How do you know whether or not your writing has been infected with purple prose?

A lot of the well-written HP fanfiction I've read have been concise and minimalist--reminiscent of Hemingway's style. My own writing style is quite different from this. I have a tendency, though perhaps unhealthy, to thrive on imagery and wordy (?) description.

Is brevity really the soul of wit? How much description is too much?

Thanks for your input.

 

No. See Circular Reasoning for the best prose ever. It's difficult to strike a balance between descriptiveness and wordiness, but it can be done.

The trick is to evoke powerful imagery in as few words as possible. I can't tell you how to do this because I can't really do it myself, so I tend to write with heavy focus on dialogue and character interaction.

 

As Sesc aptly notes, all that matters is whether or not you think it's good. Honestly, my favorite fic that I've written for Harry Potter is my most fluid and stylistically elaborate. Do what you want, fuck the rest.

 

Duly noted.

Although...there has to be a limit somewhere, at some point. It is easy for a writer's "critical eye" to be blinded by their own ego. I admit that this sometimes happens to myself. So, we might think our own writing is good even if it is, in reality, a fetid pile of crap. I'm sure that you guys would not have given that advice to certain writers on ff.net. ¬_¬

I'd like to think that my writing is not a fetid pile of crap. However, since I'm not the most objective evaluator of my own work, how do I know that for sure?

As T3t mentions, I think part of it is the ability to harness words to their truest potential. Great poets don't need to use a great many words to evoke vivid images--it seems to be just a matter of selecting the right words.

...how does one do this?

 

Honestly, I don't think it's something that can be taught in any logical sense. It seems to me more a talent than anything, the understanding of how words roll off of the tongue in ways that seem effective and interesting.

So yeah... I guess I'd say that it's hard to comment about style and such in general - I'd need to see your writing to talk about what you could adjust specifically.

 

Well... the first thing you want to do is to step back from your own work, and the best way to do that is to leave it for some period of time after writing it - at least a week. Then read it slowly. I've caught a lot of stylistic mistakes and inadequacies in my work by doing this.

 

I'd say it isn't a matter of black and white, either. Sometimes the mood calls for a different style of writing. If you're in the middle of describing a scene, or writing inside the head of a particularly clever character, you can be a little bit more indulgent. If you're writing an action scene, or something really emotionally charged, I find it helps to get the concepts out and be concise, rather than clogging up the works with fancy shit.

I know I used to be horribly verbose--every action, every description, even the way characters spoke a line had to be a certain way, and I was concerned with having my prose come off as very impressive. I still struggle with this, and when I'm editing usually the first thing I do is chop the fat off my sentences.

But it turns out that usually readers (myself included) don't really want to be reminded of the author--they want to be immersed in the story. So don't get in the way.

 

One of these days I'm going to write a Brechtian fic. Just sayin.

 

It's difficult to evaluate your own prose style, but I think there's one important questions you can ask yourself about it—Is this natural, or organic, both to the story I'm telling and the way I think and write?

In all writing, but especially fanfiction, the main thing you have to offer as an individual is your individual sense of the story you want to tell, which comes out in your voice and preoccupations. Stories that come off as overly florid always strike me as coming from something else—a desire to impress, or to mask some perceived deficiency, etc. On the other hand, a really well-done lyrical piece feels just as natural as Hemingway's staccato sentences.

 

I think style comes down mainly to two things.

Word choice. What you use to describe something. Purple flowers, blue flowers, etc. Vermillion Flowers, Azure flowers. If you're going for something a bit outside the norm, mix up what colors you use. Red...ruby, crimsom, etc.

How you piece together your words. I tend to favor longer sentences, with liberal use of commas and semi-colons. This usually brings about choppy phrases within longer sentences. Butcher's style is pretty straight forward, using simple sentences, makes the reading more abrupt, and given the action in his novels, it works.

The thing also about style is that is varies from sentence to sentence, chapter to chapter, based on what is going-on, so it's hard to pinpoint it. In an emotional scene, I'll use more flowery words, like the color choice. I'll try to pick words that fit with the scene. Saying a funeral was cheery, when going for a sad tone, is bad, unless you are going for a contradictory tone. Somber, silence, quiet, mournful, etc, work better.

Length of sentence can also vary. I try to use complex sentences, and when I want a phrase to stand out, or jerk the reader, I'll use a simple sentence.

"The sky was a mournful iron as they laid the stranger into the silent grave, where only the quiet earth would keep him company. I'm not sure what I was feeling, sad, annoyed, angry, maybe a little of them all.

For the stranger was my father."

Example. That is my usual style.

Which brings me to a final point. Keep the style consistent, which I think most people do unconsciously most times. As stated by Sesc in rereading your own work to catch such things. Don't write the above, then put in something about the ground raping him.

""The sky was a mournful iron as they laid the stranger into the silent grave, where only the quiet earth would rape his ass daily, yo. I'm not sure what I was feeling, sad, annoyed, angry, maybe a little of them all.

For the stranger was my father."

So long as you keep some consistency, varying every now and again, I don't think you have to worry about style too much. But, if you're that afraid of purple prose, just keep this in mind. It's okay to have descriptions that are flowery and dramatic prose, Swim is a great example of this as mentioned above, but when the words take away from what is happening or describing, then you need to watch out. Don't let the reader become lost in the words so that they forget what you are describing and what is going on.

 

Suddenly everything makes sense now.

 

Just about anything from Joe is too far. :awesome He is the one eyed, one horned, purple prose puker. D:

Seriously, though. Its all entirely dependant upon what you're writing. There are times when brevity help push along the idea, but you can also not go far enough.

Especially strong emotion reactions to an act/scene/statement can at times cause a lack of focus which dictates a bit of brevity. Or can do preciesely the opposite, Harry's reaction to Diagon Alley for example. You'd want to go just a bit into the purple to show wonder/awe.

Most times, I would agree with you, Sesc. I can go a bit insane into detail with shit. Ask Nuhuh about the flower incident. >_>

But as much as I prefer show to tell, it is possible to go to far. It should always be a concern for the author. If you drive reader to exhaustion with detail, you won't get too far.

 

The answer isn't simple, and isn't easily defined. Sorta like porn - hard to defintively describe, but I know it when I see it.

For me, it boils down to how I feel that particular scene should /feel/. Lots of people will tell you to eliminate every word and sentence that isn't absolutely necessary, and that often has merit. Shorter works can often pack a lot of meaning and impact into a few words, and that's powerful. But, when I'm reading a very immersive piece, I appreciate the work put into the character and setting.

Mark Twain says it well:

I put a lot of time into word choice, whether it's fanfiction, a text to my wife, or a business letter or email to a client. It makes me a slow writer, but it's just my way of going about it.

 

I don't mind the "purple prose" when it's done well. Forced purple prose, however, is like those white guys wearing their hat backwards, trying to talk black. You can immediately tell when someone is trying too hard and you hate every second of it.

Good purple prose and vivid imagery is always a plus for me, provided the text goes well with it (ie: you don't go all flowery in a job application letter).

Plus, there's a difference between purple prose and details. Purple prose is how you tell a story, and details is what you tell in it. Although both can ruin a story if done wrong, purple prose doesn't necessarily mean too much detail, and viceversa.

Also, the use of purple prose depends on who the narrator is. In 1st person, except for very special cases, flowery description is usually an instant fail. Can you imagine, for example, The Dresden Files written all grand and "poetic", and not in a sarcastic way? No, thanks.

 

So basically, there's no absolute standard when it comes to style? I guess a large part of it depends on the situation/plot of one's story and the personalities of the characters.

I actually just happened to stumble across some interesting advice while reading the intro to Strunk Jr. and E.B. White's The Elements of Style:

"Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts. This requires not that the writer make all sentences short or avoid all detail and treat subjects only in outline, but that every word tell."

And more...
"It is an old observation that the best writers sometimes disregard the rules of rhetoric. When they do so, however, the reader will usually find in the sentence some compensating merit, attained at the cost of the violation. Unless he is certain of doing well, he will probably do best to follow the rules."

Anyways, thank you for your input, everyone. I'll be sure to keep these tips in mind when I write the rest of my story.

Btw, iLost, was your username created with malicious intentions? Because you just made me lose The Game.

 

Elements of Style is a horrendously terrible book.

 

When you reread it and groan at how overblown it is- that's Purple Prose.

Really? While I wouldn't ever support the prose of Hemingway being something to aspire to, what I generally see among middle-level writers is the attempt to mimic JK Rowling's style, and among the truly skilled they know enough to work in their own voice.

 

@Fiat Piscis

I suppose that everyone is entitled to their own opinion (and once someone is set upon something, it is always difficult to convince them otherwise). However, I will venture forth and say that I myself am a fan of The Elements of Style.

Out of curiosity, was your great dislike for the book really caused by all of the reasons that Geoffrey Pullum mentions? Or did you instinctively hate it, and find the article later on, in which case Pullum's stance happened to coincide with yours and thus serve as a perfect justification for the statement "The Elements of Style is a horrendously terrible book"?

Yes, I am aware that I just wrote a horribly convoluted sentence. Anyways, I'd just like to say a few words (alright, many words) in defense of the book.

Pullum is a linguistics professor, so he probably does have more knowledge about the hidden cogs and inner workings of grammar than Strunk Jr. ever did. However, The Elements of Style serves its purpose as a concise guide to basic grammar rules. Why focus on the numerous exceptions (as I'm sure there are many) when most people just need to have a basic grasp of the language? Pullum's own grammar book is 1860 pages long--comprehensive, yes, but unlikely to be read by any except the most conscientious writer. On the other hand, The Elements of Style can probably be read in its entirety, in just an hour. It is much more approachable and serves its purpose of teaching novice writers the rules of the trade. I'm sure that many of the writers on ff.net would benefit from reading such a book.

Pullum also addresses some inherent contradictions in the book. E.B. White, however, does put a "disclaimer" at the beginning, stating that rules may be violated if there is a good enough justification for doing so. The rules are not cast in iron--as many people have mentioned in this thread already, a lot of the time a writer just has to play it by ear.

[Side note: And no one can claim that they have never been hypocritical at some point. There are always contradictions--especially when it comes to things like making generalizations about the nature of generalizations, or writing a book about writing.]

Personally, I found E.B. White's addendum about style to be quite helpful. Pullum takes a lot of the advice out of context. Of course "Be clear" sounds stupid by itself; a preschooler could've come up with that. However, Pullum fails to note that "Be clear" is only a concise summary, and that E.B. White goes into a lot of detail about exactly how and why one should "be clear."

Pullum himself is also quite hypocritical at some points. He bases his dislike for the book on the fact that it is "overopinionated", and yet he refers to White and Strunk Jr. as a "pair of idiosyncratic bumblers." Really, that's not overopinionated at all. Especially when a simple "I disagree" would suffice.

Rant over.

...I'm probably going to get torn apart on DLP, considering what I've seen while lurking on this site, but at least I can say that I, thisMortalCoil, lived a good three days. :awesome

I also probably should've realized that since DLP is a site that almost collectively hates Hermione Granger, a book such as The Elements of Style would not be taken well for its overly didactic nature...

 

I can't say I've read Elements of Style, but DLP has become rather more moderate than it's reputation would indicate. (Actually, I think I own the book as it was required reading for English 101 in my freshman year oh-so-long ago, but I don't think I read more than five pages of it).

We don't hate Hermione either, only rabid Harmonians. Quite a few people people on this site like or don't mind H/Hr in general (myself, Taure, Silens, to name a few).