Post History
The central issue here is not the extent of description, it is focus. Good prose allows the reader to focus on one thing at a time. When it is time to describe, it describes. When it is time to dea...
Answer
#4: Attribution notice removed
by
System
·
2020-01-03T20:41:57Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/35207 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T08:33:04Z (about 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/35207 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
by
System
·
2019-12-08T08:33:04Z (about 5 years ago)
The central issue here is not the extent of description, it is focus. Good prose allows the reader to focus on one thing at a time. When it is time to describe, it describes. When it is time to deal with action, it deals with the action. If a description of the setting is necessary to understand the action, then the setting is described first and the action afterwards. If you look at the sample you provided, however, the focus is all over the place. It moves rapidly back and forth between description and action, between past and present, between detail and general scene. The reader cannot find a point of focus. A common reaction to this is to tell the writer to cut out the description and get on with this action, but you should not interpret this as an instruction to provide less description. Rather, you should interpret it as an instruction not to pollute the focus of an action scene with description. Describe when it is time to describe. Show action when it is time to show action. Keep the reader focused on one thing at a time.
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2018-04-18T13:40:46Z (over 6 years ago)
Original score: 3