Literary styles and techniques we copy

[VallesMarineris]

I have a large vocabulary, and I've been reading literary works all my life. There was a time when I loved writing words for the sake of using them. I enjoyed showing off my mastery of the English language.

The older I get, though, the more I think language can get in the way of the story. Shorter, everyday words have a power that flowery words don't. I think simple language makes descriptions more vivid, emotions more immediate and dialogue more realistic. I think it draws the reader in more easily.

Hey @StillStunned, this really resonated with me.

I started off reading only what I thought of as the "ultimate" works. I read everything by Joyce (yes, even Finnegans Wake, which is hilarious, by the way) and parts of Ulysses multiple times. Then I discovered Pynchon, whose technical background and sensibility match mine (and he's also hilarious in places). But I hit a wall with David Foster Wallace. I've admired and read the first half of every story in Brief Interviews with Hideous Men, but couldn't finish any of them. It was like if you love chocolate fudge but someone gives you a 5 kilo block of it. Infinite Jest is incredible but defeated me also. I think I just don't love tennis enough. Or footnotes.

Now I agree with you, keep it simple. Just tell the fucking story. My hero now is William Gibson. I wish I could write his haiku-like chapters. And Homer. He did it first and there's still nothing better.

My own style seems to combine Pynchonesque stochastic scene-setting with Hemingway's "this happened and this happened and then this" sort of run on. Which is ironic, given that I've hardly read anything by him.

VM

 

[joy_of_cooking]

@StillStunned @Paul_Chance thanks for reminding me to check on kj Parker again. I hadn't heard of his scavenger series.

Did you know that he's the same person as Tom Holt? Blows my mind, that one person can write in two styles that differ so greatly from each other.

 

[Paul_Chance]

@StillStunned @Paul_Chance thanks for reminding me to check on kj Parker again. I hadn't heard of his scavenger series.

Did you know that he's the same person as Tom Holt? Blows my mind, that one person can write in two styles that differ so greatly from each other.

I did not know that. Now, I will be checking out Tom Holt. Thanks for the information.

 

[joy_of_cooking]

I did not know that. Now, I will be checking out Tom Holt. Thanks for the information.

Be warned: I love KJ Parker but I don't like his Tom Holt style at all. :-/

 

[StillStunned]

@StillStunned @Paul_Chance thanks for reminding me to check on kj Parker again. I hadn't heard of his scavenger series.

Did you know that he's the same person as Tom Holt? Blows my mind, that one person can write in two styles that differ so greatly from each other.

I did know - at least the knowledge was there, somewhere, that KJ Parker was an established non-genre author, although I couldn't remember precisely who.

I hope later editions of Scavenger cleared up the mistakes, because they were quite confusing.

 

[AG31]

An often Poe-like approach to vocabulary (not that my writing echoes any other elements of his style), which is the the antithesis of yours. I’m still in my love affair with words, not settling for a more middle-aged focus on clarity.

I often use parataxis to convey arousal. And it often becomes more prominent as orgasms approach.

I mostly write in first person past (less frequently first person present and third person past). This is both the go to style of the novice (which I view myself as) and the easiest way to emphasize the emotions and thoughts of the narrator, while masking those of other characters, leading to misunderstandings and / or twists. I know you can achieve that in other ways, but first person past is simplest.

Talking of twists, or the revealing of hidden plans, I’m probably too partial to these.

It’s not a literary technique, but many of my works contain pop culture references and fourth wall breaking. I think my general approach to humor is a shadowy reflection of Douglas Adams, with a little absurdist Lewis Carrol thrown in. I think there are also notes from Whedon’s writing / direction in Buffy and Firefly (insert mandatory disavowal of his behavior towards writers and actors).

I don’t see much of my very favorite authors in my writing. Probably because I’m too embarrassed to try to emulate them. I couldn’t write like Steinbeck, even if you paid me.

Emily

Thanks for the new word!

 

[AG31]

I'm glad this thread woke up because I've learned something about my style since December. I've always known that my content was closely related to Pauline Reage's The Story of O, but now I realize that my style is also. In the last few months my have been told that my writing is "You like a tableau, a freeze frame, it's quite static." (Thanks to @ElectricBlue again.) The opening of The Story is, for many, memorable. And I think it is a tableaux. This is a bit metaphorical, of course, since things do happen in my stories. Anyway, it took me quite a while to realize that people mostly don't write erotica that way any more. But I like it. Thanks to Pauline Reage.

************
On the subject of style, this doesn't really warrant a new thread, but I was interested to figure out for myself that Richard North Patterson, at least in "Fall from Grace," was a pleasure for me to read not because his characters were richly portrayed, but because all of his characters were super articulate. They all sounded like the narrator, who sounded really good!

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

Thanks for the new word!

Yeah, I've learned participating in conversations with @EmilyMiller pretty much requires a dictionary and a thesaurus...

 

[EmilyMiller]

Yeah, I've learned participating in conversations with @EmilyMiller pretty much requires a dictionary and a thesaurus...

I remember when it was more a box of Kleenex…

Emily

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

I remember when it was more a box of Kleenex…

Emily