Word count in writing
Posted 3rd August 2008 at 11:38 PM by Leisha
I wondered what I'd blog about, if I blogged at all, and then it hit me - I could blog about writing! Write what I know and know what I write. I'll only do short posts, since I'm busy, but maybe they'll improve someone's writing.
Today's tip:
What's wrong with this sentence?
Bertie trundled off down the middle of the road, his gammy leg popping and clicking with each step.
I have used too many words. For a start, does the reader need to know that Bertie trundled off? Wouldn't trundle suffice in most cases? Secondly, is it relevant to use the middle of the road? For this, it depends. Think context. If you want to give the impression that Bertie is one bean short of a full can, showing him trundling down the middle of a road full of traffic is a great way to do this. However, if Bertie is just strolling down a country lane, why should the reader need to know he's in the middle - it's not relevant and it certainly doesn't move the plot forwards. Also, why state that his leg is gammy when you've shown it is through the popping and clicking? Lastly, from the way I phrased the line, the reader will take for granted that Bertie's leg is popping and clicking every time he takes a step. Thus, remove with each step.
You end up with this, which is much tighter and still conveys the same meaning:
Bertie trundled down road, his leg popping and clicking.
So, always watch for unnecessary words. They come in many guises!
Today's tip:
What's wrong with this sentence?
Bertie trundled off down the middle of the road, his gammy leg popping and clicking with each step.
I have used too many words. For a start, does the reader need to know that Bertie trundled off? Wouldn't trundle suffice in most cases? Secondly, is it relevant to use the middle of the road? For this, it depends. Think context. If you want to give the impression that Bertie is one bean short of a full can, showing him trundling down the middle of a road full of traffic is a great way to do this. However, if Bertie is just strolling down a country lane, why should the reader need to know he's in the middle - it's not relevant and it certainly doesn't move the plot forwards. Also, why state that his leg is gammy when you've shown it is through the popping and clicking? Lastly, from the way I phrased the line, the reader will take for granted that Bertie's leg is popping and clicking every time he takes a step. Thus, remove with each step.
You end up with this, which is much tighter and still conveys the same meaning:
Bertie trundled down road, his leg popping and clicking.
So, always watch for unnecessary words. They come in many guises!
Total Comments 13
Comments
-
B...b...but I like unnecessary words!
Don't people like descriptions though?
Maybe it is important that he's in the middle of the road what if a car comes along and hits him?
Sorry I couldn't help that leish. Seriously though aren't you supposed to do descriptions in books?
Like this is this okay. (random thing here.)
She wrote so fast billowing smoke rose from the paper. Her hand was numb and aching by the time she finished.
Actually that's a fair description of how I write in real life. But is that okay or does it have too many words?Posted 4th August 2008 at 12:37 AM by mirinda
-
Yes, description is fine. Description is good! But you want to make your description strong and hooking, not full of meandering, hesitant prose.
As for the billowing smoke, that's a lot of exaggeration... But no, you haven't used too many words in the first line. However, I'd say go for the formal tone if you must use that line: She wrote so fast that smoke billowed from the paper. In the second line you could cut down slightly: Her hand was numb and aching when she finished. Or, to phrase it differenly using the same number of words as you have, Her hand ached as she set down her pen.
I'll add in something here that I told someone once: While too much description can get boring, especially if you present it as plain, uninspiring prose ala "The forest was lush and green and smelt of spices", a good, hooking description would evoke a clear, engaging description to the reader: "The dried fern crackled underfoot as Laya walked through the woods. Stray leaves tickled her arms, bringing a smile to her face. She'd always loved exploring this woodland, ever since she'd discovered it as a child. The vegetation near the heart of the forest gave off a scent of spices, and she wondered how many other people had found this paradise."
See, rather than boring, straightforward prose, the descriptions bring in her feelings, her senses, her memories. Also, notice I didn't write "gave off a smell of spices"? Smell is a weak word, whereas scent, aroma, tang, reek, etc, give a better image in the reader's mind. Always use strong words in your description.
So, to recap, write to evoke feelings in the reader, don't just write plain descriptions. All good prose links the description with the character/s emotions. Like: "She ran her hand over the wood. The surface felt smooth, most probably worn down by thousands of worshippers caressing the idol over the centuries." Blah blah blah. And that sort of description is far more engaging than "She smiled as she touched the smooth wood of the idol".Posted 4th August 2008 at 12:56 AM by Leisha - I know it's exaggerated silly it was just an example.
That actually does sound better thanks Leisha.
Haha Leisha the tutor I will come up with more important questions for you!Posted 4th August 2008 at 01:07 AM by mirinda -
"Bertie trundled down road, his leg popping and clicking."
But now as a reader I find myself wondering why is leg is popping and clicking - something is wrong - but is it broken and he walking without pain or what? The gammy leg tells me the degree and reason for this - cutting it means you need another sentence to tell me that info.
Good blog ideaPosted 4th August 2008 at 01:10 AM by Overread - Ah, but those questions make you read on, do they not? You want to know why he's like that. That's what writing's about: hooking the reader. Which is why you then expand on it in another paragraph, perhaps going on to say that it's bothered him since he accidentally ran under a steamroller.
And ask away! If I can help, I will. If I can't, I'll sing New Kids on the Block.
Posted 4th August 2008 at 01:24 AM by Leisha - NO! NO NKotB!
Alright here's something for you to look at.
They had faces like angels. Flawless beauty...on the outside. Inside they were vile, disgusting and ugly. Hunters, but not your normal hunters. Their prey were people. It's like a game if you get caught they kill you, you lose. If you get away alive you win, but they never let anyone get away, they hunt you forever, so guess what you always lose. I'm their personal caddy. What is my prize for assisting them on their murderous rampage? I get to live another day, that's incentive enough for me.
So what do you think of that?Posted 4th August 2008 at 01:29 AM by mirinda -
Good Blog Loopy, very helpful.
OR Bertie is a beetle which is why his legs pop and click
Posted 4th August 2008 at 01:32 AM by Wybren - I'm actually intrigued!
But you do need to work on your commas. And after "like a game" you need a colon. But you don't meander, and the paragraph hooks. The only other thing is the telling. In one part you've listed details instead of showing them. What makes the hunters ugly? Do they have warts? Do they have claws? Why are they vile? If they're vile because of their habits (the murderous ones you've described), you don't need to repeat yourself.
One of the first rules of fiction: Show, don't tell.
Edit: Whoa! Wy, I just made it up. I had no idea.Posted 4th August 2008 at 01:37 AM by Leisha - Really? Thanks! That's actually something I'm working on.
I'm so terrible with commas honestly. I overuse them.
I said "They had faces like angels. Flawless beauty...on the outside. Inside they were vile, disgusting and ugly."
So see I did say that.
The book is told from the perspective of their "caddy" a very smart mouth sarcastic character who (much like me) exaggerates everything. So I though the vile, disgusting, and ugly thing would work to show how much she hates them.
Most of the book will be written directly how she sees it. So what she sees and thinks that's what you'll know and think when you read it. Whether she's right or not.
If you want to see more I'd email what I have to you.Posted 4th August 2008 at 01:47 AM by mirinda - Well, tonight I must get on with my own work (if I can log off), but I don't mind looking over the work. How many pages is it?
Oh, and I'm busy this week, though, so I've no idea when I'll get around to seeing it. But I will ASAP!
As for the commas, I was thinking you needed a couple more. One after "if you get caught" and one after "If you get away alive".Posted 4th August 2008 at 01:53 AM by Leisha - Like 8 pages I think. Not too long. I could just send you part of it.
Well whenever you get a chance. I rather like the story line so far.
Hmmm more commas interesting.Posted 4th August 2008 at 01:59 AM by mirinda -
Good pointer, Leisha - I remember a big thing Stephen King emphasised in "On writing" was how to write concise sentences, removing extra words. It's definitely a lesson worth underlining.Posted 4th August 2008 at 02:09 AM by I, Brian - Thanks, Brian. Yes, I remember reading that, too. I've also read it in many agents' blogs. Plus, when John Jarrold assessed my novel, he showed me I'd still used unnecessary words in parts of my novel, and I thought I'd looked out for them, so now I know what to look for. Really, agents want no excess words and no repeats that aren't used for effect. At least I know I didn't write that many, even if I had more than I thought. Posted 4th August 2008 at 02:23 AM by Leisha
