Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion

I had a professor once say, "To be a writer is to say you are an artist of the English language".
I pondered this and I wondered if one is to be an artist then the artist must understand their medium extensively. I then, by extension of this idea was curious to know how many writers not only have studied dictionaries but have done so in such a way as to understand the English language well enough to use the words ( that they are artists of) in an abstract way?

What is your opinion on this?

What do you mean, 'use the words in an abstract way'?

An extensive and profound vocabulary is often the hallmark of a fine author. But I suggest that good writers build their vocabularies by reading challenging books, rather than dictionaries. The library of T.S. Eliot, for example, was infamous for what it did to his vocabulary.

But 'painting with words' isn't necessarily *good* prose. Its just one style. The remark of your professor was a bit disingenuous; even narrow. In writing, no one thing can be emphasized; its a mixture of skills.

Lexicon-ical flourishes may indicate a strong vocabulary, but that's not the same as using the vocabulary to any great effect. I'm sure Hemingway had a large vocabulary, but his (very effective) writing style was --as we all know--laconic.

Very, very good point. I never really thought about the complexity of great classical authors (a fine example would be Mark Twain).
What I mean by using vocabulary abstractly...I did not put that the best way...but to use words to create writing styles and tone.
As in puns, etc. That probably still doesn't make alot of sense.

I increase my vocabulary mostly by reading posts by Feliks. I believe the art of writing grows with the author and the goal is to convey meaning within the words. As noted, my favorite author, Hemingway, used simple vocabulary but conveyed incredible meaning. A noun and a verb is all that is required. Words are to paint as grammar is to brush strokes as meaning is to perspective. Get down the basics before advancing to the abstract.

I agree.....
And as most authors say: write and write some more. You have to get used to the steps before the dance flows smoothly and seemingly without effort!

Felix, what books would you consider challenging enough to be a good teaching tool to build ones vocabulary?

Raymond wrote: "I increase my vocabulary mostly by reading posts by Feliks."

I'm seconding this. :)

To me, simple and effective writing - including simplistic words choices - is often more powerful than florid prose.

Vanessa wrote: "What I mean by using vocabulary abstractly...I did not put that the best way...but to use words to create writing styles and tone.
As in puns, etc."

I think you mean a play on words...?

Someone else recently asked this question. I wonder what thread that was...eh, just a month ago, but too long for me to track it down, probably. Still, you should keep a weather-eye out for that discussion, because many more people than just myself, contributed their favorite titles there.

I did make mention of one of the best word-building books I've ever discovered (this 'find' occurred recently). Its this:

The Anatomy of Melancholy

Holy hannah, is it stupendous. The 'Google' of 400 yrs ago. Its a book you could spend a lifetime reading, without wearying (many have already attested to this).

But as I mentioned--this was a 'recent find', so my current vocabulary (such as it is, no great shakes, mind) was probably boosted by reading these works--if any:



These are all very long, prodigious reads and 'juggernauts' like this were once my passion. There were more, but these stick in my memory as being the most pleasurable.

More and more, though, I'm suspecting that one can sidestep even this. A real facility with words is probably helped best by a simple familiarity with Latin roots. The best English prose we know of, is almost always a product of a classical education. Think of all those suffering British pupils who took their painfully-won knowledge of Latin from their public schooling and later went on to become England's great writers. Why, a couple centuries' worth, at least. We laugh at such rigor, it makes great movies..but when searching for the right word, knowing those roots is a phenomenal power. When you cling tightly to Latin, its always the best-sounding choice. The top students in Britain are still among the tops in the world; Oxford has some kind of special quiz which very few can pass.

That's interesting.
When I come out the other side of my current degree program, I'll have a specialization in reading, and we've been discussing topics much like this in several of my classes. Current research actually indicates that reading a dictionary is the best way to NOT improve your linguistic facility. Dictionaries will give no understanding of English, just a list of words. To acquire words, they must be encountered in meaningful context - that is, surrounded by other words that interconnect in ways that form a concept. For instance, if I were to read through the L section of the dictionary, it's unlikely I'd actually remember any new words when I was done. But seeing "laconic" at the end of Feliks' post gives the word context. I have some idea of what it means just from the other words he used, even if I've never seen that particular word before. Knowing or not knowing "laconic" affects my understanding of his entire passage, and so it becomes important to me, personally, to find the meaning of the word. A single word on a page of other unrelated words has no such importance.

And of course, the best place to look for meaningful context is in real communicative texts: good, well-written books.

Pun means a play on words? Right?

For me one of the great wordsmiths is Henry James. I know a lot of people wince when you bring him up---but because I was not an English major--I read him because I liked his writing and I've probably read over a dozen of his books...and thankfully did not have to regurgitate them in an essay!
Other writers who stop me with the fineness of their writing is Saul Bellow and Mark Helprin's "winter's Tale" a wonderful excursion into a New York that never was.

Yep.

And look at this interesting/fun page:
http://eggcorns.lascribe.net/browse-e...

Probably one of the main thrills and obsessions I still maintain in life is to keep reading for that specific and sharp pleasure (alluded to very ably by M.R., above) of finding new words and sayings I've never before encountered. I can't really express how grand it is --and it gets more satisfying as it becomes harder to attain. As M.R. states, it is not so much 'the word', but 'the phrase'. Spot on, MR ...current literacy science fully backs you up, there.

And I would add this: not so much just finding the meaning of the phrase as it is, incorporating the new phrase into your own speech. True joy. To think I can parrot some elegant turn of wit from 400 years ago, to make that phrase fly across the centuries to my lips from someone long rendered into dust...what other magic that we know of, is the beat of that?

Sure, I was perhaps the only New Yorker with 'Anatomy of Melancholy' in my hands all last year, hauling the heavy tome back and forth to work each day..but boy. Was it worth it. Another title that shocked me recently was the first book I sampled from Evelyn Waugh: 'Black Mischief'. Now that man was a master of adroit phraseology.

Arabella wrote: "For me one of the great wordsmiths is..."
Henry James, Saul Bellow, Mark Helprin. Agreed. Top picks, every man jack of 'em.

Its funny--I never think of whole phrases...quotes occasionally...and bits and pieces.
"Men don't make passes at girls who wear glasses." (Dorothy Parker)
And another one from Ms. Parker: "Her handshake was as fake as a Japanese paper napkin." (again paraphrased)
Or "Her life was the significant pause between two glances in a mirror" (paraphrased cuz I can't remember it exactly from The Beautiful and Damned by F. Scott Fitzgerald.

Feliks: What kinds of phrases have you garnered from your reading?

Great Topic! I think this was said in an earlier post, but just as an artist uses a brush and manipulates the strokes to bring beauty to the world, a writer must be able to do the same with his/her words. The key to being a great writer is in the strokes of the brush.

Yeah...isn't it wonderful that Dostoyevsky is so wonderful even though for so many of us it's a translation!

As far as improving vocabulary goes, I find the instant dictionary look-up feature on the Kindle to be an excellent tool.

The dictionary isn't the thing that needs to be studied. It's how to string a sentence together, together with all the other elements of craft. For creative writing, this includes characterisation, plot, setting, worldbuilding, pacing and all the other large elements, as well as more micro-level matters like sentence length, redundancies, using words effectively, using the most powerful words, variation, avoiding repetition and a hundred other things impossible to list from memory.

For technical writing, it would include other elements, like logic progression for example for a lawyer.

As someone else pointed out in an earlier comemnt, words in isolation are meaningless. Context is the important thing.

There are no 'short-cuts' to talent. None. If you've uploaded a video to Youtube, pat yourself on the back..you're so adorable..but you still have zero talent as a movie director. Did you hear me? Zero.

Good post Ciara, but..

Ciara wrote: "micro-level matters like sentence length..."

Sentence-length? When you write you don't think about sentence-length.

Arabella wrote: "What kinds of phrases have you garnered from your reading? ..."

I love old-fashioned phrases, antique sayings, colloquialisms..I use them unconsciously. Its at least 20% of everything I say in a day.

Strands of glib elocution plucked from Evelyn Waugh; Damon Runyon, P.G. Wodehouse..stage plays, vaudeville, radio serials, potboilers, advertising jungles, songs ..not just from literature but classic movies..little bits of 'in-joke' humor; the way I greet people or bid them goodnight..Marx Brothers, W. Somerset Maugham, sometimes western dialect; sometimes long-forgotten scraps of custom and tradition only another rover might know..various bits of mist-from-the-grill..

I wouldn't know how else to go through life. How many times can you mutter to someone, 'yo, what's up dude? oh yeah? that's cool..later..' Gaaaah!

One of the books on my writer's reference shelf is Cassell's Modern Guide To Synonyms & Related Words, which I bought in a secondhand used books store on the Kloveniersburgwal. I have several dictionaries, but you often need context. Cassell's book gives examples to distinguish between synonyms, so you learn the difference between sardonic and sarcastic.

It doesn't replace reading books mentioned by Feliks and Henry, but it will enhance your understanding about the subtle differences between similar words.

Feliks wrote: "Good post Ciara, but..

Ciara wrote: "micro-level matters like sentence length..."

Sentence-length? When you write you don't think about sentence-length."

Oh you do though. Sentence length can have a tremendous impact on a reader, effectively serving to 'pace' prose. Varying the length of sentences is a useful technique in creating mood - my mind is stuck in an old English lesson analysing an Ian Fleming passage where a tarantula crawls over Bond in screamingly short, tense sentences for a couple of pages, before he finally frees himself, kills the creature and vomits in a paragraph-length single sentence that releases the tension built up in the previous section.

Probably a lot of writers do this without thinking. But those who don't, should. It's something I look at when redrafting, every time.

To be a good writer. You just have to write. Whether you take the time to learn good language skills or not is irrelevant. With millions of readers out there and thousands of writers, you'll find an audience no matter what you write. Destroy the past to get to the future. Otherwise, you get bogged down in other people's thoughts, ideas, beliefs, and opinions.--mark :)

The only rule I follow is "Be True To Yourself".

If you like post apocalypse books, The Last Ship has some great prose. If you like reading history books then the two volume abridged Cambridge Medieval World History has some wonderful prose.

Andrew wrote: "Oh you do though...."

Eh. Poppycock, I say. Writers don't actively think about the 'length' of their sentences one-by-one, as they slog through the already-difficult task of writing a 400 page novel. There's way too many other things to think about. If anyone is focusing on this aspect, then that's not writing, that's more like programming. Sentence-length is merely a function or extension of one's voice; which is the part you don't have to think about. Its the effortless part of writing. Editing later (for stylistically-focused passages like terror-stricken dialog between characters), yes obviously that's not the same style as you use when you're describing the the sheen on the ornate grand staircase they were descending moments ago before all hell broke loose. You admit you do this in drafting. Just so. Because the voice you hear when you come up with your descriptions in the first place, your own voice you listen to in your own head as you tell the story..that doesn't require thought and you don't have to measure it out in pieces of length-to-suit. Its as long or as short as your ability to articulate, dictates. Playfulness comes in, when you say to yourself, "How would crusty old Lord Drabblewort welcome this young couple on the eve of their engagement..? Oh, I know--probably like Uncle Basil, let me see if I can imitate how he'd sound..." and then you deliberately switch your voice and write down the phrases as if you were your Uncle Basil. Etc etc etc

The best way to see if sentence length is good : simply read it aloud.
I've read too many first published efforts filled with sentences that would bedevil a flea's progress, they are so hard to get through and untangle

Aye. Agreed. Its a common blunder for new writers to deluge, shower their readers with words.

But what I think I shy away from is the notion that someone would expand or contract their sentences as the thoughts are surfacing in their mind, for the sake of a target audience with a weak vocabulary, or for the sake of overall short book-length or chapter-length. Or, for some other 'marketing' reason. Maybe they do, I don't know..but it strikes me as not very creative, 'true', or genuine a writing-method.

Lord I hope writers don't do that (unless they are doing a for-hire piece and to get paid they have parameters to follow). You just write what comes out and read it and tweak it...etc. I never think of sentence structure--unless I've found its obvious---if that makes sense. Meaning, I realize I am jumping around on the page and the writing isn't flowing smoothly...but for me, that's an easy fix...
(now--getting rid of too much passive voice---aye, therein lies the rub!)

I like to start with a noun and a verb, and then with caution and reason add to it.

I am, I must admit a bit more a "pantster" (as in writing by the seat of...)I'll admit I am not that careful. I dive in. As if I am having a conversation or explaining something to myself and I get carried away. Not by my own awesomeness but by the story in my head and I want to capture it and pin it down like puzzle pieces...

I think the ability to write a good sentence tends to come with experience. My first drafts often have too many short sentences, and I have to consider how to string them together, so my prose will be pleasing to the inner voice of the reader.

I find that with every new book/story that I write I'm able to compose better, requiring less rewrites. And I write less extraneous scenes.

Reprobate: A Katla Novel had so many cut scenes and rewrites that I can fill another 400 pages with the extra material.
Peccadillo: A Katla Novel actually features two chapters that I transposed from Reprobate.
Rogue - A Katla novel hardly needed any rewrites. I only removed two chapters, since one was unnecessary and the other more suited to become a KillFile (short story).

I think, the more you write and the more extensive your vocabulary, the easier you'll compose without needing rewrites.

I don't worry about sentence length, paragraph length or chapter length.
Especially my rough draft features enormous blocks of text that have to be divided into paragraphs. As I turn the block into paragraphs, I also re-evaluate the sentence-length for the correct 'rhythm'.

As to the rhythm of the prose: since one of my protagonists is blind, I have readers who are also blind or visually impaired. One of my blind beta-readers turns my ePub into an mp3 and has the book read to him by a computer voice. He often spots mistakes most beta-readers miss, so an e-reader with text-to-speech feature can be a valuable feature in the editing stage.

I write in scenes and group the scenes into chapters of varying length. My books are between 100,000-115,000 words. And despite the length, my books are considered 'short' because they have a high readability score.

Feliks wrote: "What do you mean, 'use the words in an abstract way'?

An extensive and profound vocabulary is often the hallmark of a fine author. But I suggest that good writers build their vocabularies by read..."

Comparing himself to the famously (and infuriatingly) prolix Thomas Wolfe, Hemingway said he knew all the big words, he just didn't use them.

Feliks wrote: "Someone else recently asked this question. I wonder what thread that was...eh, just a month ago, but too long for me to track it down, probably. Still, you should keep a weather-eye out for that di..."

I agree that the British write the best English (as did the English before them) and it evidently has (or had) to do with the emphasis on Greek and Latin in the public schools. With the general degradation of education there as well as here, such models of clarity as Orwell and Waugh are going the way of the Dodo Bird.

A great thread. I have to rewrite & rewrite. I've developed a 20+ set of rules that I go through in editing. Some can be done in concert, others need a complete and singular run through such as checking tense with "was" etc. Overall it is a lock-step approach and hopefully will get easier the more I write. Dialogue has been my most recent albatross. For now it is just a meticulous task that needs to be done for any level of quality to result :-)

Rory wrote: "A great thread. I have to rewrite & rewrite. I've developed a 20+ set of rules that I go through in editing. Some can be done in concert, others need a complete and singular run through such as che..."

Don't forget to read the dialogue aloud no matter what looks you get.