What do you think about minimalistic style of writing?

[RaizarP]

I don’t like long-winded descriptions, especially with the setting. Why? Because it’s unnecessary and distracting.

When I read the first sentence of the descriptions, image of the scene starts to form in my head. So when the second sentence comes to provide more details, I just feel that it’s unnecessary and just slowing me down.

Like, if the author tries to describe a prison cell. I don’t need to know how the lighting in the scene works, how the water dripped down to the floor, what material the floor is made off, or what sound the water-drops make. Just tell me the prison cell is dark and wet in just one or two sentences, and I’ll get the picture right away.

Now, I do understand that detailed descriptions and beautiful prose are great to set up a mood and create an atmosphere. But I just don’t feel it as much, rather, it’s just distracting.

Well, maybe, this is just me. But I just love this kind of writing. The writing that just gets to the point and move the story along quickly.

What about you guys? What do you think about minimalistic style of writing?

Depending on genre, I love minimalistic and detailed.

For example, fluff story or yuri I will love to read it in minimalistic style. While a story like Fate or Re:Zero, I prefer to read it with detailed explanation.

 

[BenJepheneT]

when I'm almost at 90k and I'm still at the climax of my first arc. Pain.

Speak for yourself.

I finally finished my first arc.

250k words have been invested.

 

[EternalSunset0]

It depends on what I'm writing about. If it's someone's first entry into a new world/location that has decent importance or the first appearance/usage of a skill, I add quite a lot of descriptions. Or the first appearance of a new enemy. Yeah, those stuff need descriptions and/or receptor phrases on how the perspective character perceives or feels about them.

Subsequent appearances, way less description needed.

I am not too fond of the "room is dark" example for a first appearance because when I write, I want my readers to accurately visualize something in their minds that's at least close to what I have. Each reader has his own way of interpreting my words, for example, but at least I want all of them to at least be in a similar wavelength with what I have in mind when writing out the scene or character.

Plus, adding sex appeal to a character (kind of important in the way I want my series to be) is harder without more descriptive words since I can't draw full bodies and attires as efficiently Although I am working on it.

 

[owotrucked]

With an unskilled author they might just glaze over something like someone taking a shit will be flamed for adding something irrelevant. Whereas with some skilled authors, they can talk about something unimportant like someone taking a shit for a whole chapter and it would be good.
It really just depends on how skilled the author is and whether they know the demographic well enough to hit the right balance.

Edit:
I really do not recommend going into so much detail about someone taking a shit. I don't think anyone would actually want to read about someone taking a shit, unless they are into that sort of thing. At that point I think you might as well just add it in.

Nobody Poops - TV Tropes

You know that children's book, Everyone Poops? Well, they lied. Not everyone does. Sure, real people and animals in everyday life might, but you're not likely to see a fictional character going to the bathroom.note Despite the title, this …

tvtropes.org

We need more characters that poop

 

[Jemini]

Speak for yourself.

I finally finished my first arc.

250k words have been invested.

You... should probably actually consider either modifying your idea of what constitutes as an "arc," or take a serious look at your writing.

The typical story ought to be somewhere around 80K words. That's standard novel length.

This doesn't necessarily mean to trash 2/3 of what you've written. It could just mean finding places where you can chop what you've written into 3 parts.

In my series, I am telling my story through a series of more standard novel length arcs that tell a rather simple story, and stringing them together in order to tell a grander and more complex story.

My 1st story arc is about the MC growing up and figuring things out in the new world, but it suddenly climaxes when dark elves decide to attack the elven village she's living in. Suddenly, the arc comes together as something similar to 7 samurai without the reader having known about the attack ahead of time.

2nd arc, for various reasons that would be spoilers, she has to flee the village. The entire arc is literally just about getting out of the elven forest, and the difficulties faced along the way.

An arc is any motivation you can focus your story around. In my case, 1st arc is discovery. 2nd arc is escape. The things that make it interesting are the challenges faced along the way in that effort. What is keeping your MC from that goal? How do they overcome those impediments? That's what makes the story interesting.

So, you COULD look at this as it taking 160K words for me to get them out of their freaking starter village. Or, you can look at it as me finishing a story arc every 80K words. Point is, planning and being able to find an end condition for your story arc is a must. The trick to finding that end point is usually finding a central theme to build the arc around in the first place. It's what all the great successful series do, so it would be a good idea to take notes.

 

[BenJepheneT]

You... should probably actually consider either modifying your idea of what constitutes as an "arc," or take a serious look at your writing.

The typical story ought to be somewhere around 80K words. That's standard novel length.

This doesn't necessarily mean to trash 2/3 of what you've written. It could just mean finding places where you can chop what you've written into 3 parts.

In my series, I am telling my story through a series of more standard novel length arcs that tell a rather simple story, and stringing them together in order to tell a grander and more complex story.

My 1st story arc is about the MC growing up and figuring things out in the new world, but it suddenly climaxes when dark elves decide to attack the elven village she's living in. Suddenly, the arc comes together as something similar to 7 samurai without the reader having known about the attack ahead of time.

2nd arc, for various reasons that would be spoilers, she has to flee the village. The entire arc is literally just about getting out of the elven forest, and the difficulties faced along the way.

An arc is any motivation you can focus your story around. In my case, 1st arc is discovery. 2nd arc is escape. The things that make it interesting are the challenges faced along the way in that effort. What is keeping your MC from that goal? How do they overcome those impediments? That's what makes the story interesting.

So, you COULD look at this as it taking 160K words for me to get them out of their freaking starter village. Or, you can look at it as me finishing a story arc every 80K words. Point is, planning and being able to find an end condition for your story arc is a must. The trick to finding that end point is usually finding a central theme to build the arc around in the first place. It's what all the great successful series do, so it would be a good idea to take notes.

I define an arc in a more shounen manga sense. Like the Naruto/One Piece type of arcs where they'll spend a good 60 - 120 chapters in one island/battle. I see miniature stories as more like checkpoints than actual conclusions. Until the important setups established within the current overarching are done with, the arc isn't over. The MC may have won the battle between a general, but he hasn't won the war yet. Until the war is won, the arc remains. Of course, the exception to the rule would be the McGuffin that drives the entire plot. To reiterate my One Piece comparison, Luffy defeating the Big Mom pirates can be considered a concluded arc, even if he hasn't found the titular One Piece yet. That's what I see an arc as.

I'll make the safe assumption that you hadn't read my story and go along with it. According to your constitution of what an arc should be, I'll say that I've gone through 3 to 4 arcs at this point, with the fifth about to be concluded. I'd say you can see an even 50k word split down the middle. You can have my assurance that I have planned an end condition to my story arc. Hell, I can tell you exactly how my series would end too. I've planned the whole series out, top to bottom. I didn't dish out 250k for a single arc for no reason. Discrepancies and amateur writing is a definite factor, but you can be sure that I wrote everything out with a purpose, be it a good one or not.

 

[Vicky]

I don’t like long-winded descriptions, especially with the setting. Why? Because it’s unnecessary and distracting.

When I read the first sentence of the descriptions, image of the scene starts to form in my head. So when the second sentence comes to provide more details, I just feel that it’s unnecessary and just slowing me down.

Like, if the author tries to describe a prison cell. I don’t need to know how the lighting in the scene works, how the water dripped down to the floor, what material the floor is made off, or what sound the water-drops make. Just tell me the prison cell is dark and wet in just one or two sentences, and I’ll get the picture right away.

Now, I do understand that detailed descriptions and beautiful prose are great to set up a mood and create an atmosphere. But I just don’t feel it as much, rather, it’s just distracting.

Well, maybe, this is just me. But I just love this kind of writing. The writing that just gets to the point and move the story along quickly.

What about you guys? What do you think about minimalistic style of writing?

While I agree with you, I also believe that minimalist prose for sake of minimalism is as pretentious as purple prose.

Speak for yourself.

I finally finished my first arc.

250k words have been invested.

Yeah, but how many readers do you have? a 100? Now you know why

 

[Jemini]

I define an arc in a more shounen manga sense. Like the Naruto/One Piece type of arcs where they'll spend a good 60 - 120 chapters in one island/battle. I see miniature stories as more like checkpoints than actual conclusions. Until the important setups established within the current overarching are done with, the arc isn't over. The MC may have won the battle between a general, but he hasn't won the war yet. Until the war is won, the arc remains. Of course, the exception to the rule would be the McGuffin that drives the entire plot. To reiterate my One Piece comparison, Luffy defeating the Big Mom pirates can be considered a concluded arc, even if he hasn't found the titular One Piece yet. That's what I see an arc as.

I'll make the safe assumption that you hadn't read my story and go along with it. According to your constitution of what an arc should be, I'll say that I've gone through 3 to 4 arcs at this point, with the fifth about to be concluded. I'd say you can see an even 50k word split down the middle. You can have my assurance that I have planned an end condition to my story arc. Hell, I can tell you exactly how my series would end too. I've planned the whole series out, top to bottom. I didn't dish out 250k for a single arc for no reason. Discrepancies and amateur writing is a definite factor, but you can be sure that I wrote everything out with a purpose, be it a good one or not.

Even with that being the case, you can still easily break an arc into smaller definite book-length stories. I know I refer to Mushoku Tensei a lot, but that series did a REALLY freaking good job. So, it's good to use it as an example.

That story has arcs that extend across multiple books. There is the childhood/learning arc, which extends across 2 books. Even with that being the case, there is a very definite divide between the 2 books because it is in 2 separate locations. Then, there's the journey home arc. This extends across 4 books. Each of the 4 books are very definitely divided by continent, with a focus on certain cities on each continent. (I will not continue on through the series, because that would go into big spoiler territory.)

Each of these 6 books I just mentioned follow their own Freytag pyramid plot structure, each book having it's own introduction, build-up, climax, cooling off, and resolution portions. They are very much each telling their own distinct story.

So, once again. You really might want to also consider the industry standards a little more in your story structure. This is just a matter of what has actually been proven to work. I even just used the highest rated web novel of all time as a reference point for this.

 

[KiraMinoru]

With an unskilled author they might just glaze over something like someone taking a shit will be flamed for adding something irrelevant. Whereas with some skilled authors, they can talk about something unimportant like someone taking a shit for a whole chapter and it would be good.
It really just depends on how skilled the author is and whether they know the demographic well enough to hit the right balance.

Edit:
I really do not recommend going into so much detail about someone taking a shit. I don't think anyone would actually want to read about someone taking a shit, unless they are into that sort of thing. At that point I think you might as well just add it in.

About two years ago, I remember writing a chapter about a character in a Wuxia taking a DBZ style shit in the equivalent to a prison version of Hogwarts using a power suit.

There are so many things going on in that sentence I don’t even know where to begin.

 

[BlackKnightX]

Same, I like minimalist wwriting!

That's why I draw stuff like that to save words.

Spoiler: battle motion

But some readers do say it lacks some description and immersion. So I dunno

Wow, you’re pretty good.

As has been said. They both have their time and place, and both have their good and bad executions.

My opinion is that it's really all a matter of skill. Either can be very good or very bad depending on the skill of the writer. Poorly done minimalist writing might just be that the writer is just rushing things and is skimping too much on the details. It takes some serious skill to do minimalism right. You need to be a master at implying the details that you leave out of the writing. All the details need to still be there. If you are doing minimalism right, then you will find a way to make the reader fill in the blanks on their own.

Failure to trigger this response in the reader's brain is just bad.

On the flip-side, being overly wordy could just as easily be an attempt at covering up for the fact that you're bad at describing things, so you just get extra wordy to make up for it. This can become meandering and awkward, and just throw off the story if you do not do it well.

I personally admire properly done minimalist writing by an appropriately skilled author. However, I am very much of the opinion that you need to be pretty high skilled in order to do it right. It is really not a road for beginner writers.

Totally agree with you. Hemingway is admired for such a skill. Minimalistic style and sloppy writing aren’t the same thing. In minimalistic, you have to know the details of the thing you want to describe well, then intentionally leave out the unnecessary part.

With an unskilled author they might just glaze over something like someone taking a shit will be flamed for adding something irrelevant. Whereas with some skilled authors, they can talk about something unimportant like someone taking a shit for a whole chapter and it would be good.
It really just depends on how skilled the author is and whether they know the demographic well enough to hit the right balance.

Edit:
I really do not recommend going into so much detail about someone taking a shit. I don't think anyone would actually want to read about someone taking a shit, unless they are into that sort of thing. At that point I think you might as well just add it in.

Interesting~ Someone taking a shit, that is. Haven’t seen that before.

Plus, adding sex appeal to a character (kind of important in the way I want my series to be) is harder without more descriptive words since I can't draw full bodies and attires as efficiently Although I am working on it.

Just use the word ‘Jade beauty’ and you’re ready to go!

While I agree with you, I also believe that minimalist prose for sake of minimalism is as pretentious as purple prose.

Agreed. Minimalistic and sloppy writing aren’t the same thing. Minimalistic needs skill and focus to do it well.

Even with that being the case, you can still easily break an arc into smaller definite book-length stories. I know I refer to Mushoku Tensei, but that series did a REALLY freaking good job. So, it's good to use it as an example.

That story has arcs that extend across multiple books. There is the childhood/learning arc, which extends across 2 books. Even with that being the case, there is a very definite divide between the 2 books because it is in 2 separate locations. Then, there's the journey home arc. This extends across 4 books. Each of the 4 books are very definitely divided by continent, with a focus on certain cities on each continent. (I will not continue on through the series, because that would go into big spoiler territory.)

Each of these 6 books I just mentioned follow their own Freytag pyramid plot structure, each book having it's own introduction, build-up, climax, cooling off, and resolution portions. They are very much each telling their own distinct story.

So, once again. You really might want to also consider the industry standards a little more in your story structure. This is just a matter of what has actually been proven to work. I even just used the highest rated web novel of all time as a reference point for this.

I see an arc as a smaller story. Each arc should start with orientation, then put in some tension, then escalate things until you hit the climax. Then the next arc start the same.

Though, if you want to create an epic tale, each arc should contribute to the escalation of the whole story. When you hit the whole story climax, it’ll be epic.

I don’t think there should be definite numbers on how long the arc should be. It depends on the pacing. If you write something fast-paced, then the arc will most likely end faster than the slow-paced one.

About two years ago, I remember writing a chapter about a character in a Wuxia taking a DBZ style shit in the equivalent to a prison version of Hogwarts using a power suit.

There are so many things going on in that sentence I don’t even know where to begin.

Just describe one thing at the time. Two or three is the limit. I don’t say that more than that is bad, but it’s just too daunting and difficult to read.

 

[BenJepheneT]

Even with that being the case, you can still easily break an arc into smaller definite book-length stories. I know I refer to Mushoku Tensei a lot, but that series did a REALLY freaking good job. So, it's good to use it as an example.

That story has arcs that extend across multiple books. There is the childhood/learning arc, which extends across 2 books. Even with that being the case, there is a very definite divide between the 2 books because it is in 2 separate locations. Then, there's the journey home arc. This extends across 4 books. Each of the 4 books are very definitely divided by continent, with a focus on certain cities on each continent. (I will not continue on through the series, because that would go into big spoiler territory.)

Each of these 6 books I just mentioned follow their own Freytag pyramid plot structure, each book having it's own introduction, build-up, climax, cooling off, and resolution portions. They are very much each telling their own distinct story.

So, once again. You really might want to also consider the industry standards a little more in your story structure. This is just a matter of what has actually been proven to work. I even just used the highest rated web novel of all time as a reference point for this.

Ill just have to chalk this up to a different type of story being written. I understand the importance of story structure and how it can cripple an otherwise good plot/concept if done poorly. However, I can't just slap a proven framework on something and call it a day.

I'll be upfront about it and say that my story doesn't suit the usual word counts or the more conventional webnovel format. I also understand that whatever I'm writing here, frankly, has no place within the current web fiction climate. Hell, it barely takes any shelf space in your local Barnes and Nobles. Regardless however, in contrast to the "highest rated webnovels", I believe that my story needs a slower pace and in turn, longer word count, as there isn't so much a "plot" as much as it's about characters simmering about and having internal conflicts/revelations; things that can't be rushed, especially when it's the sole focus of your story. I believe I am threading the fine line between broiling the story to its most optimal degree and lingering too long on a story point with how I pace my story.

And to reiterate your point, I can definitely break my arcs into several small books with contained stories. It's just the fact that breaking them apart would ruin the flow of the story. I take heavy advantage of the webnovel's constant, unending style of reading chapter after chapter with no interruptions aside from the author's intent. But if I were to ignore that and break my current story into books, I certainly can. This is nothing more than a misunderstand of terminology and unfamiliarity with each other's works.

I understand you want to bring forth the concept of planning and structure, but you're preaching to the choir. I am speaking with firm confidence that I can produce a competent, conventional plot-focused story with the given structure, with the privilege to cut it into distinct sections in bite-sized word counts, but that isn't what I'm doing here. Like I said, I've shot my kneecaps with a .50 Action Express, but I did it knowing how much it'll hurt.