Quote:
Originally Posted by doreenjoy
I'm not convinced that writing can always be judged objectively.
To use a very coarse example, there are some who think all adverbs are bad, for example, and others who think only adverbs used to modify weak verbs are bad.
All of my writer friends disagree with me.
|
I think it is more subtle than that. It might be true, for someone who is not a good writer, that he should not use adverbs to modify weak verbs. But in the hands of a good writer, I would expect that such a device could be used effectively. The main thing is that the device would be used knowingly, with an objective, to achieve a particular effect.
For example, Edgar Rice Burroughs had a structural device he used, consisting of running parallel plot lines in alternating chapters, resolving in a single chapter at the end of the book. And he did it in every book he wrote, as far as I can tell. But that device did not rise above being anything other than a device. A good writer would have linked the device to something in the narrative - the Alexandria Quartet might be an example of that, linking the device to perspective.
Good writing is like anything else done well. It reflects the intentional use of known (or invented) devices deployed intelligently to achieve an artistic result. And how it works can be judged objectively, although sometimes it takes a while, maybe years or decades, to figure out what is going on.