Don’t Put Your Reader to Sleep

Posted on Jul 13th, 2011 | 30 comments home title

A famous quip from Elmore Leonard. But take note…it’s more than just dry humor! It’s the best advice for good writing. Unnecessary backstory? Character’s long and involved dreams? Excessive description? Leave it out.

Cartoon courtesy of “The Napkin Dad”

Marty Coleman, Photographer and Artist

Visit Napkin Dad Website

See Marty Coleman’s photography

View Napkin Dad Products

Be Sociable, Share!

Tags: Napkin Dad

[ Next Post → ] [ ← Previous Post ]

http://michelledevans.blogspot.com Michelle Dennis Evans

Very cool.
Love it.
Darla

I don’t fully agree. It can mean a lot to the story and character development. In excess, yuck, but it has value. A lot of (good) fantasy has these.
- http://kristinlaughtin.blogspot.com Kristin Laughtin
  
  The trick is to work in that character and story information in a way that won’t bore readers.
  - http://protecttherisen.blogspot.com/ Mike Koch
    
    Great post idea and I agree you Kristin. If we don’t blend the back stories into the manuscript then it becomes a lecture, an information dump,and a stagnant part of the book.
Becky Povich

Hi Rachelle! I thought I left a comment, but guess not. (hopefully, you won’t have two from me!) This is my first visit and I’ll definitely be back. Love the Elmore Leonard quote! It’s one of my favorites!
http://MarjiLaine.blogspot.com Marji Laine

Growing up, I devoured the books of a well-known mystery writer. Seriously could not get enough of them, but I would skim through whole pages full of bubbling creeks and the mist on the fields of wheat to “get to the good stuff.”

In retrospect, the poetry of her descriptions made her writing beautiful and probably popular for the time period. My purpose for reading, though, was the mystery.

In today’s writing, it’s important to have poetic beauty, but in little bite-sized morsels. Today’s readers still want to “get to the good stuff.”

The keywords in your post are excessive, unnecessary, involved. It’s not that there is no places for back story or description, but that they be reduced to the details that that are and allow the story to grow large around them.

Cute cartoon and great topic!
http://bit.ly/faKb1R Jackie Ley

The Elmore Leonard quote is one of my favourites too. It probably reinforces the need for getting some objective feedback on a novel once it’s finished. It’s very difficult for a writer to judge if they’ve lost pace and interest in places, or whether they’ve read and edited the darn thing so many times, all the suspense has evaporated.
otin

I so agree with that. I had to rewrite the beginning of my first novel because it was too slow and boring. I chopped off ten pages by cutting down on the descriptions and it reads so much better now.
http://www.katieganshert.blogspot.com Katie Ganshert

That is definitely some stellar advice!
http://www.lesedgertononwriting.blogspot.com/ Les Edgerton

No biggie, but I keep seeing that quote attributed to Elmore Leonard, but I believe it was Harry Crews who first said it, many, many years ago.
Gwen Stewart

I wholeheartedly agree. I find descriptions boring….but then, I’m the most auditory person I know, so my books are heavy on dialogue and action, shorter on description and backstory. Sometimes to a fault: I have to work hard on visuals.

I just downloaded “11 Steps to Getting Published” by Mary Demuth (oh dear, I think I bungled that title…but I’m close). She talks about “writing nekkid”, and her examples are SO worthwhile. Reminds me of my earliest writing: loaded with adjectives and adverbs, all flowery. Less is definitely more!
http://barbaraannwatson.blogspot.com Barbara Watson

I find that the books I enjoy the most are the ones I read aloud to my kids. Other than loving middle grade, what I’ve learned about this is this: I’m a fast reader and a skimmer. Even when I love a story. So when I’m forced to slow down (which can’t be escaped when reading aloud), the beauty of words, their poetic qualities, and thus, the story’s beauty shines.
http://ibischild.blogspot.com marion

This is my main target as I’m getting into revision–plus tightening up the story.
It’s the tightrope between establishing setting, mood, etc. and putting your readers to sleep.
But I think I really know the soporific sections, that somehow just go on and on (“dialog” or not). Maybe I should label them: “Cure for insomnia”!
http://ibischild.blogspot.com marion

[I think my comment got eaten.]
Working on this now, as I get stuck into revision–together with tightening up the plot and sharpening focus.

It’s the tightrope between establishing setting, mood, etc. & inducing yawns.

But I know which bits are real somnolence-inducers (including some “dialog”.) Maybe I should label those bits “Cure for Insomnia”!
http://jpkurzitza.com JP Kurzitza

KILL YOUR DARLINGS!!
Michelle Knox

Very sound advice that an aspiring novelist like myself certainly takes to heart.
http://larryshallenberger.com Larry Shallenberger

Absolutely,

Don’t write the gun on the mantle unless you intend it to go off. I think this is true both for novels and “live” learning experiences.
http://www.tonymcfadden.net Tony McFadden

I agree. Every scene needs to have a mission. If the mission isn’t obvious, cut it. The simple act of knowing what the mission of the scene is before you write it automatically drives the story forward.
http://www.supamomthoughts.blogspot.com Angie Dicken

I understand, but I look at classics like The Great Gatsby and Jane Eyre, and their great detail and description is what intrigued me most when I read them. How do we know when is too much?
- Rachelle Gardner
  
  Angie, thanks for the comment — it gave me an idea for a blog post! Lots of people say things like that. “But what about Charlotte Bronte? What about Fitzgerald? You’d probably reject THEM if they came across your desk, too.”
  
  Yep, I just might. This is not 1925 nor is it 1847. This is 2011 and the trends today are different – readers want something different. In addition, neither Bronte nor Fitzgerald were competing with television, video games, the world wide web or BLOGS to get someone’s attention. A reader today is a different animal than a reader 100 years ago.
  - http://www.supamomthoughts.blogspot.com Angie Dicken
    
    Thanks Rachelle! Makes sense. Good thing to keep in mind during my edits!
http://www.nebraskagraceful.blogspot.com Michelle DeRusha

This made me laugh, namely because I remember the day my BFF called me to report on how her reading of my early manuscript was going. “So?????” I asked her. “How do you like it????” Her response: “Welllllll, I put it down and I’m having trouble picking it back up again.”

Ouch!

Turns out, all my long sections on Biblical exegesis and “instruction” were’t doing it for her. “Stick to the stories. I love the personal stories, but you lose me with all the Bible analysis,” she advised. And in the end, that’s exactly what I did!
- Joe
  
  Interesting!
  
  I’m having that exact issue, now, with a book I’m writing (non-fiction).
  
  By nature, I tend to over-explain. To compensate, in the early drafts of this book, I left out all biblical exegesis and just said what I had to say.
  
  The feedback from reviewers said I was assuming everyone knows as much on the topic as I do, and it needs more background.
  
  So, I added a prelude giving the scriptural background. It seems to work, but I am now concerned readers will want to skip the prelude.
http://www.vanessakeccles.blogspot.com/ Vanessa K. Eccles

That’s cute. Love it!
Neil Larkins

I’m in trouble. This means my novel wip must read: “If only…’Oh, no. Who will I be this time?’” Kinda short but I guess it’ll work. Leaves people wanting a sequel.
http://catherinemjohnson.wordpress.com Catherine Johnson

I wish I could be found like that sometimes Great picture, great lesson.
Lanny

Oh, this advice is so timely! Maybe it’s just that folks are so hurried or so “fast-twitch oriented” electronically, but I don’t think today’s reader will tolerate seven different descriptions of the shade by the window or the hibiscus plant outside. Page-turning action seems to be the rule. Obviously, a fictional work can’t be all that, but we need to shed a lot of our excessive verbiage.
PS: Nice new photo, Rachel.
http://www.btdas.blogspot.com Anita

When I saw the Napkin Dad in this post, I thought surely that I’d stumbled upon the author of “Napkins – Lunch Bag Notes form Dad,” a book that I enjoyed reading and that inspired me to put notes (on index cards) in my children’s lunches, too.

When I pulled the book off my shelf, I found that Courtney Garton is the author of the book that I read, and not Marty Coleman.

Interesting…can they be the same person? Hmmm…

http://www.amazon.com/Napkins-Lunch-Bag-Notes-Dad/dp/1891043005
Susan

I think Rachelle is correct. I was talking about this with my adult daughter this afternoon because we are in the process of writing a book together.

Although novels of the past were extremely descriptive, they had a strong reason to write in that manner.

People depended on description because many did not have opportunities to venture out into the world. The only world they knew was the small area in which they were born and raised.

There were no televisions, radios or massive media we have in place today.

They relied on elaborate descriptions of a poetic nature in order to explain various far away places.

Life moves faster for all of us in today’s world. We can rent a movie, watch a TV show or travel to these places. We no longer need the heavy details or we’ll get bored if they become excessive.

That’s why we need to make sure that we do not get bogged down with too much description or we’ll lose the reader.
http://www.newchaneloutlet.com/ chanel online store

I really enjoy reading you blog which spirit me up and pursue for future.You really an outstanding person just the same as your articles.I really have a nice time with you.Thank you very much!
Pingback: fontanna czekoladowa
Pingback: PKV Tarifrechner