Thanks! I really enjoyed writing it, so it’s nice to know people are enjoying reading it as well.
Non-fiction / Literary Masturbation
Every good writer begins with a catchy introductory sentence. The best ones make some sort of general claim and proceed to back it up with statements that loosely connect it to the actual topic on which they intend to write, thus covering up the overused device that pervades modern writing. By the time a reader becomes aware of the devices, it’s too late; the device has already worked, and the reader is well into the first paragraph. A long, drawn out metaphor or simile often serves to further captivate the unprepared reader, much like the shiny lure that ensnares any unsuspecting fish who expects a simple meal dangling in the water. There is always a decision, some crucial point at which the protagonist must choose one of two paths. Only continued reading will truly reveal that decision. A compelling description of scene or character almost always coerces readers to pursue that curiosity. Readers have no time for the mundane and quotidian, and such beginnings will extinguish any and all curiosity. Of course, a curious reader will want to know exactly what the author intends to do.
“No story is complete without witty dialogue,” suggest some critics of writing.
“But witty dialogue requires more than one character,” protest others, “and there has been introduction to only one, so far.”
And thus, the second character inevitably appears – through dialogue. This character must be the antagonist; the first was, of course, the protagonist, who presents the initial problem. As with every protagonist, the central challenge is to develop a convincing plot and navigate it. Abrupt switches from intricate description of setting and characters to seemingly arbitrary dialogue carry the plot forward subtly, keeping the reader unaware of the use of dialogue as a plot-promoting device. Good authors must outline the beginnings of a plot in order to intrigue the reader without revealing too much.
“Exclamations are overused in fiction,” the critics assert. “Any semi-decent writer can show emphasis without the use of exclamation marks.”
“I disagree!” the antagonist must dissent. The tension between the two becomes unmistakable as the antagonist supports the opposing claim. “Exclamations and other interjections of the like can change the character and pace of a dialogue and reveal more about characters than simple ‘he saids’ and ‘she saids.’”
“Content of dialogue, though, is what really distinguishes superior writing. The best does not even require context for dialogue.”
“That is true. All good authors portray a character through his speech, and specific narrative context is unnecessary to know who is speaking, to whom, and how.”
Of course, all description and dialogue, no matter how clever, can become tedious. There must be assertions. There must be action. There must be short, choppy sentences contrasted with much longer ones so as to demonstrate the mastery of syntax every accomplished writer unfailingly has. The mediocre, pretentious writer is often sesquipedalian in his verbiage, relying not only upon complex sentence structure and excessively convoluted ideas – marked with extensive and tortuous interjectory phrases – that obscure even the most basic of images, but also on the nuances and caveats of the overextended and often archaic history of the English language. Superior writers can convey even the most complex ideas in simple words, and this writer is most assuredly superior. Yet through the meticulously crafted details, the delicately painted metaphors, accurate to the subscripts and italics of each letter and punctuation mark, emerges the main action of the work.
Action occurs abruptly. Sometimes this rapid change in pace emphasizes the speed with which action can occur. Other times, through long and descriptive sentences, through sadistic use of commas and compound sentences and lists and polysyndaton, the author creates suspense. It is in this suspense that the true depth of a story emerges.
“Dialogue, too, can support suspense” the more liberal of critics claim.
“Perhaps,” concede others, usually reluctantly and even more frequently, tersely.
“I must ask if there is something wrong,” the more liberal critics must ask.
“No, nothing,” is the inflexible reply.
“Then do you dislike my use of…”
“No. Interruptions are the best way of avoiding a direct confrontation of an issue in dialogue,” the disagreeable critic must remark.
And thus, tension and suspense are both tensed and suspended through dialogue. Here, the mediocre authors give in to the suspense and reveal the central issue of contention between the principal characters. Many years ago, the good writers would use a different technique. When writing was first becoming prominent as a source of entertainment, expressed in the vernacular and thus accessible to people regardless of education or social position, these good writers used lengthy descriptions of some historical event, or at least one in the distant past, in order to prolong the revelation of the central issue. Inevitably, they had to return to their literary present. Good writers today use that same technique, but the truly superior writers can extend the climax indefinitely. In fact, the revelation of the main issue often appears simultaneously with its resolution.
“Writers must learn to use dialogue effectively,” those superior writers proclaim triumphantly.
“Yet the flow of the plot must still seem continuous. How does one do it without using rhetorical questions?” the inferior writers will ask, confounded.
“Dialogue must do some things without doing other things. It must address issues without mentioning them. It must provide context and specific information without revelation,” any superior writer will respond.
“Like evasive dialogue, or dialogue that does not directly state its main objective?” the naïve writer will ask. And to this the superior writer says nothing, for his inferiors have just stated the issue.
At this climax, there is some relief, some resolution of the issue. The author must begin addressing the loose ends, must lengthen the sentences and give the narrator a sort of forlorn, nostalgic voice, somewhat reminiscent of that in the resolution and conclusion of a sad movie. The action has concluded, the short sentences that accentuate the changes and the moving forward of the plot now retire, and in their places are descriptions much like those in the beginning.
“Dialogue is sparse near the conclusion,” ruminates the author.
“Yes. Yes, it is,” agrees the yes-man, grateful that the author is bringing the tale to an end.
And with some profound statement, the author begins his descent. He ties up a few loose ends, makes a wry remark here or there, and then opens the scene for interpretation. Much like the final gusts of a long winter storm, whose fierce winds and bitter cold have ceased to besiege the white landscape, so the author draws one final simile and closes his work, yet with a hint of hope, a glimmer of possibility for a future continuation, flickering ever so faintly in his final words.
You need to log in to urbis or create an urbis account to review this writing.
Reviews
Sort Reviews by Newest | Oldest | Highest Quality | Lowest Quality | Newest Comments |
Brooklynmonk reviewed Version 2 -
Read 100%% of the Item
kind of a pesimistic view of writing. but if that is what you feel, you have expressed it. I didn’t miss the irony/humour in how your anti-writing piece fololowed the predicatable pattern that you were ostensibly writing against. But, the story could be more entertaining, funny, interesting, to make it more readable. i am curious, where are you planning on publishing this piece? or said another way, where would such a pieec be published? and would you work it into a longer piece? or would it stand alone?
- add/view comments (0)
Puttothesword reviewed Version 1 -
Read 100%% of the Item
Entertaining and informative all at the same time. Very good and my hats of too you. You got me with the title, like the fish after bait I had to bite it.
Moontan reviewed Version 1 -
Read 100%% of the Item
Firstly, I’d like to say thank you for giving me a new word to learn: sesquipedalian.
Secondly, I like how the writing of the ‘how to’ for creating a story demonstrates itself. Rather clever. It puts me in mind of such stories as Animal Farm, where the writing is quite simple, but the concept and development is quite complex. At least, it sounds as though it was what you were describing.
Of course, it gives a person some standards to work up to. And I honestly can’t find anything negative to say about it.
hypatia reviewed Version 1 -
Read 100%% of the Item
I enjoyed reading your rules guide. You state so clearly the so called hierachy of writers. The scholars and the dumbfounded, myself the latter.
It reads like a confusing bombardment of advice – which is how I see it.
And yet like mud thrown at a wall you come away with some points clarified. Hurray
wordwan reviewed Version 1 -
Read 100%% of the Item
I think this is the reason instruction of English composition should be removed from the classroom.
grin
The wrong kinds of people are teaching it.
I loved this. You didn’t miss a hair. You should show this piece to Lawrence Block—I’m serious. He used to do instructional pieces for magazines. His stuff was great.
go here:
http://www.lawrenceblock.com
and look, under books, for “Telling lies for fun and profit.”
And here, on amazon.com; there’s a table of contents and some prose, as well:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0688132286/lawrenceblock
Thank you for your words.
wordwan
Fatherspirit reviewed Version 1 -
Read 100%% of the Item
Sexy words indeed!
I enjoyed the ‘warring’ tone in parts and insertion of factions etc.
Have to admit that your use of italics and subsequent punctuation is a lot cleaner than mine ever is.
Your writing style is crisp and the subtle humour of ‘Literary Masturbation’ made me chuckle.
A real lesson in grammar and the rules of language, but handled with so much more panache than any of my high school teachers could ever manage!
‘Superior writer’ and ‘yes-man’, terms implying ego-driven character studies never fail to put a smile on my face.
Your insight is splendid and turn of phrase employed spot on!
Thanks! It was a great pleasure to read!
bmcanally reviewed Version 1 -
Read 100%% of the Item
Clever essay. I unfortunately became bored with the dialogue, even though I “got it.” I thought you betrayed your own effort from the get-go without providing a lead sentence that grabbed me and wouldn’t let me go, and that your extended metaphor could have been even a bit more extension for the illustrative purposes.
In all a good job, perhaps a bit too lenghty, but overall worth the time and effort.
xurs reviewed Version 1 -
Read 100%% of the Item
Absolute slam dunk. Brilliant use of sesquipedalian. My favorite part: When writing was first becoming prominent as a source of entertainment, expressed in the vernacular and thus accessible to people regardless of education or social position, these good writers used lengthy descriptions of some historical event, or at least one in the distant past, in order to prolong the revelation of the central issue.
Actually, I loved the use of short sentences paragraph as well. Virtually all of this brilliantly executed and aptly titled.
hockeyslife reviewed Version 1 -
Read 100%% of the Item
This was a very interesting take on writing, and I really liked it! Makes me appreciate our work more, and also makes me see that more goes into it than we realize initially! I really, really loved your last sentance. It was so…beautiful. Great job, there isn’t anything wrong with it.
Idrequired reviewed Version 1 -
Read 100%% of the Item
This is one of the best pieces of writing I have read on urbis. You started this was for fun. It definitely is entertaining with the way you show the reader as you and tell them as they read. It is quite a clever way to show the different types of writing and writers. I laugh, smiled and learned many new things in your non-fiction story. You would make a good teacher. You are subtle and funny and people learn even if they don’t realize it from what you have written.
Showing 1 - 10 of 11
Next →
Review item
Add to favesCreator
Relevant Links
Item Stats
GENERAL
1 Review 0 Comments
Version 2
Latest Activity: over 2 years ago
REVIEW QUEUE
Appeared in Queue: 0 Times
Skipped: 0 Times
Versions
| Version 2 |
| Version 1 |