# Polar Opposite Writing Styles



## ViKtoricus (Mar 10, 2014)

I was having a discussion a few days ago with thepancreas and I asked him about what he thought of my writing style. This was his whole reply (I got his permission to post it here):



_You're very direct, often blunt, straightforward and uni-directional. Your story has plot and you adhere to it pretty strongly. There's not a lot of deviation, no asides, no stylistic paragraphs.

 I'm the opposite. When I write, there are all sorts of little tidbits that I shove in there. I write in a web with various concurrent thoughts that splay out at the beginning of a scene and then come back together at the end.

 Both are effective, both can be successful, neither is better than the other. I'm a forest path that winds it's way over rocks and valleys and streams, and you're an interstate that bolts through cityscape. They're both beautiful things when used effectively. Let me try to write two paragraphs about the same thing written in both styles.

 Describing a scene of surfacing submarine.

 I might write it this way:
 White foam bursts forth from the water, the first hint of the monster lurking beneath. The shadow of it trembles with the waves, the perpetual motion machine of air and sea, that which tears down all things in time. What is it that could disturb mother ocean? An eye appears, not one befitting of the dark thing, but small, inquisitive. It dances on it's stalk, spins and retreats, more in line with a curious sea-going rodent than the behemoth it belongs to. Whatever report it gives it's master must make the monster angry. She screams from the depths with waves of ballast, bubbles and sea water roiling, the waves divided on which way they are to go, convinced they should be running from her in any case. Black and slick and steel she rises, pushing nature aside. She plunges through the surface, breeching for a moment, slapping the water with her flanks. She breathes a sigh and takes in the sun.

 You might write it this way:
 The USS Clinton has been at sea for six months. Her crew hasn't seen land in almost two. They haven't seen the surface since Thursday. It's almost Wednesday. Captain McLanahan wraps his fingers around the periscope handle tightly. He presses his eye to the piece, turns the entire circle, and sees nothing, just blue as far as the eye can see. Dark blue water. Light blue air. Doesn't matter. It's all blue. That's better than black. It's certainly better than gray. The last thing he wants to see an outline on the horizon. His crew needs air. Stuck down here in this hollow metal coffin, they've started going crazy. Six days without sunlight will do that to a man. He nods and the Ballast Officer takes the signal. He heres his own words echoed back to him through the chain of command. The floor slants, his ears pop. He takes a firm hold of the bulkhead. There's an instant where his stomach rises into his throat, where he feels completely weightless, and then the ship levels out. He rocks back onto his heels and breathes with the pressure valves. He gives the command to rouse the men. Tonight, they'll get some real air in their lungs.

 Now, they're both effective in communicating the point and the emotion that comes with the topic. One is very languid, very metaphoric, very sensory. The other is very human, very straight, very easy to read. It really comes down to personal preference. I would love to see you try the first style just so that you can get a feel for descriptive flair. That will help when you transition back to your straight style. If you notice, the way I wrote the second paragraph, there's just enough description in there to really convey feeling and setting. That's what you should be aiming for. 



_I'd like to start a discussion about this whole writing style thing in general. Which do you prefer? Which is your writing style? Are you in between? Etc.


----------



## Jeko (Mar 10, 2014)

When two people's writing styles are dramatically different, they can learn a lot from each other.

The two styles displayed both read like rough drafts.


----------



## Sam (Mar 10, 2014)

Does it really matter how I write? All that matters is how _you _write.


----------



## ViKtoricus (Mar 10, 2014)

Sam said:


> Does it really matter how I write?



Yes.

I believe a writer has to know his competition well.


----------



## Jeko (Mar 10, 2014)

> I believe a writer has to know his competition well.



Competition? There's no competition. My activities have no effect on your success; you are only competing with yourself. And in that case, you should stop that - seek support, not competition, if you want to succeed.


----------



## Sam (Mar 10, 2014)

ViKtoricus said:


> Yes.
> 
> I believe a writer has to know his competition well.



I'm not your competition.


----------



## thepancreas11 (Mar 10, 2014)

Vik, it's not so much a competition, they're just different. Just as I have a lot of trouble writing in your writing style, you'd probably have a lot writing in mine. That's because we're very different writers. You just have to embrace what you've got and go with it. What I learn from you is that sometimes it's best just to say it rather than trying to be clever about it, and maybe what you could take from mine is that sometimes, it really hits home when you give the reader a scene to see.

I like your style as much as I like my own.


----------



## Bishop (Mar 10, 2014)

Firstly, drop all pretense about competition. This isn't who buys what type of laundry soap, this is writing. A person can, and most likely will, read many, many writers. I write sci-fi. This does not mean that I am in direct competition with every other sci-fi author out there. They're not taking business away from me by writing, in fact just the opposite. Fiction is a living, growing community where writers help one another out to become great. I read other writers to become a better writer. X published a sci-fi book, and people bought it. That doesn't mean they'll never buy my book. It means they like X. Possibly me as well. I buy X's book. I read X's book. I learn something new about writing, some new technique that makes me better. That's the opposite of competition.

Next, style is built, voice is found, and personality is unique. No one's writing style is perfect, and there is no "right" writing style. Mine is descriptive, with a focus on character perception. Others might be focused on describing scene and setting. Some, like yours, have little to no description. There's no right answer, only shades of color as we each write like an artist using different brushes and technique. It's different, and that's okay. That's good. It makes people more apt to keep looking.

Bishop


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Mar 10, 2014)

Actually, those two paragraphs are the same style with a different focus.  One focuses on the submarine from the outside; the other focuses on the submarine from the inside.  Both are (in my mind) far too wordy and neither serves the plot, but at least the latter paragraph offers some insight on the characters.  The first one doesn't even get that far.

When I write, I'm only concerned about one thing: telling the story.  If descriptions serve that purpose, great, but I find they rarely do.  I write as an author what I'd care about as a reader.


----------



## Apple Ice (Mar 10, 2014)

I don't think there is a need to start slapping Viktoricus about. If that's how he feels then so be it. Technically speaking everyone is each others competition, just like music artists in the charts. Although I think you need to be published before you are actually competition. I think all Viktor wanted was to start a conversation about how we all write and what we prefer. 

Sam, seeing as you are an administrator and have an official capacity on this website I think you should conduct yourself in a more professional manner. That was personally rude towards a member.

As for the question, I think it is the same answer with most questions about writing, whichever is best for you. I personally don't describe settings very much at all and I know for as long as I write I will never describe a sunset. I often see writers describe a setting and I think this is boring, but at the end they make it relevant and it works well. That's quite a commendable ability I think. As for me, I think I'm more like you Vik, I just go straight to it


----------



## Kyle R (Mar 10, 2014)

I've found my style of writing evolves over time. How I write today will be different than how I write a year from now.

For that reason, I try not to worry about it too much.

As for what I prefer, I lean more toward simple punchy writing, rather elaborate, artistic prose. I've tried my hand at beautiful, Ray Bradbury-esque writing, but it's really not my natural tone.

Since then, I've learned to travel the path of least resistance and write how I feel most comfortable. As a result, my style has come out on its own. :encouragement:


----------



## Tettsuo (Mar 10, 2014)

I find it funny that a reviewer noted I have a very descriptive style.

I don't think my style is descriptive at all!

So what you perceive is lacking in description, may not be at all in-line with what others think of your work.  Just something to think about.


----------



## bookmasta (Mar 10, 2014)

Cadence said:


> Competition? There's no competition. My activities have no effect on your success; you are only competing with yourself. And in that case, you should stop that - seek support, not competition, if you want to succeed.



This. That is, after all, the point of a writing forums such as WF.


----------



## Outiboros (Mar 10, 2014)

ViKtoricus said:


> I'd like to start a discussion about this whole writing style thing in general. Which do you prefer? Which is your writing style? Are you in between? Etc.


I couldn't say with certainty. I can't value my own writing style, just as I can't describe my own voice. It's just natural to me. Though I do find my writing style varies greatly between projects; in a satiric fantasy story, it was much more bare-bones and to-the-point than in my science fiction stories and one epic fantasy story, where I allowed myself to be more verbose.

I'd say I tend more towards the descriptive and the introspective. One thing I can say for sure is that I always stick very close to the minds of my characters, and that the world I write is described only through how they perceive it. I only barely have scenes like the first example, where there is no perceiving character but only a incorporeal narrator. Here and there a small introductory passage, maybe, but never more than that. It's always through the characters with me.

What you get is that the characters each get their own 'voice'. In my current WIP, a science-fiction story, the narration is split between a group of children, a Doctor of Neurology, and a Navy Captain, who all have developed their own prose. It's fun to switch from the Doctor - heavy, verbose, cynical, introspective - to the children - colourful, simpler, much less intellectual and far more social.

So there you have it. Polar opposites, back to back.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Mar 10, 2014)

Bishop said:


> Firstly, drop all pretense about competition. This isn't who buys what type of laundry soap, this is writing. A person can, and most likely will, read many, many writers. I write sci-fi. This does not mean that I am in direct competition with every other sci-fi author out there. They're not taking business away from me by writing, in fact just the opposite. Fiction is a living, growing community where writers help one another out to become great. I read other writers to become a better writer. X published a sci-fi book, and people bought it. That doesn't mean they'll never buy my book. It means they like X. Possibly me as well. I buy X's book. I read X's book. I learn something new about writing, some new technique that makes me better. That's the opposite of competition.
> 
> Next, style is built, voice is found, and personality is unique. No one's writing style is perfect, and there is no "right" writing style. Mine is descriptive, with a focus on character perception. Others might be focused on describing scene and setting. Some, like yours, have little to no description. There's no right answer, only shades of color as we each write like an artist using different brushes and technique. It's different, and that's okay. That's good. It makes people more apt to keep looking.
> 
> Bishop



Yep. What Bishop said.

The writing process should not ever be looked at as competition.


----------



## Riptide (Mar 10, 2014)

Competition... I've never looked at it as that... I can't believe the thought never crossed my mind, actually. I'm very competitive by nature and it never occurred to me to include writing in that as well. 

Anyway, we all, like I'm sure I'm repeating, have our own stylistic charm that adds a piazzas to any piece of art we happen to write.


----------



## N J Xkey (Mar 11, 2014)

Totally agree with Bishop. This isn't the olympics, there aren't a finite amount of points or prizes. In fact, a huge success of a novel in a particular genre is of massive benefit to other writers penning similar works. Look at the explosion in  erotica since THAT book, the extra copies of The Worst Witch stories that have been sold since Harry Potter... I write mainly fantasy, the recent successes of more "accessible" fantasy books are great news to me. Anything that attracts people to work similar to your own is fantastic. When you purchase a book from Amazon they give you recommendations for others with similar themes/styles. They don't say "you have already purchased a book similar to this, your quota for this genre is now used up". The more successes the better! Hell, if one of you guys writes an international bestseller it's good news for all of us (especially if you mention this forum in interviews, everyone else's book sales will go up!)


----------



## Jeko (Mar 11, 2014)

> I don't think there is a need to start slapping Viktoricus about. If that's how he feels then so be it. Technically speaking everyone is each others competition, just like music artists in the charts. Although I think you need to be published before you are actually competition. I think all Viktor wanted was to start a conversation about how we all write and what we prefer.



Believe me, the only reason I'm half the writer I am today is because I've been 'slapped about' by writers who know that if there's an important misconception, it needs rectifying. Sam was one of the members of this forum who helped me out of a few holes; I might have remained stuck in them for a lot longer without his blunt guidance. 

The thought that published writers compete with each other is also unhelpful. An author wants to tell their story; they do not want to prevent other authors from telling their stories or use their story as a means of outdoing others' work. That's not the attitude I hold, anyway.


----------



## Apple Ice (Mar 11, 2014)

Yeah I get what you're saying and I'm not saying one's more right than the other. If your book is next to someone else's on a shelf and there's a buyer who's flicking between trying to get a feel for which on to buy, the other becomes your competition. I've personally never thought of everyone else on here as competition but I understand where he's coming from. Writing is very different from anything else in a competitive sense though as there's so many books and they're all different, so it ultimately comes down to taste. I think the competition lies within which genre you're writing in, fantasy vs fantasy etc. It's a nice thought that there's no competition and we're all in this together as if we are in High School Musical but it just doesn't seem true to me.

If my book was next to someone else's I would want the buyer to pick mine, it's just sense, and anyone here would want that too no matter how idealistic they are about it. That doesn't mean I don't want them to do well, far from it. Me wanting to do well doesn't mean I want others to do badly, if you know what I mean. I'm just thinking of myself first.

I believe that's what Vik meant in context, he just came across as a bit blunt and aggressive and people thought he was against community spirit.

I hope this doesn't make me the boogeyman of the forum and you all think I want you to fail. This forum is full of lovely people and I wish you all the best. I simply think Vik's view is as fair and as justified as the other view. I hope I've made sense, I often ramble a bit when it comes to these things and struggle to be concise.


----------



## Terry D (Mar 11, 2014)

I don't see any "slapping about" going on here at all. Questions posted on these boards are, by their very nature, open to differing opinions (why else post them?) and that's what we are seeing; differing opinions. Just as some writing styles are more direct--more blunt--than others, so to are the way comments are posted.


----------



## Kepharel (Mar 11, 2014)

I reckon that there is a perfectly acceptable definition of competition that maybe ViK was alluding to.  It's possible to read a book and be inspired to think "That was brilliant, I would love to write like that, be as brilliant as that, in fact I'm going to do my best to make sure it happens."  As an aside I think the comments on this thread have been misconstrued as to purpose. We were asked to comment on writing styles.  A poorly worded, ambiguous sentence about competition has turned the thread off topic and soured it with a whiff of superiority and one-upmanship.


----------



## Bishop (Mar 11, 2014)

Kepharel said:


> ... soured it with a whiff of superiority and one-upmanship.



I wouldn't go that far, it's just people offering opinions.

But getting back to the original topic, writing styles are really like fingerprints, no two are alike. Even when wholly inspired by or borrowed from, they're still unique. You write the way you think, a lot of times, and you also write within your vocabulary. This is important to remember because if you want to change your writing style, there's really only one thing you can do that makes a difference: Read other writing styles. You'll never know what to do unless you see it done properly (and improperly) in other places. I firmly believe that you cannot be a good writer without reading. It'd be like being a musician without ever listening to music, or a painter without ever looking at anyone else's artwork. If you don't read, you're crippling yourself, particularly in writing style and technique.

Bishop


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Mar 11, 2014)

Bishop;1709401o said:
			
		

> *You write the way you think*, a lot of times, and you also write within your vocabulary.



Oh, good Lord. Am I ever in trouble. :nightmare:


----------



## bazz cargo (Mar 11, 2014)

> *Originally Posted By VIKtoricus*. I'd like to start a discussion about this whole writing style thing in  general. Which do you prefer? Which is your writing style? Are you in  between? Etc.



I am but a humble beginner so my point must be taken with inexperience in mind. 

What I write has no specific style. The subject sometimes requires a certain style, but that varies. Also as I practice the way I present my work changes. 

While it will be interesting to explore the way you and others   deal with styles, I think this is a slippery subject and it will never reach a conclusion.


----------



## ViKtoricus (Mar 12, 2014)

Outiboros said:


> in a satiric fantasy story...



lol. I could never write something like that, at least not at my level now.

Can this really work? I've written satire in modern settings, but fantasy? Where it's almost mandatory to be polite and flowery? lol


----------



## Outiboros (Mar 12, 2014)

ViKtoricus said:


> lol. I could never write something like that, at least not at my level now.
> 
> Can this really work? I've written satire in modern settings, but fantasy? Where it's almost mandatory to be polite and flowery? lol


Nothing is mandatory in writing. I've written fantasy stories narrated by plain, down-to-earth characters, who perceived the unnatural around them in a human way with no flowers involved.

This satiric fantasy story was urban fantasy, though, set in a contemporary setting. The main character - and thus the writing - was one of the most unpolite characters I've ever written, and the smell of him wouldn't have reminded you of flowers, either.


----------



## Jeko (Mar 12, 2014)

> fantasy? Where it's almost mandatory to be polite and flowery? lol



That's a very limited definition of fantasy.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Mar 13, 2014)

ViKtoricus said:


> Can this really work? I've written satire in modern settings, but fantasy? Where it's almost mandatory to be polite and flowery? lol



Have you ever read any of Terry Pratchett's work? Neil Gaiman, perhaps?

Both do satirical fantasy, Pratchett more than Gaiman, and I have never thought of either of them as "polite and flowery".

Gaiman's style is pretty dark, so flowery is definitely not what I would consider his writing.


----------



## KindaNice (Mar 13, 2014)

Gamer_2k4 said:


> Actually, those two paragraphs are the same style with a different focus.  One focuses on the submarine from the outside; the other focuses on the submarine from the inside.  Both are (in my mind) far too wordy and neither serves the plot, but at least the latter paragraph offers some insight on the characters.  The first one doesn't even get that far.
> 
> When I write, I'm only concerned about one thing: telling the story.  If descriptions serve that purpose, great, but I find they rarely do.  I write as an author what I'd care about as a reader.



Maybe our writing style isn't just the way in which we write, but is more aptly described as the way we want what we read to be written (_holy alliteration Batman_​).  Just some thoughts for food.


----------

