Using lots of words.

[AG31]

Some authors use lots of words in their narration (not necessarily in dialogue). I've mentioned this before here and there in AH threads and have characterized the style as "writing mini-essays" of description, whether of history or thoughts. I use the word "discursive" for my own musings, but I had only heard objections to that word from others on AH, like @SimonDoom and @Britva415, until @yowser posted this: "short choppy action sentences (or long discursive immersive ones.)" just a day or two ago.

I did find one comment particularly helpful, by @SimonDoom. "I like Elizabeth George a lot. She's a skilled writer. She knows how to use words. And she uses them to get into the details of how her characters think and feel and experience things. She uses words to build suspense and mood."

I'm currently reading a book by Robert Galbraith (J.K. Rowling), which I'll add to my list of much admired discursive authors, P.D. James, Ruth Rendell, and Elizabeth George. And I noticed something new. In her mini-essays (not dialogue), there are almost no simple declarative sentences. All have dependent clauses, or are at least compound. This got me thinking, and I'm trying again to get a discussion going, this time with its own thread.

For the sake of discussion "using lots of words" means including "mini-essays" (see above) and using mostly multi-clause sentences (lots of commas).

Do you consciously write using lots of words?

Do you like stories written using lots of words?

Do you agree that "discursive" describes, at least, the mini-essay aspect?

If not, what would you call this writing style?

Do you find the sentences below pleasant to read? If so, can you articulate why?

They're long, but not up to Hemingway's 87 words (thanks @Bramblethorn).

*********************

- Once sitting in the window at the hotel bar, each with a coffee, Strike told Robin about his interview with Jade Semple, omitting to mention either his crashing hangover or the fact that he'd fallen on his arse in the mud mid interview, because his reputation as a detective was about the only thing he currently had going for him and he was damned if he was going to give that up, too.

(How come the post editor here, doesn't like "arse?")

-Five months previously, Strike had been almost entirely focused on a complex case the agency had been investigating, and had had little attention to spare for much else, but he remembered this news story, which had generated a short but intense burst of media coverage.

She hadn't cried since being admitted to hospital, and she didn't want to cry now, but having to say out loud the things the surgeon had just told her was going to make what had happened real, rather than a strange interlude she could half-convince herself was a nightmare.

 

[MrPixel]

Do you find the sentences below pleasant to read? If so, can you articulate why?

No. They're run-ons of multiple distinct thoughts. Too many conjunctions - 'and', 'or', 'but', 'because'. They could easily be broken into two or three sentences each and make better sense.

 

[Britva415]

Maybe using a lot of words means you have a lot to say.

Or not!

In all seriousness, breaking up unnecessarily long-ass sentences wouldn't result in fewer words being used. Not-saying some of the resulting sentences at all would.

 

[IWroteThis]

Sorry, but you lost me pretty fast. "Using lots of words" does not mean "lots of commas." Those are two completely different things. Both are valid discussions, but you need to be be able to tell the difference between them in order to realistically discuss them.

On the "lots of words" side, I prefer 750 word stories that work over novels that are more padding than story. That said, I like novels that have been trimmed lean and don't like 750 word postings that fail to tell a complete story. The key is not the number of words, but the value of the ones included.

On the "lots of commas" side, it depends on the story and the specific phrases. When I'm editing by listening to the story being read to me, I find myself combining some sentences and breaking up others. There is no one right answer for all situations. It's all about how the story flows, and the challenge is to recognize which is better in the moment your writing.

 

[AG31]

Sorry, but you lost me pretty fast. "Using lots of words" does not mean "lots of commas." Those are two completely different things. Both are valid discussions, but you need to be be able to tell the difference between them in order to realistically discuss them.

"Lots of words" was a short hand for both long paragraphs and long sentences. Long sentences have to have lots of commas. I pointed out that there were two things to discuss.

On the "lots of words" side, I prefer 750 word stories that work over novels that are more padding than story. That said, I like novels that have been trimmed lean and don't like 750 word postings that fail to tell a complete story. The key is not the number of words, but the value of the ones included.

On the "lots of commas" side, it depends on the story and the specific phrases. When I'm editing by listening to the story being read to me, I find myself combining some sentences and breaking up others. There is no one right answer for all situations. It's all about how the story flows, and the challenge is to recognize which is better in the moment your writing.

 

[crookedletter]

I like to vary my sentence length and rhythm, based in part on what's going on in the story, the tone of the narration. If a character is taking a series of rote actions, without giving them much thought, one after the other, short action sentences -- and fragments -- might be appropriate:

He pulled his shoes on. His jacket. Patted his pockets to confirm he had his keys and his wallet. Turned the lights off and locked the door on his way out.*

On the other hand if the pace is frenetic, if the person is racing against time and frantically trying to get their shit together, something more approaching run-ons might work:

He half-tied his left shoe, looking around for the right, but he didn't see it, maybe he'd kicked it off on the porch, maybe it was under the heap of jackets at the bottom of the closet. He checked his watch, barely registered the time, just saw there wasn't enough of it as he stumbled with his shoe half tied throwing jackets aside, feeling every second tick by, he should be out the door by now, he should be there by now.*

And so on. For example.

Descriptions like the examples in the OP say something a about the perspective character, I think, and the way they see the world. Shorter clipped observations might not be appropriate for that character. Though I haven't read those works.

* not meant to be shining examples of excellent writing, for the record, just slapped together by way of example

 

[ElectricBlue]

- Once sitting in the window at the hotel bar, each with a coffee, Strike told Robin about his interview with Jade Semple, omitting to mention either his crashing hangover or the fact that he'd fallen on his arse in the mud mid interview, because his reputation as a detective was about the only thing he currently had going for him and he was damned if he was going to give that up, too.

-Five months previously, Strike had been almost entirely focused on a complex case the agency had been investigating, and had had little attention to spare for much else, but he remembered this news story, which had generated a short but intense burst of media coverage.

She hadn't cried since being admitted to hospital, and she didn't want to cry now, but having to say out loud the things the surgeon had just told her was going to make what had happened real, rather than a strange interlude she could half-convince herself was a nightmare.

All three are too long for me. If I have to read a paragraph twice to understand what its singular sentence is saying, then it needs better punctuation. I read enough convoluted gunk in contracts, I don't want to read it in fiction.

I'd edit those samples, especially the first one, into several sentences. I'd probably lose some words in the first example, too.

Mind you, this is a comment from someone who @SimonDoom says writes in long meandering sentences, so I don't know where my style sits, in the context of this discussion. I don't think I write convoluted sentences (I'd describe the first sample as convoluted), but I might.

 

[SmilingLez]

Some authors use lots of words in their narration (not necessarily in dialogue). I've mentioned this before here and there in AH threads and have characterized the style as "writing mini-essays" of description, whether of history or thoughts. I use the word "discursive" for my own musings, but I had only heard objections to that word from others on AH, like @SimonDoom and @Britva415, until @yowser posted this: "short choppy action sentences (or long discursive immersive ones.)" just a day or two ago.

I did find one comment particularly helpful, by @SimonDoom. "I like Elizabeth George a lot. She's a skilled writer. She knows how to use words. And she uses them to get into the details of how her characters think and feel and experience things. She uses words to build suspense and mood."

I'm currently reading a book by Robert Galbraith (J.K. Rowling), which I'll add to my list of much admired discursive authors, P.D. James, Ruth Rendell, and Elizabeth George. And I noticed something new. In her mini-essays (not dialogue), there are almost no simple declarative sentences. All have dependent clauses, or are at least compound. This got me thinking, and I'm trying again to get a discussion going, this time with its own thread.

For the sake of discussion "using lots of words" means including "mini-essays" (see above) and using mostly multi-clause sentences (lots of commas).

Do you consciously write using lots of words?

Do you like stories written using lots of words?

Do you agree that "discursive" describes, at least, the mini-essay aspect?

If not, what would you call this writing style?

Do you find the sentences below pleasant to read? If so, can you articulate why?

They're long, but not up to Hemingway's 87 words (thanks @Bramblethorn).

*********************

- Once sitting in the window at the hotel bar, each with a coffee, Strike told Robin about his interview with Jade Semple, omitting to mention either his crashing hangover or the fact that he'd fallen on his arse in the mud mid interview, because his reputation as a detective was about the only thing he currently had going for him and he was damned if he was going to give that up, too.

(How come the post editor here, doesn't like "arse?")

-Five months previously, Strike had been almost entirely focused on a complex case the agency had been investigating, and had had little attention to spare for much else, but he remembered this news story, which had generated a short but intense burst of media coverage.

She hadn't cried since being admitted to hospital, and she didn't want to cry now, but having to say out loud the things the surgeon had just told her was going to make what had happened real, rather than a strange interlude she could half-convince herself was a nightmare.

My issue when it comes to too many words is that it turns into a tell me versus a show me and my brain nods out. FWIW, most times, my brain enjoys the nap. YMMV

 

[caleb35]

Some authors use lots of words in their narration (not necessarily in dialogue). I've mentioned this before here and there in AH threads and have characterized the style as "writing mini-essays" of description, whether of history or thoughts. I use the word "discursive" for my own musings, but I had only heard objections to that word from others on AH, like @SimonDoom and @Britva415, until @yowser posted this: "short choppy action sentences (or long discursive immersive ones.)" just a day or two ago.

I did find one comment particularly helpful, by @SimonDoom. "I like Elizabeth George a lot. She's a skilled writer. She knows how to use words. And she uses them to get into the details of how her characters think and feel and experience things. She uses words to build suspense and mood."

I'm currently reading a book by Robert Galbraith (J.K. Rowling), which I'll add to my list of much admired discursive authors, P.D. James, Ruth Rendell, and Elizabeth George. And I noticed something new. In her mini-essays (not dialogue), there are almost no simple declarative sentences. All have dependent clauses, or are at least compound. This got me thinking, and I'm trying again to get a discussion going, this time with its own thread.

For the sake of discussion "using lots of words" means including "mini-essays" (see above) and using mostly multi-clause sentences (lots of commas).

Do you consciously write using lots of words?

Do you like stories written using lots of words?

Do you agree that "discursive" describes, at least, the mini-essay aspect?

If not, what would you call this writing style?

Do you find the sentences below pleasant to read? If so, can you articulate why?

They're long, but not up to Hemingway's 87 words (thanks @Bramblethorn).

*********************

- Once sitting in the window at the hotel bar, each with a coffee, Strike told Robin about his interview with Jade Semple, omitting to mention either his crashing hangover or the fact that he'd fallen on his arse in the mud mid interview, because his reputation as a detective was about the only thing he currently had going for him and he was damned if he was going to give that up, too.

(How come the post editor here, doesn't like "arse?")

-Five months previously, Strike had been almost entirely focused on a complex case the agency had been investigating, and had had little attention to spare for much else, but he remembered this news story, which had generated a short but intense burst of media coverage.

She hadn't cried since being admitted to hospital, and she didn't want to cry now, but having to say out loud the things the surgeon had just told her was going to make what had happened real, rather than a strange interlude she could half-convince herself was a nightmare.

I like my sentences like I like my stories, on the short side. That's not always a good thing, and I've been working on doing better on description, but I still prefer to use fewer words than many. Part of it is having dabbled in journalism a long time ago. Part of it is I like to move things along quickly, using just enough words to convey what's happening. Get in, get out, no fuss, no muss, a short, sharp shock.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

There is no right or wrong answer to this and no best practice. There will be times in writing that a long descriptive is just what's needed. Just as using short sharp sentences for impact is what's called for. Variety. Flavor. Color...

It depends on which tool best fits the job at hand.

We are painting tapestries with words. I'd suggest learning to use as many brushes as you can.

 

[StillStunned]

Do you consciously write using lots of words?

Usually my sentences are relatively short. But I've written a few stories where I deliberately wrote long sentences and paragraphs.

Do you like stories written using lots of words?

As a rule, I prefer a more bare-bones style. Give me a framework and let my imagination fill in the blanks.

Do you agree that "discursive" describes, at least, the mini-essay aspect?

If not, what would you call this writing style?

Sure, it works for me. I understand what you mean: a series of associations, one thought triggering the next but they all belong together.

Do you find the sentences below pleasant to read? If so, can you articulate why?

It's not my preferred style, but when it's done well I can enjoy it for short stretches. I think a lot of us think in strings of association. The style conveys a certain frame of mind, which can become tiresome if overdone but it does a very good job of sketching the character in the reader's mind.

They're long, but not up to Hemingway's 87 words (thanks @Bramblethorn).

The longest sentence in a published story of mine is 252 words. And that story is rated 4.74.

 

[AG31]

he longest sentence in a published story of mine is 252 words. And that story is rated 4.74.

Can you give us a link, and a unique phrase to search for?

 

[BobbyBrandt]

For me, it depends on the POV.

I am tolerant of, and generally use, longer sentences and more words in a third-person narrative than in first-person.

While the 3P narrator might be omniscient, the 1P narrator should be able to describe things more concisely. They ARE the story.

 

[StillStunned]

Can you give us a link, and a unique phrase to search for?

Into The Night. As my signature says: be warned, it's 2P POV, stream of consciousness cyberpunk. Most of the sentences are around 150-200 words. The second sentence is 250 words, but the one with 252 words starts "How long's it been".

 

[Bramblethorn]

I like to vary my sentence length and rhythm, based in part on what's going on in the story, the tone of the narration. If a character is taking a series of rote actions, without giving them much thought, one after the other, short action sentences -- and fragments -- might be appropriate:
...

On the other hand if the pace is frenetic, if the person is racing against time and frantically trying to get their shit together, something more approaching run-ons might work:

This. It's hard to assess a sentence taken in isolation, without seeing how it fits into the broader story. Examples like those given could work as occasional indulgences, but if these are typical sentences for the whole work I'd likely consider that excessive.

(I know enough of JKR's Galbraith stories to know that they would not be my cup of tea, so I'm not going to go seek out that context; her sentence construction is the least of the issues there.)

(How come the post editor here, doesn't like "arse?")

This is probably the spell-checker on your browser, rather than anything provided by Literotica. "Arse" is UK spelling, "ass" would be the US equivalent, and you probably have US spelling enabled by default.

-Five months previously, Strike had been almost entirely focused on a complex case the agency had been investigating, and had had little attention to spare for much else, but he remembered this news story, which had generated a short but intense burst of media coverage.

This sentence feels tautological. "Had been almost entirely focused on a complex case", "little attention to spare" and "for much else" are all saying the same thing. Does it really need to be said three times?

I would guess that at this point, it's already been established that "the agency" is how he works. And "news story" feels a bit redundant with "media coverage".

Unless there is some pacing consideration that requires drawing this sentence out, I'd be inclined to edit it down e.g.:

Five months previously, Strike had been almost entirely focused on a complex case the agency had been investigating, and had had little attention to spare for much else, but he remembered this news story, which had generated a short but intense burst of media coverage.

Going further: if we're not going to hear more about the "complex case" he was investigating five months ago, is it actually relevant? What is the point of telling the reader the reason why Strike might not have heard about this case, only to immediately tell them that he did?

So it might be possible to cut it down further:

Strike remembered this story, which had generated a short but intense burst of coverage.

Again, the longer version might be justified if needed for pacing. I have deliberately drawn sentences out when I needed to create a bit of quiet space in between moments of tension. But I understand that the Strike books are unusually long for the story they're telling, which makes me wonder if she has a habit of padding unnecessarily.

She hadn't cried since being admitted to hospital, and she didn't want to cry now, but having to say out loud the things the surgeon had just told her was going to make what had happened real, rather than a strange interlude she could half-convince herself was a nightmare.

With the same caveat as above, this also feels unnecessarily repetitive. It could probably be cut down to something like:

She hadn't cried since being admitted to hospital, and she didn't want to cry now, but saying it out loud would make it real.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

Fewer words per sentence is better.

And I don't support 'authors' who espouse hate and intolerance.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

Into The Night. As my signature says: be warned, it's 2P POV, stream of consciousness cyberpunk. Most of the sentences are around 150-200 words. The second sentence is 250 words, but the one with 252 words starts "How long's it been".

Excellent example of what I was trying to say above. Mixed in with some very long immersive paragraphs, you'll find a bunch of short, punchy sentences, two, three words, that add contrast, almost a kick in the gut in comparison to the longer ones.
They all work together to create a great image. If you can get past the 2nd person , you'll find a wonderful story told in a very creative way using a variety of sentence and paragraph lengths.

And @StillStunned, I gave it five stars...

 

[M_K_Babalon]

I usually keep the paragraghs short, but it's all about how deep tge narration needs to be, how much detail there is. Folks used to joke about how many pages Tolkein can use to describe blades of grass. How much do you need to pontificate?

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

I usually keep the paragraghs short, but it's all about how deep tge narration needs to be, how much detail there is. Folks used to joke about how many pages Tolkein can use to describe blades of grass. How much do you need to pontificate?

As much as it takes to depict the image I'm trying to depict. That's going to depend on the overall style of the piece, the flow of the scene, and what's needed to get the reader to the emotional space I want them in the get the feel of what I'm writing.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I tend to use long sentences in description, but much shorter sentences in dialogue. That reflects how people generally talk.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Fewer words per sentence is better.

And I don't support 'authors' who espouse hate and intolerance.

And.... drink.

 

[anthrodisiac]

I mean, it depends on what you're trying to do.

If you want to create moody, introspective scenes, then you want chunky paragraphs and long sentences.

You want action or suspense? You do short, choppy sentences. Small paragraphs. Punchy.

So, honestly, it's entirely variable. I'll have sections that are friggin' half-page paragraphs of a continuous train of thought. And then I'll have four paragraphs with six words each, tops.

Cadence and structure are valuable tools that I think tend to be underutilized by a lot of writers. It's not just the words themselves, but what they inhabit, that brings our stories to life and set the mood. Think how unsuspenseful a thriller would be if the chase scene is a 50-word sentence.

Ambling:
He ran through the streets and didn't look back because he knew they would catch him if he stopped for even the tiniest fraction of a second and he couldn't afford any mistakes. This was it.

Staccato:
He ran. Through streets, alleys. Didn't dare look back. They'd catch him if he stopped, even for a second. No mistakes. This was it.

The only consistent rule I try to follow is to avoid having too many of the same-length sentences together... Unless it's for a good reason. Something like to create an atmosphere of monotony or stagnation, where nothing changes. So, even then, it's not a hard rule.

For me, it depends on the POV.

I am tolerant of, and generally use, longer sentences and more words in a third-person narrative than in first-person.

While the 3P narrator might be omniscient, the 1P narrator should be able to describe things more concisely. They ARE the story.

It's funny, I'm almost the opposite. But I also tend to write highly introspective characters when I do first-person POV. I will agree that you can write more "flowery" sentences in third-person, depending on how tight the POV is. I don't use third-person omniscient very often, I tend to be be more over-the-shoulder when I dip into third-person. But you do have to watch out for narrative consistency when doing first-person and I don't think most people think in long, rambly sentences like my brain tends to, so I would agree that usually first-person should be shorter than third if you're aiming for narrative realism.

 

[StillStunned]

And @StillStunned, I gave it five stars...

I must have done something very right then! Thanks!

 

[Dancefactory]

Someone once said, ”I wrote you a long letter, because I didn’t have time to write a short one.”

I like to write shortish, trying to compress the situation, chemistry and feelings into small packages. I’m also a slow reader, so I try to service the ones like me.

But I also think that as one writes more and develops, one starts to write longer texts, describe more etc. Writers tend to write longer books as their career advances.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Someone once said, ”I wrote you a long letter, because I didn’t have time to write a short one.”

Allegedly, Winston Churchill.