Comicality Posted August 23, 2010 Posted August 23, 2010 (Subject) Message Board Topic 8/23 (Description) Writer/Reader Patience? (Post) When a story is created, along with characters and plot, it's almost like the creation of a 'life' in a way. A life that is born in the minds of both the reader and the writer alike. And..as things get more and more intense...hehehe, one side or the other seems to be in a big rush for them to 'HURRY UP AND DIE ALREADY!!!' There's a huge race to get to the end. Hurry!HURRY! Either the author is rushing to reach a certain major point in the story by skipping a lot of details, or the reader gets to a cliffhanger and goes crazy trying to figure out when it'll be over and done with. This week's question is about story pacing. Is a shorter, less detailed story, better for reading as long as all of the major points have been touched upon and the story is finally finished? Or do stories that take too long, and add too much detail, slow down the process to the point where it's no longer enjoyable. As a writer...do you tend to try to 'skip' to the good parts as you're writing? As a READER...do you 'skim' through the stories in order to reach a point of greater interest to you? Let us know what you think!
phana14 Posted August 23, 2010 Posted August 23, 2010 No skimming here! No sir! I read every word. Sometimes more than once. Although I may add things to a scene where the author has left voids, it's your story to detail. As a reader, I will take over when you leave off, If I deem it necessary.
Site Administrator Graeme Posted August 23, 2010 Site Administrator Posted August 23, 2010 The mere fact that there is a category of writing known as 'short stories' I think answers the questions. Stories can be long or short, and in both cases, they can be good. Short stories and novels, while nominally just different lengths, are actually very distinct. A short story tends to be a lot more focused than a novel, and trying to compare the two types would be wrong. I saw a description once along the lines of: Imagine a room. There are many things in that room. A short story illuminates one thing. A novel illuminates the whole room. A great novel illuminates the whole room and the world outside. Comicality's questions can then be paraphrased as, if you're going to illuminate the whole room, how long should it take, and how much light do you shine on the different things in the room? Some people like to see just the big picture items. Sort of like a friend of mine who was a tourist in London. He drove past Westminster Abbey and crossed it off his list because he'd thus seen it. That's a contrast to another friend who spent two hours in Westminster Abbey examining everything. They both had different views on how much time they wanted to spend on the different items. You can't please everyone, because everyone is different. Some like detail. Some like brevity. Some like a slow buildup. Some like explosive action from page one. The ultimate answer to the questions is the same as the answer to the following question: How long is a piece of string? 1
Agincourt Posted August 23, 2010 Posted August 23, 2010 I never realized how much I missed when reading a printed text until I started listening to audiobook versions (unabridged) of the same books. All that careful description of scenery, all the stuff between blocks of dialogue, I tended to skim over without even realizing it. In the audiobook, of course, every word came out. It almost made it seem like a different book. It's all a matter of taste, and some authors simply will never be right for some readers because their tastes in pacing don't correspond closely enough. It also depends somewhat on the genre -- some genres seem inherently to call for more or less "stuff" per unit of story advancement. A
Recommended Posts