Dialogue VS Description and the avoidance of Lavender...

[Precise Calibre]

As I've been writing my current WiP, I've noticed that I often reach a point where I feel stuck to a degree. I know from personal experience that when I read a book with heavy descriptions, often ranging into lavender or beyond, I can sometimes zone out and the writing may lose me if it goes on for too long. However, as an added irony to this situation, a lot of my own descriptions tend to be very flowery unless I keep a strong rein on my creative hand.

Furthermore, I sometimes feel as though I am using too much dialogue within the narrative for the simple sake of not wanting to write so much description for fear of falling into my own creative sink-holes.

I know that portions of the story where no dialogue takes place are inevitable and in fact I love writing these bits. But I am left wondering exactly what sort of balance I should strike between these three elements. I want people to feel what the characters feel in a given environment, but I've been told that too much metaphor or introspection from the character's viewpoint can soil the mood of the piece by being overbearing. I'm notorious for using too many metaphors and similes in description...

I also want people to understand the characters through dialogue, but I don't want to write dialogue for the sake of it (I think I've managed to do this thus far).

I'm not sure if I even have a question regarding this matter, but I'm still wondering if others feel the same way sometimes.

 

[J Riff]

I'm reading 'Techniques of fiction writing' in the bathroom lately, and there's a chapter on description.
" ...description also narrates and narration also describes and both serve much the same purpose in fiction."
It goes on for forty pages, all very educational.
Poisonally, too much description is worser than too little. Trust the reader's imagination. )

 

[Boneman]

This is a problem that there are no hard and fast rules for: on the one hand there are those who absolutely LOVE descriptive prose, and lap it up, curling up in bed and devouring it over and over. On the other, people skip pages as soon as they see a wall of descriptive prose, because they can't stand it.

And there are those who shout at books: "Stop talking and get on with it!"
And others who find dialogue so much easier to get through than descriptive stuff.

Finding the balance? Well, is it truly necessary? I cannot stand the Wheel of Time series, it annoys the bejasus out of me, because of the interminable talk, talk, talk and nothing happening. I gave up at about book three, but can't actually remember, because it was so long ago. But the books sold in millions... and Brandon Sanderson is now finishing it off in the same style. The Malazan series is reputedly really hard to read.

My point is this: I don't like it, I don't read it. I buy the books that I like and want to read. I'm seriously enjoying the Chronicles of the Black Company at the moment, written in the 1st person, and I noticed one thing: there's not a paragraph over 7 lines (so far), and there's a lot of descriptive stuff packed into it.

I asked 'is it necessary?' If you want to write like Brandon Sanderson, then you can do it. If you want to write like Roger Zelazny, then you can do that, too. But if you want to write like yourself (and get better at it), then I think the only way is to write it and see how it looks. You've expressed a concern about striking a balance and admit that you love writing the descriptive bits, and if that's your strength, then that's the way you should go.

It's been said by so many writers that once you've finished a book/long section/chapter you should distance yourself from it, and come back to it at a later date. On a number of occasions (depressingly so, sometimes) I've come back to a piece that I really enjoyed writing, that flowed like the Don in winter when it was set on paper, only to find that it's now stodgy, lacking sparkle, intensity, enjoyment and so on. But I set to, with a vengeance and rewrite, rewrite, rewrite. (I like to think of it as hammering base metals in the forge and emerging after many immersions in fire and water, with all the dross bashed off, and a pure piece of shining steel in my hand. Okay, it hasn't happened yet, but I'm still in the forge, and it's getting there...)

And I'm sure this is what you will do. Yes, your first draft may have too much lavender, but I'm certain you will have scythed so much of it down by the tenth draft, that you're getting happier with it (and becoming a better writer in the process) and finding the right balance for you.

I haven't had a slap in ages, and I may have written this before, but here goes: Patrick Rothfuss said: "What really defines a character in a reader's mind is the actions they take (descriptive) and the dialogue they engage in"(dialogue!) My italics... And the balance of the two is what makes a great book.

As I said above, some incredibly high sales books have been very unbalanced in either direction, and so I'm probably answering my own question and saying 'it doesn't matter'. But it does matter for you, and that is part of your writer's journey, to find what works for you. Write it how it comes out, and then go back and change it if it's (for your liking) too much dialogue or too much prose. But stick at it, and never be anxious at your first draft - there's so many more to come...

Naturally, your agent/publisher will change it all around...

 

[chopper]

*hand of doom hovers, Damocles-loike, in the air over BM's head*


it tends to be structural problems that hold me up more than excessive descriptions (i'm quite capable of writing those). and in general i find that if something is proving to be extremely boring and difficult to write, then i probably don't really need it. i've just binned a whole chapter like that.

that flowed like the Don in winter

nice. flows bloomin' quick in summer too, after all that rain....