Changes I would make

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 177444

bboyminn wrote:
> 
> One problem with 'literary' writing is the incessant need for style
over substance. 
> 
> As an example, in most high school English Composition
> classes, you are usually given two grades. Your 
> composition might come back looking like this  +C/-B. 
> Meaning that from a technical literary and style aspect,
> you did C+ work; from a storytelling aspect, you did
> B- work.
> 
> Too many post-modern realists believe that a book
> should be all style. They operate under the mistaken
> belief that if you do everything 'technically' correct
> then you writing something of significants. Of course,
> any rational person, and certainly the buying public,
> know that isn't true. We don't want perfect style;
> we want a good captivating story. I'll take a good
> story badly written over a bad story perfectly written
> every time. Of course, ideally, I want a good story 
> nicely written. 
> 
> As for technical style, JKR breaks many many rules.
> For example, she uses asides and parenthetical 
> expressions. She also uses 'all-caps' expressions.
> Your high school English teacher will generally hold
> these against you. However, I think JKR weaves them
> skillfully into her story, and further believe that
> they add to rather than subtract from the story.
> 
> Finally, the story itself. To me story, not style, 
> is the God of good writing. JKR is a master story-
> teller. She weaves a magical story spell that many
> many many many many nights has keep me up reading
> way past my bedtime and into the dawn.
> 
> So, after all this rambling, maybe Grade B is about
> right from a technical perspective with regard to 
> JKR's writing, but for me she is absolutely Grade
> A++ in storytelling. 
> 
> 
> > Laura:
> >
> > Finally, someone pointed out the "she said / he said +
> > adverb" problem, something that I had NEVER noticed
> > before, even though I have read all of the books multiple
> > times and listened to them on audio in the American,
> > British, and German versions.  ...
> 
> bboyminn:
> 
> The adverb thing I think refers, as others have said,
> to JKR's tendency to say -
> 
> He said angrily...
> 
> Said Harry softly...
> 
> ...Ron said shyly...
> 
> ...Hermione said furiously...
> 
> In the earlier books, she maybe over does it a bit,
> but most of the time I am so caught up in the story
> and so interest in what is happening to the 
> characters, that I don't notice it. Though I will 
> concede she has improved in the later books. Still
> adverbs are a valid literary device, and work
> quite well if you mix it up a bit with other methods. 

Carol responds:

I'm not sure I'd call what you're referring to a "literary" writing
style though writers who use overly formal diction, unnecessarily long
words, and "purple prose" may be attempting to sound literary. Editors
try to eliminate these weaknesses, along with cliches, euphemisms,
unnecessary passive voice, and needless abstraction. It's essentially
the same problem that professors encounter with graduate students who
want to sound sophisticated and the general public has to endure with
everyone from cops to salespeople to weathermen trying to sound fancy
and formal ("emergency situation," "precipitation event").

Never having seen one of JKR's drafts (I can't decipher her writing on
her website), I'm not sure how much editing her manuscripts have
undergone. I do know that had I been the copyeditor, I would have
changed a word or two, starting with "fug" in HBP, and eliminated the
misplaced modifiers (which I know are there even in DH but which I
couldn't find because for some reason, I'm finding it less easy to
memorize key segments of that book than its predecessors, either
because I'm focused on particular chapters or because I'm still
figuring out what happened and why (and what might have happened "if
only," a topic I haven't posted on here because it's not really
canon-related).

You seem to be using "style" rather dismissively, as if it were an
unimportant component of good writing, but ideally, style and
substance work together. It doesn't matter how well a story is
constructed or how exciting the elements of the plot are if it's
written so clumsily that the reader is distracted and can't identify
with the characters. (Some readers can't get through "Moby Dick"
because they're put off by its discursive and wordy style or by the
"thees" and "thous" of the characters with a Quaker background--an
error on Melville's part, actually, since the Quakers said "thee" but
not "thou," but Melville wanted Ahab and Starbuck to sound
Shakespearean or even biblical.)

At any rate, I think "B" (or "E," if we're using OWL grades) is a fair
grade for JKR's style as edited (maybe the copyeditor rather than JKR
deserves the B for not improving the diction and sentence structure in
the few places where the flaws are noticeable. The style isn't
excellent (either invisible or adding to the effect), but it's above
average, certainly better than most of the manuscripts submitted to me
for editing, which contain gems that I'd love to post here but can't
because it would be a discourtesy to my "clients" (euphemism for
"customers," which for some reason we're not supposed to use, possibly
because it calls attention to the business aspect of editing).

Regarding adverbs, here's some advice from an excellent website on
writing style: "Begin by avoiding adjectives and adverbs. Only use
them when the noun or verb can't do the job alone. Used sparingly,
adjectives or adverbs can have a powerful impact." IOW, it's best to
convey meaning through concrete nouns and strong verbs in the active
voice. But, like the passive voice, which should be used only "when
you don't know who did it, your readers don't care who did it, or you
don't want them to know who did it," adverbs and adjectives do have
their uses. "Furious" and "furiously," for example, quite clearly
convey a particular degree of anger in much the same way as "his face
contorted in fury." 

Here's a link to the site, which I highly recommend to anyone
interested in writing fiction or fanfic:

http://www.esc.edu/esconline/across_esc/writerscomplex.nsf/0/336aa1a4426e652a852569c3006c815d?OpenDocument#passive

Eggplant suggested that adverbs become annoying through the repetition
of "-ly," but the incessant repetition of "said" with no synonyms or
adverbs or substitution of action for attribution can be equally
tiresome. Just read a passage from William Saroyan to get a taste of
pure unadulterated "said":

"Mr. Spangler watched him a moment and then said, "How do you like
being a messenger?"

""How do I like it?" Homer said. "I like it better than anything. You
sure get to see a lot of different people. You sure get to go to a lot
of different places."

""Yes, you do," Spangler said. He paused to look at the boy a little
closer. "How did you sleep last night?"

""Fine," Homer said. "I was pretty tired but I slept fine.""

Actually, Saroyan blends the dialogue with action, but the "said,
said, said" effect is noticeable and, for some readers, annoying.

JKR's style is more varied. Here's a sample from DH:

""But you'd have been better, much better, than Fudge or Scrimgeour!"
burst out Harry. 

""Would I?" asked Dumbledore heavily. "I am not so sure. I had proven,
as a very young man, that power was my weakness and my temptation. It
is a curious thing, Harry, but perhaps those who are best suited to
power are those who have never sought it. <snip> I was safer at
Hogwarts. I think I was a good teacher-–"

""You were the best--"

""--you are very kind, Harry. But while I busied myself with the
training of young wizards, Grindelwald was raising an army. They say
he feared me, and perhaps he did, but less, I think, than I feared him.

""Oh, not death," said Dumbledore, in answer to Harry's questioning
look" (DH Am. ed. 717-18).

The dialogue is mixed with action, as in the Saroyan example, but the
attributions are also varied, some missing, some using "said" alone,
some using synonyms ("asked," "burst out") along with an occasional
adverb ("heavily"). She also varies the position of "said," so
sometimes we have "Harry said" or "Dumbledore said" and sometimes it's
"said Harry" or "said Dumbledore." (Most writers are more consistent
in following a pattern, either "said X" or "X said." I'm not sure
whether the inconsistency is a flaw or not; I'd say not since it isn't
distracting.) The passage is very readable, the chief flaw being the
length of the snipped commentary from DD. It's varied, it appeals to
sight as well as hearing, and the reader has no difficulty in
following it. We know which character is speaking.

I'll rewrite in in an exaggerated Saroyan/Hemingway style to
illustrate my point:

""But you'd have been better, much better, than Fudge or Scrimgeour!"
Harry said. 

""Would I?" Dumbledore said. "I am not so sure. I had proven, as a
very young man, that power was my weakness and my temptation. It is a
curious thing, Harry, but perhaps those who are best suited to power
are those who have never sought it. <snip> I was safer at Hogwarts. I
think I was a good teacher-–"

""You were the best--" Harry said.

""--you are very kind, Harry," Dumbledore said. "But while I busied
myself with the training of young wizards, Grindelwald was raising an
army. They say he feared me, and perhaps he did, but less, I think,
than I feared him." 

"Harry looked at him but said nothing.

""Oh, not death," said Dumbledore."

Which is better? I prefer JKR's (or her editor's) version to my silly
succession of "saids." Which is not to say that JKR's writing is
perfect. "Burst out" is, IMO, exactly right in the quoted passage, but
the use of synonyms can be overdone. For example, one page (which I
forgot to bookmark as I was flipping through DH) has "Hermione
panted," "Ron wheezed," and "Hermione panted" a second time in quick
succession. Not a major flaw, by any means, but I'd have changed the
second "Hermione panted" to "Hermione said, still gasping for breath,"
or something along those lines.

Carol, who believes that grace and precision and concreteness shape
the reader's emotional response to a story and make it "real" in a way
that clumsy, abstract, pompous writing can't 

P.S. In case anyone is a Saroyan fan, I'm not accusing him of being
"clumsy, abstract, or pompous." I was only showing what happens when
an author incessantly uses "said" with few synonyms and no adverbs to
vary the dialogue. I could have used Hemingway's "Short Happy Life of
Francis Macomber" to illustrate the same point:

http://www.geocities.com/cyber_explorer99/hemingwaymacomber.html