by Clare Langley-Hawthorne
http://www.clarelangleyhawthorne.com/
http://www.clarelangleyhawthorne.com/
I’m trying to ignore the pervasive sense of doom and gloom drifting westward after the BEA in New York but I have to confess it doesn’t help when I’m in that ‘this is utter crap’ stage in my own writing. So instead of wrestling with the page my husband and I decided to watch Australia on DVD – an event we faced with some degree of trepidation – given what critics (including my own mum) have warned us about – that the film suffers from a serious case of ‘bloat’.
My own books have been accused by some of being too short (actually people have said ‘I loved it but write a longer book next time!’) – but when a story is done, it’s done and it’s extremely irritating to read books that have been puffed up and bloated by all sorts of unnecessary techniques that make you experience (usually about three-quarters of the way through) the sinking feeling that the book should, by now, be over. I call it the ‘Titanic’ effect because quite frankly three-quarters of the way through that movie, I was like ‘just sink already!’ (followed shortly thereafter by ‘just die already!’)
Some of the pernicious ‘bloat’ techniques for me are:
- Unnecessary description – I love gorgeous, evocative prose that creates atmosphere and sense of place. What I don’t appreciate is pages and pages of description that quite frankly as a reader I end up skipping. I subscribe to the Raymond Chandler approach where less, skillfully done, is best.
- Convoluted sub-plots and twists- the ones that don’t really add to the overall plot but seem to be merely a device to prolong the inevitable. If they involve secondary characters that I am not invested in (or care about) then it’s all the more yawn-inducing. Which brings me to…
- An unnecessary large cast of characters – the ones that sprawl endlessly and which serve only to pad out the book till it’s bursting at the seams. As far as I’m concerned unless you’re Dickens this is too hard to pull off; and
- Too many ‘themes’ and ‘issues’ that make you feel as though you suddenly stumbled onto a lecture series…or a non-fiction book.
So what are in your mind the worst offenders in ‘bloat-dom’?…what makes you think ‘enough already’ and realize that the books could have been done in say, 200 less pages…or in the case of Australia 2 hours less….
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coming up on our Kill Zone Guest Sundays, watch for blogs from Sandra Brown, Steve Berry, Robert Liparulo, Paul Kemprecos, Linda Fairstein, Julie Kramer, Grant Blackwood, and more.
I’ll leave the author unnamed, but one of my favorite thriller writers seems to be bloating his books. Each one seems to be getting thicker and now, the format is larger to accomodate.
Lots of subplots in those that don’t really go anywhere.
Another author I read has shifted from suspense to YA, but one of his later suspense novels went on and on about the scenery; two or three paragraghs to describe the tree in front of a house they were watching. I wanted to throw the book against the wall.
I heard Harlan Coben once say that he takes out what most of us skim over. I think that’s excellent advice.
Thanks, Claire.
I have the exact opposite problem in my own writing. I sped through my first draft (okay, not really, but it felt fast there at the end…) only to realize that my manuscript is right at 68,000 words. Everyone tells me “much too short for a thriller!!” So now I’m going back and I realize that the book could have happened anywhere. You get almost no description of Raleigh (where the book takes place), and it could be Juneau, Alaska for all I’ve written in. But now i have to make sure i am strategic in my placement, without bloating, which means it still won’t be more than 70-75,000 words (STILL too short for a thriller). So what’s a guy to do, y’know?
Like you, I get unnerved by large casts of characters. Since I’m a mom and have to get my reading on the go, I hate having to flip back through the pages to figure out who some bit part character is…
Great post and a good reminder to focus on “just the headlines” and not tons of extras.
Elizabeth
Mystery Writing is Murder
I’m with Claire about Australia AND Titanic. I saw Australia in a theater and sort of liked it, but it was waaaay too long. Probably should have been two separate movies.
I also remember turning to my wife well into Titanic and saying if I didn’t see some ice soon I was going to order up a submarine.
To Jake’s point about the length of thrillers: I think I could be talked into your 75,000 word versions. My main objection with contemporary thrillers is that is almost impossible to stay thrilled for 150,000 words.
Worse than bloat is when you’re reading a novel that is very long, and the ending is resolved too quickly. I’ve read so many books like this–you’re reading along, and then, as though some unseen editor said the book was too long, BAM! it’s over. At least be consistent. If the story has lots of frills, the ending should have them, as well, at least so it makes more sense.
I know, picky, picky. 😉
Karen – you’re so right. There are novels that go on and on and then resolve themselves (look at my tidy bow!) in one chapter leaving the reader wondering – what??! Dana – I think there was a point in Australia where it was obvious the movie was over – and then it went on for nearly another hour (at least I think so – by then my husband and I had given up!). Jnantz, I also have the same problem re: being too short on the first draft but I find the places where texture are needed are obvious – but to Wilfred’s point – some authors seem determined to pad and bloat with description and extra subplots as if the industry now demands it from a thriller. I wonder if publishers or the authors are to blame??
Good points, Clare. I bet contractual word count requirements can contribute to book bloat as well.
And other than being over-directed, over-acted, and way too long, I thought Australia was underwhelming.
Admit it, Australia was awful, Joe. My husband and I were embarrassed…and totally underwhelmed. I think it may be one of the worst movies I’ve seen!
Compare those bloats with some of the classic films of the 30’s and 40’s. 90 minutes. Some great noirs, 65 – 80 minutes (e.g., The Narrow Margin)
Only David Lean should be allowed to make films longer than 2 hours, and he’s no longer with us!
Over describing is a killer for me. I started a book once, can’t remember the name, but by the time the author had finished describing what a couple of characters were wearing, I’d forgotten what the story was about and quit reading.
Jane Kennedy Sutton
http://janekennedysutton.blogspot.com/
I usually end up skipping over the subplots. I find, more often than not, that they don’t add much to the story. If I’m reading an exciting action book, the last thing I want to see is a stopover to visit the family and the kids. Or, in the case of one book, 100 pages of subplot before returning to the main story.
jnatz – I have the same problem. I have urban fantasy that’s weighing at 70K. It’s a little short for urban fantasy, too, and I’ve been struggling to bring it up a few K more.
I am currently listening to CARELESS IN RED by Elizabeth George. I’m in the middle of CD#4 (of 21) and so far there’s been a dead body found. That’s pretty much it for action. She’s also described every tree in Cornwall and characters have shared a lot of soulful looks. To me it’s the epitomy of how not to engage your readers and I’m only persisting because I’m doing more walking and therefore need more audio books which are really expensive to buy and this one was available for free from the library.