Simplistic writing

[Orange_Flaaffy]

I've always wondered this:
Many sites say a simple style of writing is bad, and that the more detail you add to the writing the better it is but...
Is a simple style of writing always bad, as a style itself ?
For example, like we were saying in the idea topic about once reading Goosebumps books in grade school. The writing style was very simple but it still allowed us to fill in the blanks, and for many kids it was a favorite series of books for us.
Now as I start to write that 'Choose Your Own Adventure' pokemon style fic I find myself falling back into the simple style of writing that I remember so many of my childhood books having. So I have to ask, is that a bad thing? If simple style is a part of the core format of a type of story does that make it bad overall ?:eh:

[Pips]

I don't think so I mean any kind of style is cool as long as it is clean,easy to read and not
a big mess of things:wink: Personally I like all type sof writing except messy!

=>Pips

[Galleon]

Mm, the term 'simple writing' seems pretty vague. I mean, you can have a complex plot, but still write in a simpler fashion because you want to ensure that your readers understand it more clearly. Or it could be just the opposite. Personally, I find the prior much more interesting than the latter, since devising something intricate and detailed, yet still being able to explain it easily and clearly seems like a much more amazing feat.

It would just depend upon your intended audience, dontcha think? I mean, if you're aiming for a younger audience, then it would be beneficial to try to be more simplistic in your approach. On other hand, that concept wouldn't work as well if you're aiming for a more educated crowd.

But, that's also why I admire a complex plot with a slightly simplified approach. I think it makes the whole ordeal more accessible for folks of different ages, because on the surface, you've got the main things that are easier to see so that you can hook the youngins, but at the same time, you've got that deeper piece to draw in your older readers. Perhaps the most famous example of this would be the Harry Potter series, since it seems to appeal to many different age groups. Of course, I'm not saying that it's the best thing ever written or that you should model your own writing after it, but... just something to keep in mind as your conceive your own style, I suppose.

'least, that's how I see it.

[Orange_Flaaffy]

It is a little vague, but I guess I mean the sort of writing that does not go on and on about surrounding detail but gets right to the point.
I am writing this 'choose your own adventure' type of fic with my target reader being the younger members of the forum I guess you could say:happy: .
Since I link the memory of such books, which focus more on the outcome of the readers actions than surrounding detail (the whole plot focusing on character actions mostly), with that style of story :happy: .

Note: I did not mean I was looking to turn my writing style of all my fics into such a style (Fable is simple to some readers already and I would never dream of trying to change the pov) , just this one :)

[TheStoneRegisteel]

I've started a Choose Your Own Adventure. Read mine, and you'll see how simple and undetailed it is. I just get the basics in. Want to help me?

[Orange_Flaaffy]

I've started a Choose Your Own Adventure. Read mine, and you'll see how simple and undetailed it is. I just get the basics in. Want to help me?
Oh, I would like to help but I am working on my own verison :). It is nice to see what two different writers do with the same idea I think :3. I hope you don't think I am just trying to copy, I got the idea from the same topic on 2nd person pov :)

[TheStoneRegisteel]

Same here. Don';t worry, I don't think you're copying. It'll be good with two games, I agree!

[Dragonfree]

The style that is appropriate depends entirely on what type of mood you're trying to convey and how much is happening, really. You can't make a scene in which nothing of much interest happens seem dark and dramatic without fleshing it out with a bunch of description, for example, while if you try to write that scene eccentrically or humourously, you'll probably spend a great deal less time on it altogether and spend most of that talking about how nothing happened rather than describing the scene.

Something like a "Choose your own adventure" type of thing would most likely work just fine in a simplistic, little-described style as long as you aren't trying to convey some sort of a dark and dramatic mood with it.

[Orange_Flaaffy]

The style that is appropriate depends entirely on what type of mood you're trying to convey and how much is happening, really. You can't make a scene in which nothing of much interest happens seem dark and dramatic without fleshing it out with a bunch of description, for example, while if you try to write that scene eccentrically or humourously, you'll probably spend a great deal less time on it altogether and spend most of that talking about how nothing happened rather than describing the scene.

Something like a "Choose your own adventure" type of thing would most likely work just fine in a simplistic, little-described style as long as you aren't trying to convey some sort of a dark and dramatic mood with it.
My 'Choose You Own Adventure' tone is mostly a comedy, so I think that will do fine. In a way, it is just a fun project for me, rather than one that is meant to be symbolic etc :)

[Deathspector]

My 'Choose You Own Adventure' tone is mostly a comedy, so I think that will do fine. In a way, it is just a fun project for me, rather than one that is meant to be symbolic etc :)

And even if you were writing something dark and dramatic, it would be a sign of a great writer to be able to write it in simple language. People often associate deep stories with hardcore thesaurus picking up language, but in reality it could be as light-hearted as Artemis Fowl.

Deathspector

[PokéJungle]

I don't find simple writing to be all that great.

Goosebumps? Oh yeah, I loved those. Seven years ago. If you're writing for teenagers, then I'd keep out of a 'simplified' fic. It just doesn't have that same charm unless you're in grade school. Lord of the Rings? Not Simple. IT? Not simple. Eragon, which was written by a teen, not simple.

Basically, there's some point were simplified writing just looks like what it's called, simple. And I don't want to fill in the details. I want to see the writer's imagination fill out on the pages of a book (or forum). So no, it isn't a good idea in my opinion.

[Matt]

I think the sites you are reading are referring to the:

Jenny played at the park.
vs.
At the park, Jenny could not stay away from the slide, making a mad dash back to the top every time she reached the bottom.

Something like that. I don't think the sites are speaking of a simple plotline, I think they're referring to giving the reader a better connection through the story through the use of detail, helping it to play like a movie in their head. In my opinion, a good story will make me forget I'm reading.

[PokéJungle]

I think the sites you are reading are referring to the:


vs.


Something like that. I don't think the sites are speaking of a simple plotline, I think they're referring to giving the reader a better connection through the story through the use of detail, helping it to play like a movie in their head. In my opinion, a good story will make me forget I'm reading.
I so agree with that last sentence.

Like Stephen King. His stories just pull you in. (Also good authors are: Ed McBain, Patricia Cornwell, Piers Anthony, and MORE!)

[Orange_Flaaffy]

Of course simple writing is not for everyone. The funny thing is when I was seventeen I thought I was too old and above simple writing styles to. Now at nearly twenty four the idea of reading and writing a simple style does not seem so above me anymore (Note: In the case of writing acertain stories like this).

I would think that as long as the story is enjoyable (in this case a story that is made by the actions you choose), the level of detail would not matter too much :).

But if you want to think that my pokemon CYOA idea is meant only for the 10-13 age group you can. I never let age stop me from reading childrens books as well as normal 'adult' books (most of which are actually written for a 5th grade reading level, did you know?) so I don't know why I'd do the same for writing them ;)

Eragon, which was written by a teen, not simple.
I also hate Eragon with a passion, so you will never see me copying it's style ;)

Piers Anthony is one of my all time favorite authors :). Please don't think my desire to write a simple worded story is for any lack of reading, that is just silly :P

[Kenny_C.002]

If you look at short story writers in general, they tend to have a powerful yet very simplistic writing style tht gets the point across. Remember that simple writing style =/= simple. The ability to paint the scene may be a great ability to have, but generally that slows down the story's pace. If you read JRR Tolkein, you'll understand how an extreme side of this detail is actually too much a burden on the story rather than enchancing it. It's all a delicate balance, and I personally think that erring to the side of simplicity is infinitely better than erring toward the complex.

[Orange_Flaaffy]

If you look at short story writers in general, they tend to have a powerful yet very simplistic writing style tht gets the point across. Remember that simple writing style =/= simple. The ability to paint the scene may be a great ability to have, but generally that slows down the story's pace. If you read JRR Tolkein, you'll understand how an extreme side of this detail is actually too much a burden on the story rather than enchancing it. It's all a delicate balance, and I personally think that erring to the side of simplicity is infinitely better than erring toward the complex.
Thank you Kenny :). It's nice to know someone understands what I am trying to say. I think too much of the time people think the only good type of writing is very complex (in wording/style/detail) :P.

[katiekitten]

Simple is best. =3 I'm actually having difficulty attempting to simplify my writing, for although I like it as it is, my beta reader, Ej, won't leave me alone about it. XD But I totally agree with her. I just like my adjectives too much. ;_;

[Deathspector]

Simple is best. =3 I'm actually having difficulty attempting to simplify my writing, for although I like it as it is, my beta reader, Ej, won't leave me alone about it. XD But I totally agree with her. I just like my adjectives too much. ;_;

But here, you're spaking what you believe to be complex writing. I try to explain this over and over again, but description is not a sign of complex writing. It is usually present in complex writing, but it need not. Complex writing could be written with as few adjectives as possible, but using a complicated sentence structure, and dealing with more complicated themes. Eragon's is written simply, no matter what other people say. He used his words well, but not his ideas. If you get what I mean.

PokéJungle, take Ernest Hemmingway. Probably one of my favourite authors; his writing is extremely simple, but his stories still draw me in. It's not the complexity of the story that marks it as a good story, but the ability of the author to do what he does best, and still draw people in.

Long live Hemmingway.

Deathspector

[katiekitten]

*nods* I get it, thanks. =D

[Shiny Loser]

i think simple is better than completely adult writing. when you write too complicated, it looks like you're trying way too hard to impress than to entertain.

[Lord Voldemort]

If you look at short story writers in general, they tend to have a powerful yet very simplistic writing style tht gets the point across. Remember that simple writing style =/= simple. The ability to paint the scene may be a great ability to have, but generally that slows down the story's pace. If you read JRR Tolkein, you'll understand how an extreme side of this detail is actually too much a burden on the story rather than enchancing it. It's all a delicate balance, and I personally think that erring to the side of simplicity is infinitely better than erring toward the complex.

Yeah, if you've read LOTR, you'll know that he puts too much detail and makes the story go slow.

For a choose your own adventure book, I would say that simplistic is better, especially if its a comedy.

[Deathspector]

Yeah, if you've read LOTR, you'll know that he puts too much detail and makes the story go slow.

Well, actually, in Tolkien's time, there was no such thig as TV, and people had only seen the places that they had lived. I know that Tolkine likved in South Africa, and most of Middle Earth is based upon South African topography (I lived there, myself so I know what it looks like). But if no one had ever seen South Africa, and he didn't go ino that much description, people would have trouble imagining it.

It's okay for authors like Rowling, Colfer, and to a certain extent Paolini, as they don't have to describe things too much because people already know what it looks like. But Tolkien didn't have that luxury...

Deathspector

[Kenny_C.002]

Specter, you have to understand that too much description, for ANY time, is a bad thing. We have writers like Mansfield who, if you look at her short stories collections, does not write descriptively dispite the fact that there is no TV and no pictures. There is no need for it. Tolkien's means may have been justified, but the delivery still made LOTR a burden.

[Galleon]

Specter, you have to understand that too much description, for ANY time, is a bad thing. We have writers like Mansfield who, if you look at her short stories collections, does not write descriptively dispite the fact that there is no TV and no pictures. There is no need for it. Tolkien's means may have been justified, but the delivery still made LOTR a burden.
Well, too much of anything is a bad thing; otherwise, it's not too much, no?

As for me, I find that description is desirable in different amounts according to different situations. But in the end, it's the writer's decision as to which situations are most deserving. Personally, scenes of distinct tension and importance usually qualify. Yes, that's pretty vague, but hey, writing is a vague thing to begin with. There are exceptions to pretty much everything. Hell, that's part of what makes grammar so troublesome, for the English language, at least.

And it's like description is the end-all-be-all of storytelling goodness, as some of you have mentioned. Describing a piece of crap only makes it stink more vividly. Gotta take into account what's actually happening within the text, weave things together in a coherent enough fashion that other folks will comprehend it all, and of course, make it interesting. Picking what you want to write about is arguably the most difficult part of writing. How you write is something that can be learned, refined, polished, and all those other fancy words, but finding something that will actually make you 'want to write about it, especially for an extended period of time, isn't something that can be nailed down with an kind of accuracy. It's a decision that's entirely up to the author. That's it.

[Deathspector]

Specter, you have to understand that too much description, for ANY time, is a bad thing. We have writers like Mansfield who, if you look at her short stories collections, does not write descriptively dispite the fact that there is no TV and no pictures. There is no need for it. Tolkien's means may have been justified, but the delivery still made LOTR a burden.

Agreed, I mean Hemingway got a Nobel prize because he didn't describe things too much. I'm very much on the not-to-much-description "side", but I love Tolkien's works, and felt the need to explain. The description did make LOTR, and more importantly, the Sil, a major difficulty in getting through – especially when you're not too old, and don't know a lot of words –, but you have to admit that it did make you really picture the scene in your mind. I would never have imagined the Mines of Moria how the were, had I only read the Hobbit; LOTR gave me the perfect image, and I think the movie people screwed it up.

Galleon, I have to agree with you. It's all very easy to take flowery words, and explain situation, but coming up with the situation is the difficult part. But is this really the point of the thread?

Deathspector

[Lord Voldemort]

I'm very much on the not-to-much-description "side", but I love Tolkien's works, and felt the need to explain.
Deathspector


Hey, I like LOTR, it's one of my favorite books.

[Galleon]

Galleon, I have to agree with you. It's all very easy to take flowery words, and explain situation, but coming up with the situation is the difficult part. But is this really the point of the thread?
Isn't it? Where ‘simplistic writing’ crosses over to ‘complex writing’ is an almost indistinguishable line, if you ask me. Even though it’s a big part of writing, description shouldn't decide whether a manuscript is consider simplistic or not. There are many, many different elements to think about when it comes to writing. If you've reached a point where you think you've figured everything out, then that only weakens your capacity as a writer. It's that feeling of striving for improvement that helps us continue our growth.

Really, 'simplistic' is just a matter of perspective. It all depends upon what the author wants to do.

[Orange_Flaaffy]

Galleon, I have to agree with you. It's all very easy to take flowery words, and explain situation, but coming up with the situation is the difficult part. But is this really the point of the thread?

Nope, it is'nt ;). The point of this topic is meerly if simple writing can be a truly good style in its own right for its own reasons of being used. People often only link true worthwhile writing with the use of huge words and mountains of detail, but I think it is more than that...

It's that feeling of striving for improvement that helps us continue our growth.

Yes, but you don't have to be doing that with everything you write. Sometimes it is nice to just write for fun. If you don't take an easy every once and a while I've found that writing can become overblown, and you lose sight of why you wanted to write in the first place. It is nice, I think, to get back to your roots and just write for writings sake again :). Everyone should do that I think (for a story or two) , pushing yourself untill your passion for writing burns out does no good to anyone, least of all your own stories or readers.

That's what my CYOA story is to me, a short little break :)

[Galleon]

Nope, it is'nt ;). The point of this topic is meerly if simple writing can be a truly good style in its own right for its own reasons of being used. People often only link true worthwhile writing with the use of huge words and mountains of detail, but I think it is more than that...
Fair enough, but at the same time, people also tend to have a very skewed idea of what 'simple' really is. And since I've already pointed out that I think a simple style can be effective if utilized properly, I had thought to only elaborate on what Kenny and Deathspector had been discussing. Perhaps it was unfitting of me to throw my personal tendencies into the mix, but... oh well. I apologize. :tongue:

Yes, but you don't have to be doing that with everything you write. Sometimes it is nice to just write for fun. If you don't take an easy every once and a while I've found that writing can become overblown, and you lose sight of why you wanted to write in the first place. It is nice, I think, to get back to your roots and just write for writings sake again :). Everyone should do that I think (for a story or two) , pushing yourself untill your passion for writing burns out does no good to anyone, least of all your own stories or readers.
That's a good point. A break from the more intense writing sessions can be helpful in the long run.

However, I really can't find much incentive to write unless it's something I'm trying to put considerable effort into. I suppose it's just my style, but if I'm going to write just for the heck of it, I'd sooner just not write at all and go play video games or something. :oops: Though, that's not to say I'm always trying to keep the tension piping hot throughout the story. I think another type of break could be to just let things simmer down with the story as the plot changes gears and starts heading in a new direction. Yes, that'd only be applicable for ongoing stories, but hey, that's just how I write. :ermm:

[Orange_Flaaffy]

To me writing for fun is just as fun as a video game, becuase I have control over everything :). Writing for fun does not mean you don't put in any effort, it just means that you do not try to live up to other peoples ideas of what is writing about and how to write to. It's like daydreaming, only on paper.:)

Actually, now that I think of it, Fable is this, only with a bit higher vocab in the details. The only differentice between it and my for fun stories is that it has years of planining behind it and there are times I actually have to research things. That and it has...a message in it.
That's it I think, the difference between the two: For fun writing to me does not have a moral, and deeper writing does. They could both have the same level of detail, but simple fiction writing is meant only to take the reader away from real world, and deeper writing has something you take away at the ending. It could be a moral, or mood...

[Shiny Loser]

To me writing for fun is just as fun as a video game, becuase I have control over everything :)....


My sentiments exactly. I spend my free time writing stories - not a common hobby for teens. I don't know why, but people prefer TV to writing.

[Deathspector]

My sentiments exactly. I spend my free time writing stories - not a common hobby for teens. I don't know why, but people prefer TV to writing.

I know what you mean. When I go to school, my friends are talking about the latest episode in the OC, while I'm trying my best to make my stories sound more interesting. It's odd, and sometimes I feel left out, but when I'm writing, I don't really care what others feel, but what I feel. I only write when I feel like. I have times when writing is so much fun for me, and other times a burden. But when it's a burden, if I write for about half-an-hour, it becomes fun again...XD

Deathspector