Michael Potts's Blog: Bits and Pieces: Book Reviews and Articles on Writing, Horror Fiction, and Some Philosophy - Posts Tagged "beautiful-language"
Beautiful Language and Fiction Writing
Should a writer focus on writing beautiful prose? I am thinking of such writers as James Agee, in his book, A Death in the Family, or Ray Bradbury in Dandelion Wine. The first part of A Death in the Family consists of an earlier work by Agee, Knoxville: Summer of 1915 and is the most beautiful piece of fiction I have ever read. It is unmatched in atmosphere. You feel as if you are present with the boy, Rufus, and his father as they walk the streets of Knoxville on a summer evening. The language is the closest to magic, I think, in all of American literature.
There is a danger in writing beautiful fiction--an author could try to substitute beauty of language for good plot and characterization. Some critics of contemporary literary fiction have claimed that a great deal of current literary fiction has this problem. Much depends on what the author's purpose is--not all literary fiction has traditional plot. The fine book by Cormac McCarthy, No Country for Old Men, is a character study, something the movie faithfully represents. That did not please all audiences, as I discovered after watching the movie and overhearing comments after the end. It is possible, however, if a writer is good at crafting beautiful lnaguage, for that writer to become lazy about plot and character development. The result is beautifully written bad fiction, which should be no author's goal.
Beautiful language can distract some readers from the flow of the plot. Although plot is not an issue in most poetry, I find Dylan Thomas' poetry to be so beautiful that I sometimes lose the meaning of the words in the beauty of the language. Personally I think it is up to me, the reader, to re-read until I can follow the meaning. As a writer, I would rather be criticized for my language being too beautiful than for not having a coherent plot or convincting characters.
Among horror writers, Robert McCammon is the best stylist in language--and his novels also do an excellent job at plot and characterization. Bradbury's early horror works are good, but are not as beautifully written as some of his later works. Vivid imagery is essential to horror, thus skill in word crafting is important. I find that McCammon or Stephen King have better use of imagery and beautiful language than Dean Koonz or Peter Straub. I will say, however, that Koonz has improved a great deal over the years, and Straub is grows on me.
My advice to a writer is to write as baautifully as a story will allow. If the writer has good language skills, some beauty of language will come out in the first draft. For me, that is the case, but many revisions are necessary to tweak the language. My goal, whether I am writing Southern fiction, or horror, is to use beautiful language that elicits images in the reader's mind. Transporting a person to another world is part of the task of fiction, and beautiful language should be part of that transportation.
There is a danger in writing beautiful fiction--an author could try to substitute beauty of language for good plot and characterization. Some critics of contemporary literary fiction have claimed that a great deal of current literary fiction has this problem. Much depends on what the author's purpose is--not all literary fiction has traditional plot. The fine book by Cormac McCarthy, No Country for Old Men, is a character study, something the movie faithfully represents. That did not please all audiences, as I discovered after watching the movie and overhearing comments after the end. It is possible, however, if a writer is good at crafting beautiful lnaguage, for that writer to become lazy about plot and character development. The result is beautifully written bad fiction, which should be no author's goal.
Beautiful language can distract some readers from the flow of the plot. Although plot is not an issue in most poetry, I find Dylan Thomas' poetry to be so beautiful that I sometimes lose the meaning of the words in the beauty of the language. Personally I think it is up to me, the reader, to re-read until I can follow the meaning. As a writer, I would rather be criticized for my language being too beautiful than for not having a coherent plot or convincting characters.
Among horror writers, Robert McCammon is the best stylist in language--and his novels also do an excellent job at plot and characterization. Bradbury's early horror works are good, but are not as beautifully written as some of his later works. Vivid imagery is essential to horror, thus skill in word crafting is important. I find that McCammon or Stephen King have better use of imagery and beautiful language than Dean Koonz or Peter Straub. I will say, however, that Koonz has improved a great deal over the years, and Straub is grows on me.
My advice to a writer is to write as baautifully as a story will allow. If the writer has good language skills, some beauty of language will come out in the first draft. For me, that is the case, but many revisions are necessary to tweak the language. My goal, whether I am writing Southern fiction, or horror, is to use beautiful language that elicits images in the reader's mind. Transporting a person to another world is part of the task of fiction, and beautiful language should be part of that transportation.
Bits and Pieces: Book Reviews and Articles on Writing, Horror Fiction, and Some Philosophy
The blog of Michael Potts, writer of Southern fiction, horror fiction, and poetry.
- Michael Potts's profile
- 159 followers
