A teeny tiny writing exercise

[AG31]

I was reading a book recently that just didn't engage me. On a little analysis, I decided it just spent too much time on non-essential things. That doesn't really nail it, because I do like some authors who indulge in lots of words. I'm sure it's a matter of taste, and some folks might like this style just fine, but I'd be interested to see how some of you might re-do it more concisely, with more punch, and more movement in the sentences. I hope I get some takers. This is from The Briars, by Sarah Crouch.

P.S. What's the opposite of "engaging?"
'************************************
Annie Heston mashed the toe of her boot against the gas pedal, pressing it harder than was strictly necessary to slingshot the Wagoneer around a green Jetta and whip it back into the fast lane. A moment later, the angry dual flash of high beams flickered in the rearview mirror, but Annie ignored them as she pressed the pedal harder, giving the V-8 more gas.

It was reckless, driving like this. Reckless and stupid and rash, and she knew better, but still, the speedometer stayed well north of eighty as she flew past dark fir groves and rolling acres of velveteen farmland. It felt good, speeding like a lunatic, fleeing north as though putting as many miles between her and Bend as possible would somehow lessen her heartache, even though the rational part of her brain knew it wasn't so.

Ahead on the horizon, a low, gray city ringed with emerald hills was rising up to meet her, and Annie glanced at the half-folded map on the passenger seat. Portland. Good. She was almost to the border. Once she was through the city, she would cross the Columbia River and enter Washington State, and from there, it was just ninety minutes farther on a remote highway that led northeast to the blink-and-you-miss-it mountain town that no one, including her, had ever heard of.

Annie flicked the lever that spritzed the windshield with fluid and cleared the constellation of bugs from the glass with a sigh. She had to quit doing that, mentally tearing apart her new hometown before she'd even set foot there. No more framing it negatively. There was no going back now, so she might as well make the most of it. After all, she'd asked for this, outright, marching into her supervisor's office and slamming her hands down on his desk.

"I'm putting in for a transfer," she'd said without preamble or hesitation.

 

[AlexBailey]

Wow. That level of detail is exhausting.

Knowing the area, it also seems odd that she would drive from Bend to Portland, before going 90 miles NE once she crosses the Columbia.

 

[Dodola]

What's the opposite of "engaging?"

Unengaging, disengaging

 

[Dodola]

from Bend to Portland, before going 90 miles NE once she crosses the Columbia

It was 90 minutes on a remote highway to a mountain town, not 90 miles. It seems plausible that it could have been a shorter distance, depending on how fast she could drive on that highway.
I didn't find this except to be too wordy.

 

[SyleusSnow]

I just finished a Dean Koontz novel and to me he packs in exhausting detail, often way too purply for my taste. I try aiming for just enough detail to put the reader in the scene, with a dash of "crunchy specificity" as Tim Clare calls it.

Annie gunned though the countryside as though her reckless speed would outpace her heartache. On the horizon: the low grey and emerald of Portland. On the other side lay the tiny mountain town that no one, including her, had heard of. Her new home. Whether it would be prison or paradise, she accepted, was entirely up to her.

 

[anthrodisiac]

My main issue is that the recklessness isn't really conveyed in the writing style. I'd probably rewrite parts of it more raw, jerkier, to match the emotional tone. Take out some of the extraneous details, they wouldn't be something someone in her state would really focus on. Doesn't matter if it's 3rd omnipotent, I'd want to convey some of the emotion in the structure. Then as she starts to relax a little upon reaching Portland, get back into smoother flow to show her calming down a bit.

Annie Heston mashed the gas pedal. She slingshotted the Wagoneer around a sedan, whipped back into the fast lane. The angry flash of high beams glared in the review. Fuck 'em, she thought, gunning the V-8.

It was reckless. Rash. Stupid, she knew. Yet she kept it cranked above eighty, fir groves and acres of farmland blurring on the periphery. Lunacy felt good — fleeing north, away from Bend, hoping to lessen her heartache. Too bad it wouldn't.

On the horizon, Portland rose up to meet her. Thank God — almost at the border. Through there, across the Columbia, and she'd be in Washington. From there, ninety minutes of remote highway to the remote mountain town no one, not even her, had heard of.

No, that wasn't fair, shredding her new hometown before she even set foot in it. Positive thinking, not negative, that's what she needed. There was no going back, so she might as well make the most of it. After all, she'd asked for this when she marched into her supervisor's office and growled, "I'm putting in for a transfer."

 

[shelleycat1]

I would not read. The character is unsympathetic and reckless, uncaring about anyone else. The detail is tiring in just the first couple of paragraphs. I do not know enough about this idiot on the road to care, just enough to be annoyed as I imagine other idiots on the road who endanger me. Then the detail. She drives recklessly yet cares sbout engine size? Cares about other car brands? That’s just inconsistent. Why does she care about cars and not about the fragile humans in the car?

 

[ElectricBlue]

I would not read. The character is unsympathetic and reckless, uncaring about anyone else. The detail is tiring in just the first couple of paragraphs. I do not know enough about this idiot on the road to care, just enough to be annoyed as I imagine other idiots on the road who endanger me. Then the detail. She drives recklessly yet cares sbout engine size? Cares about other car brands? That’s just inconsistent. Why does she care about cars and not about the fragile humans in the car?

Smacks of AI assistance to me. If it's her natural style, she might need a more aggressive editor because you're right, there's too much disjointed information and irrelevance.

 

[Statius]

The first sentence threw me. Who says

The TOE of her boot on the gas pedal? Especially when speeding. I'm not a good writer but that just feels like trying too hard.

 

[StillStunned]

My main issue is that the recklessness isn't really conveyed in the writing style. I'd probably rewrite parts of it more raw, jerkier, to match the emotional tone. Take out some of the extraneous details, they wouldn't be something someone in her state would really focus on. Doesn't matter if it's 3rd omnipotent, I'd want to convey some of the emotion in the structure. Then as she starts to relax a little upon reaching Portland, get back into smoother flow to show her calming down a bit.

I agree. This section in particular:

Ahead on the horizon, a low, gray city ringed with emerald hills was rising up to meet her, and Annie glanced at the half-folded map on the passenger seat. Portland. Good. She was almost to the border. Once she was through the city, she would cross the Columbia River and enter Washington State, and from there, it was just ninety minutes farther on a remote highway that led northeast to the blink-and-you-miss-it mountain town that no one, including her, had ever heard of.

There's no sense of danger in taking her eyes off the road to look at the map, or planning ahead. She's not in the moment, like you'd expect from someone driving through traffic at that speed. There's no mention either of having to slow down to get through Portland, or whether she'd be racing again on the other side to complete the drive in those 90 minutes, or whether that was at a leisurely pace. That sentence is about 50 words long: completely out of sync with the action.

 

[Bazzle]

I agree. This section in particular:

There's no sense of danger in taking her eyes off the road to look at the map, or planning ahead. She's not in the moment, like you'd expect from someone driving through traffic at that speed. There's no mention either of having to slow down to get through Portland, or whether she'd be racing again on the other side to complete the drive in those 90 minutes, or whether that was at a leisurely pace. That sentence is about 50 words long: completely out of sync with the action.

Almost AI?

 

[StillStunned]

Almost AI?

Hard to say. I just read an interview with the author about writing the book, and it gives of some definite Meep Morp vibes. It feels very flat, either AI-assisted or else overedited.

She says that by the time her first book was accepted by a publisher she already had a million words written, and it took her that long to find her voice. Maybe this is her voice. Maybe she's writing for readers who skim sections like these and only pay attention to the gritty or romantic parts.

 

[Actingup]

I think it's got a few too many, unneeded and superflous words, but I was too distracted wondering why her awful boyfriend was called 'Bend' - such an unusual name! Then I read your comments and it clicked.

 

[AG31]

they wouldn't be something someone in her state would really focus on.

Excellent insight. Yes, I expect even 3rd person omniscient narration to reflect the mind of the character being described. (I wonder if that's always true... I'll have to pay attention.)

Doesn't matter if it's 3rd omnipotent, I'd want to convey some of the emotion in the structure.

Yes.

 

[AG31]

Smacks of AI assistance to me. If it's her natural style, she might need a more aggressive editor because you're right, there's too much disjointed information and irrelevance.

Almost AI?

It feels very flat, either AI-assisted or else overedited.

Interesting thought! This never crossed my mind. But now it's taken up residency.

 

[StillStunned]

Interesting thought! This never crossed my mind. But now it's taken up residency.

In case it wasn't clear from my earlier post: when I said "it" felt flat I was referring to the interview, not the snippet from the book. But my view of the interview of course also affects how I see the snippet.

 

[AG31]

In case it wasn't clear from my earlier post: when I said "it" felt flat I was referring to the interview, not the snippet from the book. But my view of the interview of course also affects how I see the snippet.

Also interesting.

 

[AlexBailey]

It was 90 minutes on a remote highway to a mountain town, not 90 miles. It seems plausible that it could have been a shorter distance, depending on how fast she could drive on that highway.
I didn't find this except to be too wordy.

I’m just saying that in spite of all of her details, the description of the of drive is inaccurate enough so anyone who’s familiar with the area is going to know it’s off. I know the area and it caught my attention.

“Fleeing north” out of Bend would take 97 to 26 then across the Columbia on the 205 bridge. Someone in a hurry wouldn’t bother to go all the way west “ through the city” of Portland to get to the I5 crossing just to then go northeast for 90 minutes/miles whatever.

Yeah, I’m splitting hairs, but if you’re going to write in so much unnecessary detail about speed and directions it should at least make sense.

 

[anthrodisiac]

Yes, I expect even 3rd person omniscient narration to reflect the mind of the character being described. (I wonder if that's always true... I'll have to pay attention.)

It's definitely not always true. Some writers like to do it, other writers prefer the narrator stays consistent with voice. Personally, I'm a fan of using narrative voice and style to add subtext and subliminal undertones. Plus, an omnipotent narrator whose voice is unchanging for the whole story is a detached narrator, which by extention detaches the reader from the narrative by putting distance between the reader and the story, not immersing them in it more thoroughly.

 

[NotWise]

FWIW, I dropped the text into two AI detectors and both characterized it as 100% human.

There are a lot of empty words and phrases and the odd metaphore in "velveteen fields" made me think of AI. Everybody likes their own writing, and some people like more of it than others.

Anthro's version is better.

 

[AG31]

It's definitely not always true. Some writers like to do it, other writers prefer the narrator stays consistent with voice. Personally, I'm a fan of using narrative voice and style to add subtext and subliminal undertones. Plus, an omnipotent narrator whose voice is unchanging for the whole story is a detached narrator, which by extention detaches the reader from the narrative by putting distance between the reader and the story, not immersing them in it more thoroughly.

That's a helpful bit of insight, that a narrator who adds subliminal undertones must change their voice as the character in focus changes. The consistent narrator doesn't. But it's interesting to think about the unchanging voice, and how it may or may not have its own personality. One thing I've recently noticed and mentioned here somewhere, is that it can be a feature, not a bug, for the unchanging narrator to have almost no personality, so there's nothing left but the story.

But whatever we do, we should do it well!

 

[AG31]

Anthro's version is better.

I didn't see that Anthro supplied their own version. Did you get the wrong person? Am I misunderstanding?

 

[anthrodisiac]

Yeah, I put it in quotes, so maybe it seemed like I was quoting the work instead of writing my own.

This post! (Click it, then check out the quote block).

My main issue is that the recklessness isn't really conveyed in the writing style. I'd probably rewrite parts of it more raw, jerkier, to match the emotional tone. Take out some of the extraneous details, they wouldn't be something someone in her state would really focus on. Doesn't matter if it's 3rd omnipotent, I'd want to convey some of the emotion in the structure. Then as she starts to relax a little upon reaching Portland, get back into smoother flow to show her calming down a bit.

 

[anthrodisiac]

But it's interesting to think about the unchanging voice, and how it may or may not have its own personality. One thing I've recently noticed and mentioned here somewhere, is that it can be a feature, not a bug, for the unchanging narrator to have almost no personality, so there's nothing left but the story.

But whatever we do, we should do it well!

Voice is one of those things I believe should be considered with great intentionality. If you're going to go with detached omniscient narrator, what purpose does that serve for telling the story? Impact, narrative, fit, tone, all should factor into decisions around voice (and POV, plus others). Basically, what's the best voice and angle to tell this story from?

What voice you pick for your story is going to impact how the reader interprets and interacts with it — the exact same story told from omniscient narrator hits differently than the close-in nitty-gritty of first-person present tense. Neither is necessarily wrong, but it changes the lens through which the reader sees the story, and that consideration shouldn't be overlooked.

 

[StillStunned]

I mentioned above that the excerpt lacked urgency for someone racing along. Without claiming to be perfect, or even better, just writing in a different style, here's a similar scene from my story Into The Night:

[...] and you slam the door shut on her slightly worried look, check the mirrors release the break foot on the power and off you scream into the Night...

This is where the Night really comes to life, racin' along with the lights overhead lights comin' towards you lights on the dash lights flashin' on the windscreen HUD, information all information comin' at you through the ghosts, cars and people and streets and turns and more people and all around you the tall buildings of the City, black and impregnable, blocks of nothin', vanishin' behind you one by one, left in the dirt of this smooth ride, check the battery nearly full you could go for hours, more hours than you got in the Night, swervin' left right left round the corner hard turn avoid the bikers so fast past the Enforcers they don't even see you what a thrill to be alive hands sweaty on the wheel foot almost tremblin' on the power fuck this is good this is what the Night is all about fuck you've missed this why did you ever leave, but there was Kitty of course and now there's Beth and you slow down because you here now...

And later in the same story:

[...] and then you're out of the alley and she's already forgotten behind you as you look for the bike, silver she said with blue flames can't miss it and you can't, less than a minute you're away and in the Night...

It's all familiar, all comin' back to you racin' along dodgin' between drivin' cars runnin' lights swervin' left right right left so smooth so fast, your body could never steer so fast so surely, but it's the Night and you're steerin' with your mind your reflexes your know of where you're goin' so you ride swift and smooth as the lights flash by, in bursts or long lines, cars partin' before you, skiddin' aside, faces watchin' from the curb as you race by your long coat streamin' out behind, reachin' the Lawmen's zone...

Obviously the style is completely different: stream of consciousness (and 2P to boot), but I reckon if you're driving 80 mph in traffic that's probably your state of mind anyway. Even if it isn't, writing in a leisurely way doesn't give the reader the impression of speed.

It makes me wonder how clear the scene was in the writer's mind: it's as if the bit about driving fast was thrown in on a whim, but she really wanted to use the driving scene to introduce the background. If she wanted to convey urgency, I think she might have been better served by describing an itch between the character's shoulder blades, triggering a barely controlled desire to speed up. I haven't read the rest of the book, but I think that would create a more vivid (and more positive) impression of the character.