Quote:
Originally Posted by crich70
Yes but journalism is mostly non-fiction (I say mostly since even the writer has a point of view about whatever issue is under discussion) isn't it Harry? So it's more a problem of just presenting the important facts fully but without bloat where as fiction is harder to quantify in the same way I think. I mean a subplot may seem to be important to the main plot though the reader might see it differently later.
|
This is the other side of bloat isn't it. Unintentionally increasing the size of a story.
Sometimes, removing content will improve a story by increasing the pace of an action-oriented chapter or by keeping the story threads where they should be.
Oftentimes, I read a story and take note of the threads that are started early on in the piece and wonder where they went after the last page is read and the back cover closed.
Except for some authors who have a habit of opening a thread in one book and closing it several books later, it's rather annoying to see authors simply dropping threads because they can't think of how to tie them off in the ending.
Likewise I hate it when I get to the climax of the story and realize the writer has simply run out of steam and just wants to get the story finished. Both are likely to result in a needlessly shorter story and less satisfaction.
And both are good examples of how a great story is devalued by what could essentially be classified as professional behavior.
Writing to a size is an important skill to have for many reasons, but used poorly I think it detracts from the quality of the final product.
Regards
David