding facts, it's about the reader not really knowing what the character will do in this or that particular situation, and it's what stories are about, in the end. About people, fictional people, that deal with various shit, as simple as that. Seeing this allowed me to stop being afraid and take my time to slow down and thoroughly explain to my readers what the hell is happening in my story (well, it's causing my current Draft to double, so I'm not sure yet where this is going, but so far 3 beta readers tell me it's MUCH better than previous draft). Every good book has a way of rooting you as a reader from the beginning, and it doesn't have to be long, a few sentences is enough, but it continues throughout the story.

Here is my favorite example from The Lovely Bones by Alice Sebold. It's actually the very opening of the book: "My name was Salmon, like the fish; first name, Susie. I was fourteen when I was murdered on December 6, 1973." BAM! This is the whole book for you, right there. Yet we keep reading, because we want to know HOW this happens.

It's all about the characters. This is the most valuable lesson I've learned from reading. It's all about the main characters, the folks your story is about, usually two, because usually all stories are about love, and the rest doesn't matter and serves only as layers. (Yes, even Sherlock Holmes is about love, or, more specifically, about male friendship.). The rest provides a canvas, a type of background that doesn't need to be explained or closed or developed. It needs to make the reader FEEL. I've read many great books with sub-plots that wouldn't be closed, minor characters who would appear and vanish, a ton of "unfinished" elements, yet I read them till the end, loving the story. It puzzled me at first, but it doesn't puzzle me anymore. I know that many of you will shake your heads here, but hear me. I used to shake my head at this too, yet this is something that explains the success of The Twilight Saga or 50 Shades Trilogy. Readers FELT these books, so they didn't care about sentence structure or closed plots or anything like that. And, this is what happens in life. Unclosed loops.

It's hard to give a specific example on this one, but the perfect and most bizarre would be, probably, from 1Q84 by Haruki Murakami, where at the end a new way of weaving an air chrysalis is introduced, never to be explained or closed. Here is a short excerpt following first 3 little people starting the job: "The next three followed suit. Only the last one did something different. He stood up, left the circle, clambered back up on the conference table, reached out, and plucked one frizzy hair from Ushikawa's misshapen head." What?!? Why? If you read the book, you'll get my agony. But I lovd the story and it didn't matter.

Of course all of these observations are only my hypothesis, so please feel free to dish in the comments what you think, what you saw, what you discovered, and I'll go read me more books in the meantime.

TAGS: dialogue, patterns, plot, repetition, summary, undefined