Fairy Tales: talking down to one's audience

[BeccaPrice]

so far the main criticism of Dragons and Dreams that I've gotten has been with writing style and vocabulary - style is style, and there's not much I can do about that, but the question of vocabulary is one that concerns me. The stories were originally written for my own kids, and we never talked down to them, and if we used an unfamiliar word or concept, we'd explain briefly and go on with the story.

I'm preparing a second collection of stories, and now I'm wondering - should I simplify my vocabulary? if so, how much? I don't mean down to Dr. Seus level, but using words like chivalry.

Each collection has stories from a range of ages, from the more simple to the more complex, and I do that deliberately, but how much should I simplify for my audience? I don't want to lose the Andrew Lang-ish tone of the stories, but I don't want to make people feel stupid either.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by BeccaPrice

The stories were originally written for my own kids, and we never talked down to them, and if we used an unfamiliar word or concept, we'd explain briefly and go on with the story.

If kids are reading on their own, that explanation needs to be included in the story. You wouldn't have to remove the vocabulary they aren't likely to be familiar with, but the first time a word is used, find a way to work a definition into the storyline.

Charles and Mary Lamb's Tales from Shakespeare has examples--

"There was a certain island in the sea, the only inhabitants of which were an old man, whose name was Prospero, and his daughter Miranda, a very beautiful young lady. She came to this island so young, that she had no memory of having seen any other human face than her father's."

-- The word is not directly defined, but it's clear from context what the meaning is. (A child may not know that the word means "people who live there" rather than just "people" or "humans," but he doesn't need that distinction to enjoy the story.) Some books intended for children use footnotes for words they may not be familiar with; unfortunately, that approach doesn't work well at all for ebooks.

[cromag]

I wouldn't "talk down" to anyone, nor would I try to write a story in a style that doesn't come naturally. You might make sure that your story's description, as carried on the book's page, makes a point of giving your reasons for not "talking down" to your audience -- like you did here.

I have one story out that I describe as a "Science Fiction Bedtime Story." So far it has received one review, by someone who seemed to like the story but was disappointed there wasn't more "danger" in it. That, to me, is something that doesn't make for a good "Bedtime Story." Right now I'm considering ways to change the description to make it more clear what my story is about and my aims in writing it.

[crich70]

I would think that by trying to simplify the text you could unintentionally do just that. Talking down to the reader I mean. Not all children learn to read and understand the meaning of words at the same speed. My own mom started me on books at age 3 (when I got my 1st library card) and while I don't remember what age I was when 1st able to read a book on my own I was probably pretty young still. She would help me look up words in the dictionary when I had a question.

[Nancy Fulda]

This may be one of those situations where you simply cannot cater to all readers. Some children will go right along with complex vocabularies, and will quickly grow bored at simplified text. Others will not be able to engage with the story unless the vocabulary is matched to their emotional and literary development.

You cannot please both groups. It is pointless to try.

It may, perhaps, be possible to find a middle ground which is acceptable to both groups. In my experience, however, this is difficult to do, and generally results in a story that everyone agrees is passable but nobody adores.

Me, I'd rather write the story that a small group of devoted readers adores.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Nancy Fulda

You cannot please both groups. It is pointless to try.

I'm with Nancy. There were one or two words total across all the stories that made me think "Hm. That's an odd word choice for a kid's story" and one of them I had to look up myself.
Other than that, isn't one of the points of reading to learn and expand vocabulary? Your stories are for people who think so.

ON THE OTHER HAND, it's not impossible that you inadvertently chose some words well above YOUR intended audience level and may want to reconsider some choices.

I think the distinction has to be you correcting places if you decide you were being needlessly unclear or hoity-toity, rather than you decidedly writing to lower reading level overall.

Does that help at all?

[BeccaPrice]

As I understood the biggest complaint I got over at The Other Board, there were two issues: one was writing style, that I'm rather more wordy than modern children's books tend to be these days. The other (as I'm understanding it) related to vocabulary. Well, one person's "wordy" is another person's "charming" so I'm not letting that bother me, but I do wonder whether I should run my stories through a reading level program and see whether I am expecting too much from my audience.

On the other hand, children's indy books are a hard sell anyway, and non-illustrated ones an even harder sell just in general, so maybe I should be pleased that anyone at all is downloading my books.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by BeccaPrice

I'm rather more wordy than modern children's books tend to be these days.

That was a complaint? I see it as a positive!
They are saying your stories are more than "See Jane run." Yea!

[BeccaPrice]

go to the last comment here and tell me what you think.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by BeccaPrice

go to the last comment here and tell me what you think.

"Too many notes, Mozart. Too many notes."

That's an exaggeration, sure, but that was the first thing that popped into my head reading that comment.

By no means do I believe that fewer words = better storytelling as an axiom. And I say that as someone who, while editing, does indeed subscribe to "cut words where ever you can" as a rule of thumb.

Some of the changes suggested in that comment don't flow as well as the original and certainly don't set the same tone. Some don't even convey the same meaning (the people didn't come out of their shops to crane their necks, for goodness sake...they could have craned their necks in the privacy of their own basements if that was the point....)

Might some of the individual suggestions be worth considering if you were to re-edit? Sure. But as a style? Nope. They might as well be telling you to craft all fairy tales in the style of a 2nd grade history text book.

ApK

[BeccaPrice]

Thanks - as someone who has actually read the stories, and to real children, I value your input. (Tell Cassie I'm working on a sequel to Sunflower - just have to do some research that's all)

[gmw]

I haven't read the book, but I do find people reciting bland rules as if they are commandments from God rather annoying. And something like: "Fewer words = greater clarity = greater readability." is utter crap, even at face value. The rule, such as it exists, should be stated as: do not use more words than necessary (but note that it has the corollary: do use as many words as necessary). Of course "necessary" still leaves a lot of room for interpretation, which is largely the point of any art form.

[Patty Jansen]

I'm sure this site has a WHOA policy. I've been a member here for a number of years.

OK, you don't like what I said. Call me an idiot in private discussions, it's all the same to me. Please remove the link to the blog where you *asked* for comments.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Some books intended for children use footnotes for words they may not be familiar with; unfortunately, that approach doesn't work well at all for ebooks.

But the built-in dictionary feature works wonderfully. :-)

[gmw]

Originally Posted by Patty Jansen

I'm sure this site has a WHOA policy. I've been a member here for a number of years.

OK, you don't like what I said. Call me an idiot in private discussions, it's all the same to me. Please remove the link to the blog where you *asked* for comments.

Patty, I can't even see that Becca has done anything more than take your comments seriously and try to discuss what, if anything, she should do to improve her writing in the future.

The only post I can see which seems likely to have caused your ire would be mine - but it would be helpful if you said so. If that is indeed the case, then you can ask the moderators to bring me into line, ask me to adjust or remove my post (I will admit that it is more strongly worded than may be considered polite, and if this is what has upset you then I will happily amend it), or you could choose to discuss further.

The fact is that your post offered more detailed advice, with examples, than most such posts do. This is a generally good thing, much more helpful than a simple did or didn't like it (an example of more words being better than less ). But you must accept that if you are going to offer such detailed advice that you may raise some discussion, and it should not be surprising that there will be someone in the world that may find reason to disgree - sometimes strongly.