Paragraph structure.

[john11]

Hi And thanks for reading this post.

I was taught at school about paragraph structure, in that the first sentence should be the topic sentence which gives a brief overview of the paragraph itself, then the remaining sentences support and expand on the topic sentence.

But why do people not use this.

I went through some of my older books, Tarzan - by Edgar Rice Burroughs, and found he uses this format of paragraphing, but newer books like Harry Potter By jk rowling totally ignores this.

Is this form of paragraphing wrong nowadays, is it old fashioned.

What format do you use and why?

Many thanks in advance. John.

 

[Hex]

um I wasn't aware that was how to write paragraphs (well, I think I knew for academic stuff but not for fiction). I went to school at a time when you were meant to absorb grammar from the air, rather than be taught it explicitly.

Doesn't it slow things down and kind of kill tension if you're telling people what you're going to say and then saying it?

So, I don't use that paragraph structure because I am poorly educated, but also because I normally write in present tense.

 

[Culhwch]

Yeah, seems to me to be a more academic way of writing, rather than one that is suited for prose. Certainly Burroughs and his contemporaries wrote in a much more formal style than is the norm today, and it's something I guess that could be adopted for effect, but otherwise I'd suggest steering away from that kind of structure when writing fiction.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

It's not used today because it's waaaaay too prescriptive.

 

[john11]

Hi. Thanks for the replies, much appreciated.

Guess it shows my age using this type of paragraph structure.

What would you recommend for modern fantasy genre writing, and is there a website or link to expand and explain.

Many thanks. John.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

There is no formula as far as I know. I have one line paragraphs and long paragraphs that rumble on. To me, it's a feel thing - I change to a new paragraph when I change the focus of the story a little. Or, if it's getting very long, readers don't like walls of text.

This is the sort of thing crits are useful for when you get to the magic 30 posts. It's hard to tell out of context - like your question about writing psychic scenes - and really difficult to advise until we see what you are doing, if that makes sense?

 

[jastius]

they taught us that too.. but i never got the idea of a topic sentence. i mean if i put the idea for the paragraph in the first sentence then why do i have to write the rest of the paragraph? My teachers' explanations never made sense.

having said that, there is a time and a place for everything. topic sentence paragraphs are useful for essay type monologues, instructions, descriptions and explanations.

they are also useful in establishing a certain tone to the writing. to give it an old fashioned feel for a particular passage.

but i still don't see why i have to write the paragraph after i have explained it in the topic sentance.


8. Descriptive Paragraphs | Read & Write BALL at UKI

Paragraph lengths in fantasy fiction – an analysis | Creativity Hacker

 

[allmywires]

I remember being taught that at school as a structuring tool for academic essays. As for writing, I think it becomes instinct once you've done it a lot. I kind of think of it like if you're watching a film, every time the camera switches to a new angle, that's when you're changing paragraphs.

 

[BenSt]

Hi John,

As others have said, that style of paragraph structure, the whole Hamburger style, is for non-fiction and academic writing only.

For fiction, it suffices that each paragraph be about a particular topic or subject. So, you have very small to large dialogue paragraphs where each time a person says something it becomes a new paragraph.

If you are describing a certain item, place, subject then that would merit it's own paragraph, unless it's a long description of a subject in which you can then seperate it by sub-subject.

If you have a monologue, again it goes based upon flow or natural breaks in the speech. Although a lot of speeches I have seen can be in one single block.

 

[BenSt]

they taught us that too.. but i never got the idea of a topic sentence. i mean if i put the idea for the paragraph in the first sentence then why do i have to write the rest of the paragraph? My teachers' explanations never made sense.

Yeah it's a bit confusing this. My professors and academic writing tutors always told me that what you're doing with the first topic sentence is presenting either an argument, or a statement that you will then prop up with arguments afterwards. The closing sentence is a place to reiterate in words all of the facts and then add in a new element to link it to the next paragraph. It does take some work at getting a perfect structure, but luckily for most subjects eventually it will come naturally and when you go back and edit you'll have a keen eye as to what is expected, atleast in the academic field you are writing to.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

I was taught paragraphs were a consideration to the reader rather than a punctuation requirement. They make writing easier but there is no set format for them.

Having said that I do try to include a beginning, middle and end in most paragraphs in my writing. It's a hang up from being lazy at university if I wrote like that I could just write until my word count was up then write a concluding paragraph.

 

[Ursa major]

I've seen that style suggested for presentations:

• Give an executive summary of the presentation
• Give the body of the presentation
• Summarise what you've said, sressing the main points.

This is fine for preparing a presentation: it forces you to understand what you're trying to say before you leap into a whole load of slides. But even in a formal setting, it's likely to be boring.


And that's not what we want our writing to be; so, for example:

• in action scenes, it just doesn't work, because the narrative is driven by events and it's often difficult to say something once without killing the pace;
• in dialogue, we should already be paring down what the characters say to the essentials, not adding stuff (even if it was interesting the first time);
• in description, which some people find boring when something is described only the once, we shouldn't really be repeating anything.

 

[Esfires]

Generally, formulaic paragraphs are for academic writing. And even there, they can be tiresome. I teach in my university's writing center, where we helps students develop their papers and their writing, and we're constantly having to work to help students unlearn the rigid formulaic systems they learned in high school.

I think it was Stephen King who called the paragraph the basic unit of fiction (as opposed to the sentence). As a general rule, a paragraph is organized by the fact that everything in it sticks to a single topic. You'll have one paragraph detailing a particular action, and then the next paragraph might show a character's reaction to what happened.

There are three basic structures that I tend to find in fiction writing, though this is by no means a prescriptive formula or even comprehensively descriptive:

1) Main action of the paragraph first, followed by sentences which expound upon and further describe that action. This is good for clarity.

2) A slow start of setup and description, leading up to the main action toward at end. This is good for when you're wanting to build suspense.

3) The paragraph starts going one direction in the beginning, but then you give it a turn and take it somewhere unexpected. This can be good for impact, like a narrative punch in the gut.

 

[Dozmonic]

Sounds a lot like the standard structure for a presentation. Tell them what you're going to say, say it, tell them what you said. It's very valid, in the scope of a presentation.

 

[Gumboot]

Yeah, I've only heard that sort of thing being used for academic writing. I still remember the principle I was taught for essay writing as a child;

First tell them what you're going to tell them, then tell them, then tell them what you've told them.

(Although that was for entire essays, not a single paragraph)

I do think the OP sort of raises a good point though, which is that some writers don't really consider paragraph structure at all.

 

[Beef]

I rarely consider paragraph structure until I come to revise and realise that things are a little hard to follow. I think Brandon Sanderson mentioned on his podcast recently that he uses a topic sentence sometimes in a first draft, and then later finds he can cut it without detracting from the paragraph's meaning. Maybe that's a better way of doing things - make things super clear to begin with and then trim redundant sentences/fragments of sentences later

 

[jastius]

Maybe that's a better way of doing things - make things super clear to begin with and then trim redundant sentences/fragments of sentences later

i like that a lot; tell, retell, then trim.. sounds good. You could even do that when you are blocking out the point form outline of your story.
point of action / phrase / or description, followed by detailed explanation. Then edit out the list bits.

 

[chrispenycate]

From a pedant, this might seem odd, but all structural rules – punctuation, sentence structure, paragraph, chapter and even (in a story that is split up into larger subsection) by book or geographical setting – are there to enhance the reading experience. Most (but far from all) to simplify and lubricate the transfer of information from writer to reader, to prevent the sudden jolts when there's a sudden 'Hey, what just happened' reflex.

Thus all grammar 'rules' are subservient to the story, and readers' comfort. There's a reason for them, though, so it's a good idea to learn them so you can judge when the particular guideline needs modifying, or when the traditional technique, honed over several centuries (and continuously evolving over that entire period, and still doing so now) is the best option.

 

[john11]

Hi. Thanks for the replies.

Does this work:

The crowd of spectators were howling, tensing fists, ready for the bloody schoolyard fight. John walked straight in and landed a hard right cross to the jaw, staggering the much larger Dreadrick Bonecrusher and the students screamed their approval, then a left sunk deep into Dreadrick's stomach.

This is just something i knocked up on the spur of the moment, but it shows my paragraph construction technique. I start with the first sentence giving an idea of what the remainder of the paragraph is about, then the remaining sentences expand on the first sentence.

I know you said this is really for academic and essay writing, but do you think it could work well for fiction.

I would not put in anything like: teachers stepped in and stopped the fight, or parents screeched to a halt and came out of their cars, because teachers or parents is not mentioned in the first sentence (topic sentence)
Do you think this is ok.

Many thanks. John.

 

[chrispenycate]

A two sentence paragraph is not a good example for this particular question. Not that two sentence paragraphs, or even one line paragraphs, are not perfectly acceptable, but they are poor for illustrating the reasons for changing to the next concept. Perhaps three successive paragraphs would have told us more.

Depending on the importance of adult intervention I feel it could be safely appended to this paragraph, or not. Yes, if it was merely the closure of the scene; not if the scolding and the breaking up (if, for example the opponents need to be physically separated rather than obeying a verbal command) are an important element in their own right.

It does, however, give us a chance to look at sentence structure. Yes, I am aware of the fact this is not a genuine sentence, merely a flung-off sequence of words, so you can't be offended when I point out that the second one is really badly organised. Ignoring the "sunk" instead of "sank" (I did point out that I was a pedant, no?) the structure informs me that the jaw punch staggers not only the person it hits but the approving students, while the gut punch is tacked on the end, not feeling part of the structure at all. Even the first sentence, although there the problem is largely word choice; I suspect they were 'clenching' rather than 'tensing', and jaw and gut punch do not merit the adjective 'bloody'; about the only things that do in playground fights are nosebleeds (and some cuts, generally from falling on the wrong things. All sorts of adjectives like 'brutal' are available.

So, now you're not upset because it wasn't really your writing I criticised, yes?

Nobody has said you should not follow formulaic rules of construction; there are generally reasons those rules have come into existence. What we do suggest is that you attempt to understand the reasons, so you can break the rules (or twist them into unrecognisable forms, which is just as effective) when the story, or the story structure, do not invite them. Real dialogue is rarely grammatically perfect; you have to choose whether to modify it to fit the rules, and maximise information transfer, or transcribe the actual words for added veracity (or, most likely, steer an intermediate path). If anyone else decides for you it is no longer your story, but a collaboration.

If the more formal approach feels right for you, use it; you're not going to write anything worthwhile while you're forcing yourself into informality ("I'll show them! I will use swearwords, and be modern").

Pray excuse me. I rant.