So what do we prefer? I mean we have things that we say make good writing, but how much of it is just bits of style? I personally can't stand Stream of Consciousness writing. I also find that prose that is too flowery or has too many adjectives seems pretentious, or trying too hard to seem good. I like writing a bit closer to Stephen King, a place where adjectives are sparse, adverbs frowned upon and the writing is rather spartan. I'm slowly reading through The Last of the Mohicans, and while the story is good, it is so full of random flights into description of the scenery that, at times, its harder to read because of these descriptions. At one point in time, it was the height of writing to do that, now, I don't know if it is so much.

So basically, what do you like in writing? What gets on your nerves? What just *doesn't* work when we write? What does? Why? These are the sort of questions I'm asking as I'm working some some stuff I've written, and maybe it's something we could have fun talking about.

Alrighty, I'll take the bait =3 *puts on the old opinion writin' cap*

Personally, I'm a huge fan of writing that uses plentiful and colorful descriptors. Not so many that they drown out the plot (it is indeed possible, see "Silas Marner" for an example, not that said book is any good), but not so few that the story becomes pointlessly short. As a prime example, my favorite author is H. P. Lovecraft, not just because of the subject matter, but also because of the way he describes things. His descriptions are sufficient that you're never guessing at what he's trying to describe (except, in certain cases, where that's exactly what he wants you doing), and they use a wide variety of words, which I enjoy - it's difficult to make myself read the same words over and over again, diverseness makes everything better.

I also feel that third-person narration is better in most cases than first person (the most notable exception being horror, because there's just something about being as confused as the character to lend that extra bit of fright). But to keep this contained to roleplaying, obviously third-person is superior - otherwise I would consistently be forgetting what characters are being used =p.

*cap off*

Howzzat?

Hemingway. :) He was brilliant in his simplicity.

No no no...I'm not saying that I want to write all macho male characters and female ones who are either madonnas or whores. I ache to imitate the man's style, not his themes. And his style follows the iceberg theory: reveal just the tip, and do it in a way that gives the reader the knowledge that there's a lot more there under the surface. Give them a glimpse, assume that they're intelligent, not the other way around, and let them make out the massive shape below the surface themselves.

It's incredibly difficult to do, but it's a fantastic exercise. I think everyone tends to write too much, and Hemingway was famous for limiting himself to short sentences and one or two-syllable words. I can't yet do what he did, but I try, and one day I hope to master the iceberg.

In addition to this style, I actually quite like the way McCaffrey writes her descriptions, particularly of food. Does anyone else follow this, or am I weird? I remember reading about Killashandra's hunger in "Crystal Singer" and all those exotic dishes she savored made my stomach growl.