Exquisite writing or rip roaring story telling?

[Jo Zebedee]

The magic might be both in one. But which do you look for?

Me, I take storytelling any day of the week. Characters I love, pace, weepy bits, yes please.

I love writing, too, turns of phrase that make me go wow.

But, overall, I will forgive a lot for a fab story. Which makes me question - do we focus too much on our semi colons and not enough on rip roaring fun/heart rending moments?

 

[TheDustyZebra]

I love a good story, and I love exquisite writing, and I particularly love both together.

But I think the test is this: I will read on if a story is good and the writing leaves something to be desired, but I'm not likely to read on if the writing is fabulous and the story stinks.

 

[mosaix]

I love a good story, and I love exquisite writing, and I particularly love both together.

But I think the test is this: I will read on if a story is good and the writing leaves something to be desired, but I'm not likely to read on if the writing is fabulous and the story stinks.

I'm with TDZ on this.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

My ultimate choice is a middle ground where the writing is competent and almost invisible as I read.

However when it comes to Dan Brown vs Salman Rushdie or Anita Brookner - Dan Brown would win out any day.

 

[Drakai]

I always believed that a novelist is the modern version of a storyteller. The most important part is how you tell the story, not what the actual story is or not the language you use to tell your story.

 

[allmywires]

I love a good story, and I love exquisite writing, and I particularly love both together.

But I think the test is this: I will read on if a story is good and the writing leaves something to be desired, but I'm not likely to read on if the writing is fabulous and the story stinks.

This basically! I'm verrrrrry lenient in terms of prose style if I love the characters/story. However I will fall asleep at pages of delightful description of flowers and the like. I used to be the kind of person who aspired to that...no longer!

 

[Fishbowl Helmet]

Rip roaring every time. If I want flowery language there's thousands of years of poetry to read. When I read a story, I want a damned good story.

 

[HareBrain]

I'll read one "rip-roaring" story with indifferent prose, maybe two, then I'll get bored. For me, a story has to be interesting rather than tick all the pacing/arc boxes, and often it's interesting because the author has been surgically insightful about character, situation, society, etc. They might not have worried about semi-colons, but they'll have been very concerned with exactly what words they use and in what order.

I'm not sure why, when someone asks "story or writing?", people always seem to think "writing" = "pages of description" often involving flowers. Powerful writing is usually about the verbs, and they can take ages to get right. But get them right, and wow.

 

[Ainsley]

My ultimate choice is a middle ground where the writing is competent and almost invisible as I read.

However when it comes to Dan Brown vs Salman Rushdie or Anita Brookner - Dan Brown would win out any day.

Ouch. That's the kind of statement that keeps me worrying about my material. I have to admit that I genuinely hated DaVinci Code. I think there only three or four books in my life that I've read and actually had that kind of reaction and that was one of them. Rushdie on the other hand makes my brain hurt and while I may get frustrated I certainly recognize his talent. I like that every now and again I pick up one of his books and ask myself if I've grown enough both as a writer and a human being to tackle another chapter.

 

[Mouse]

A lot of what's considered 'brilliant writing' is stuff that just makes me screw up my nose, or skip, or skim, anyway so it's story-telling for me. I don't want crap writing, obviously, but all that flowery, airy-fairy, arty-farty, overly-descriptive stuff is worse than crap. In my opinion. Not bothered about which verbs someone uses either.

 

[Abernovo]

I go for the storytelling. The best fiction, though, has that great story, but manages to slip in a few words of such poetic brilliance that it almost makes you weep. Two or three sentences that build, on their own, a vision of the world, and create an atmosphere for the story to breathe.

So, it is a mixture. The story is paramount, and the words should support it. They can change a good story into a great one.

 

[thaddeus6th]

Hmm. Obviously I'd like both, but I think I'd rather read a brilliantly written tale of a man filling out his tax return than a tediously written story of a dragon-slayer.

I don't think it's either/or, but poor quality writing would put me off buying a book after I downloaded the sample, whereas a poor story often can't be properly assessed until much further in.

Edited extra bit: and I'd not consider 'exquisite' to be synonymous with 'flowery' or 'poetic'. It can often be curt, blunt, or coarse and vulgar. It's not to do with how high or low or rare vocabulary etc is, but how effortlessly and deeply it impresses the world upon the reader.

 

[Brian G Turner]

IMO the writing is the storytelling. The trick is to achieve a level of competency with the writing so that it does not obfuscate the story.

Purple prose is writing without storytelling.

2c.

 

[Tywin]

... I'd rather read a brilliantly written tale of a man filling out his tax return than a tediously written story of a dragon-slayer.

Challenge accepted.

This will be the basis for my next writing challenge story.

 

[Dozmonic]

I'd rather have a good story, but the delivery has to be there. Hunger Games was a decent story, but first person present is such a clumsy format that I nearly didn't read it. Similarly, Game of Thrones is a great story, but told in such a manner that it's dull and drawn out, which meant it took me 3-4 attempts to get past the first hundred pages. Someone like James Patterson may be telling good stories - millions of people think so - but his prose gives me ADHD, so I will never find out. The other end of the scale, where the writing is so exquisite but nothing is said and nothing happens is just as bad. All things in good measure!

 

[AnyaKimlin]

Ouch. That's the kind of statement that keeps me worrying about my material. I have to admit that I genuinely hated DaVinci Code. I think there only three or four books in my life that I've read and actually had that kind of reaction and that was one of them. Rushdie on the other hand makes my brain hurt and while I may get frustrated I certainly recognize his talent. I like that every now and again I pick up one of his books and ask myself if I've grown enough both as a writer and a human being to tackle another chapter.

Rushdie bores the pants off me. I love literary fiction but I'm not a fan of books that have lost the plot.

I adore Toni Morrison and I love the likes of Sunset Song. As I say the ideal is when a great storyteller meets great writing. But I'm far more forgiving of a poor writer than I am a poor storyteller.

However whilst not a huge Dan Brown fan I did enjoy the DaVinci Code, and Angels and Demons. And I quite enjoy the funky little references to other classic works he shoehorns into his stories. He's as a result earned me reading the odd bit of rubbish.

Everybody has books and writing they can't stand -- there is nothing wrong with not liking a style. Hotel Du Lac, Perfume, Mayor of Casterbridge, Catcher in the Rye and Lord of the Rings are all very popular books I've put down due to boredom or dislike. Aside from the Tommy Knockers I don't like Stephen King.

 

[AJB]

Like a lot of people said: obviously both!

I'm with Abernovo:

I go for the storytelling. The best fiction, though, has that great story, but manages to slip in a few words of such poetic brilliance that it almost makes you weep. Two or three sentences that build, on their own, a vision of the world, and create an atmosphere for the story to breathe.

Like others touched upon... Those moments where each word or phrase give so much more to the reader than just telling the story is what I admire most in other's writing. This doesn't have to be flowery descriptive language (although some of this I love since good description doesn't just describe the setting, it can describe the mood, the atmosphere or the character, or all at once!). As is often the case, 'less is more' meaning much can be done in a few words, however, to get it right can take a long time. I'm surmising that it can be done straight away when the writer is so in tune with what is going on in the whole novel that the writer can think of several reasons why one sentence works well. I suppose it can boil down to how the story is told also by the way all the elements of writing is woven together to make the story what it is.

 

[Coragem]

IMO the writing is the storytelling. The trick is to achieve a level of competency with the writing so that it does not obfuscate the story.

I agree with Brian, but would add:

The reason writing is so hard is because the story alone is never enough. Being very good at saying "and this happened and then that happened" isn't enough. The skill is to reach beyond that without necessarily using more (or a lot more) words.

Coragem.

 

[Brian G Turner]

I'd rather have a good story, but the delivery has to be there. Hunger Games was a decent story, but first person present is such a clumsy format that I nearly didn't read it. Similarly, Game of Thrones is a great story, but told in such a manner that it's dull and drawn out, which meant it took me 3-4 attempts to get past the first hundred pages. Someone like James Patterson may be telling good stories - millions of people think so - but his prose gives me ADHD, so I will never find out. The other end of the scale, where the writing is so exquisite but nothing is said and nothing happens is just as bad. All things in good measure!

I'm curious - who do you like to read?

The reason writing is so hard is because the story alone is never enough. Being very good at saying "and this happened and then that happened" isn't enough. The skill is to reach beyond that without necessarily using more (or a lot more) words.

Indeed - character POV's can be an especially rich way to show any world from different perspective's and in their own unique way. This is where individual words can really make a difference. Also, differing experience and bias.

 

[Ursa major]

I'm somewhat confused why this is a writing topic rather than a reading one. If one can** produce exquisite writing, why wouldn't one?

After all, exquisite writing must mean the writing that best allows the reader to immerse themselves in the fictional world. Defined thus, it's just as appropriate to rip-roaring tales as any other type of story (simply because it is appropriate, by definition).




** - And if one can't, there's always practice, practice, practice (plus reading good writing).