|
Post by Old Dragon (Al) on Oct 24, 2005 12:57:49 GMT 1
Before anyone can learn to write well it is essential to identify bad writing - but do we?
For fun and illustrative purposes, please post below a paragraph or two of your own, deliberately badly written prose, together with personal comments relating to why that is so and how the piece could be improved.
Other members may also add comments and make suggestions.
Later you can modify your post to include a rewritten version of the piece to illustrate improvements.
|
|
PsychoJo
Wolf Team Member
Some mistakes are too much fun to only make once!
Posts: 1,403
|
Post by PsychoJo on Oct 27, 2005 7:11:31 GMT 1
I am working on this in conjunction with a "Diary" based on our current office move as it progresses this week!
(Thanks Jack, I am finding writing down the hiccups and frustrations strangely cathartic (sp?)!)
|
|
|
Post by Old Dragon (Al) on Oct 27, 2005 8:57:28 GMT 1
Keeping a diary or journal is a marvellous way to ensure you write a little on a regular basis and helps to preserve precious moments otherwise forgotten. Reading entries back a few days, weeks, or even years later can be fascinating, too. A journal can provide material for future writing and an indicator of changes within our attitudes and personal growth. Insights into our own and the personalities of others exposed via journal entries can provide invaluable material for fictional characters.
|
|
PsychoJo
Wolf Team Member
Some mistakes are too much fun to only make once!
Posts: 1,403
|
Post by PsychoJo on Oct 27, 2005 21:10:02 GMT 1
Okay here's something I jotted down between packing boxes this week!
Monday - Today began as any normal Monday except for the slight tinge of excitement at the impending move!
Then I got the email.
I have to supply a twenty page report to one of our largest customers before the end of the week.
The director in charge of the move arrived noisely at his desk and began the business of ordering another new forklift truck - one that would actually fit into the warehouse this time!
|
|
PsychoJo
Wolf Team Member
Some mistakes are too much fun to only make once!
Posts: 1,403
|
Post by PsychoJo on Oct 27, 2005 21:17:06 GMT 1
I do think the above is an example of bad writing, but I don't know exactly why.
Any comments, please?
|
|
|
Post by Jack D - AKA Mr Meldrew on Oct 27, 2005 22:20:20 GMT 1
Like Jo, the piece below is inspired by, and follows on from, what I wrote the other day and in that quick exercise.
‘Today, upon return from a walk in the rain, wit deserted me when a neighbour remarked, ‘you should get rid of that old dog, it smells.’
******************************
My badly written piece...
I was taken aback. I stared at her, rendered speechless, annoyed, and most greatly affronted. How dare this pompous female make free with her arrogant opinions? For a moment it crossed my mind to say, 'Madam, you smell, but my dog stinks,' but I had no wish to linger further in her vicinity and left her to mind her own business or to go and meddle in someone else's affairs. Resentment or not, I had to admit one thing; with her greasy, outer coat drenched in rain, Sally's odour was not exactly cologne. She did indeed stink, but I'd rather live with a stinking dog than a dog-hating, interfering woman with uncalled for opinions any day.
*****************************
Would anyone care to comment on what makes that badly written?
|
|
|
Post by Jack D - AKA Mr Meldrew on Oct 27, 2005 23:41:30 GMT 1
Jo, the secret now is to disown your piece and step into the shoes of a reader. Look at it from their perspective and as objectively as possible. It is getting late now and I need to get home, but I'll take a copy of yours and mine and draft out my observations to bring over next time I'm here or if I can get onto the library computer. However, think back to our little group discussion this evening and the four basic character types and what motivates them. My offering might be fine for a private diary rant and self-gratification, but, by writing that piece in the first person, it weakens its potential. It tells the reader about me and my opinions, showing myself in a hypocritical light and easily as arrogant and opinionated as the neighbour, rather than showing them the scene and allowing them the opportunity to draw their own conclusions. It leaves nothing to their imagination. I may well be arrogant and opinionated, but this piece of writing insults a reader's intelligence. So much of that second paragraph is unnecessary. A little rewriting and much deletion would allow the reader to draw the same conclusion but without patronising them or putting 'me' and 'my fears' in their way.
|
|
PsychoJo
Wolf Team Member
Some mistakes are too much fun to only make once!
Posts: 1,403
|
Post by PsychoJo on Oct 28, 2005 7:02:45 GMT 1
Thank you. I am having trouble distancing myself from my offering and now I am wondering whether that is the problem? I haven't given enough detail for someone to set a scene - basically boring! Apart from the wordiness, at this point I don't see how else your paragraph could be written. I will dip in and out of this board and wait for the *click*
|
|
|
Post by JD on Oct 28, 2005 8:51:56 GMT 1
The rewritten piece, with some improvements, Jo:
‘You should get rid of that old dog, it smells,’ said Mrs. Must-keep-up-with-the-Jones'.
Of course, we all know how a walk in the rain brings out the most pungent, wet dog odour, and it was tempting to remark that, although the neighbour might smell, Sally stank - but was it worth either the effort or the risk? What dog-lover would not rather share their home with a temporarily stinking, wet dog than a permanently dog-hating, opinionated woman?
(An explanation later, unless you would like to comment?)
|
|
|
Post by Old Dragon (Al) on Oct 28, 2005 14:30:17 GMT 1
As a first rewrite aimed towards dog-owning readers, this version is an improvement on the original but more is possible.
By opening the piece with the dialogue, the reader immediately recognises the subject and a potential point of conflict. By naming the speaker ‘Mrs. Must-keep-up-with-the-Jones', they gain insight both into her character and the writer’s opinion.
Although still written in the first person, the exclusion of the words ‘I’ and ‘me’ allow the reader a greater opportunity for involvement. That is furthered by opening the second paragraph with the words ‘of course’, which is a device employed by writers to invite a readers’ empathy and involvement, and to get them on their side. However, those words precede an assumption – in this case, that all readers know the rank scent of a wet dog – and assumptions can alienate readers and discredit the writer’s integrity. (A more obvious example might be: ’Of course, we all know how to prepare a dog for the show ring at Crufts,’ which is clearly nonsense.) Plainly, this needs a little more work and the piece is still too wordy and untidy.
The inclusion of a question or two directed toward the reader is another means of drawing them into the intimacy of a piece; encouraging them to share, and therefore endorse, the writer’s emotions and opinions. The remarks made by Jo and Selina in the other thread illustrate how the original first sentence immediately engaged them emotionally; and we are all powerless over our first thought. That thought results from our instinctive gut reaction when faced by conflict that threatens our beliefs or us. What we are not powerless over is how we (or our fictional characters in stories) react or respond because of that thought and its effect on our, or their, emotions.
In the chat meeting last night the four basic personality types were discussed - these being, aggressive; indirectly aggressive; passive and assertive - and how most people are a blend of them and the accompanying characteristics. It is important for anyone aiming to write seriously, to learn to identify these personality types and the underlying emotions that cause them to act as they do. That is not to say your fictional characters must always behave in character, but for a reader to believe in them and feel satisfied at the conclusion of a story, there must be some logic behind, or explanation for, any deviations.
Even in the brief, two-paragraph piece of Jack’s above, there are clues to the personality types involved and their underlying fears. Unfinished, and short as it is, it also has the essential beginning, middle, and end that are vital for reader satisfaction.
|
|
|
Post by JD on Oct 29, 2005 10:10:32 GMT 1
2nd Rewrite ‘You should get rid of that old dog, it smells,’ said Mrs. Must-keep-up-with-the-Jones'. Of course, almost everyone who has walked a large, hairy dog in the rain knows that pungent odour. However, it was tempting to reply, ‘Madam, you smell; Sally stinks,’ but was the self-appointed neighbourhood watch-widow worth either the effort or risk? Especially not when only yards from a warm hearth and pot of hot tea. Surely, any dog-lover would prefer to share those pleasures with a temporarily malodorous bitch than a permanently bigoted one? ************** Al, do your worst. Do we still have any of the old WG quizzes available that this group could use for a bit of fun? If not, I will write some new ones. Jo, I have made some notes for you that I'll post later. If you are around then perhaps we could chat again on MSN? If not, I'll start a new thread or two that introduce a some other useful exercises. One of these relates to the hidden knowledge resources that everyone accumulates throughout life, yet are rarely conscious of using; the other a role play game that can be played on MSN.
|
|
PsychoJo
Wolf Team Member
Some mistakes are too much fun to only make once!
Posts: 1,403
|
Post by PsychoJo on Oct 29, 2005 12:28:02 GMT 1
Okay - I have been thinking about all the above comments and have had several re-writes of my first effort. Here is the latest....
Monday - Today began as any normal Monday except for the slight tinge of excitement at the impending move!
Whilst the fabric of the warehouse was being loaded on to the first of the many trucks that would be used, packing started quite subtly in the office.
In between boxing up the least used files, archive records and dog-eared reference books; business continued via email, fax and telephone.
With seven file drawers, two cupboards and the MD's office to schedule for packing, an urgent twenty page report request for an important customer was not a welcome email.
The Director-in-charge-of-Moving stirred up the mild panic that had begun to creep through the office and noisely threw himself into the business of ordering another new forklift truck - one that would actually fit into the warehouse this time!
|
|
PsychoJo
Wolf Team Member
Some mistakes are too much fun to only make once!
Posts: 1,403
|
Post by PsychoJo on Oct 29, 2005 12:32:16 GMT 1
Jack, I look forward to your notes. ;D
The quiz and role play sound good too!
I will be in or around for most of the day.
|
|
|
Post by Old Dragon (Al) on Oct 29, 2005 13:28:15 GMT 1
I have posted a new thread with one of the quizzes that members here might find amusing. Jo, because I know Jack's picking up on your piece, I won't comment at this stage. Jack, you are wicked! May I suggest that you put together a short piece on the subject of writers notes/notebooks? As for your latest rewrite... The original piece ran to 142 words; the first rewrite to 77 words, and this latest version now has 87 words, yet the subtle changes and additions address the points raised in my previous comments and show (as opposed to tell) the reader a much rounder picture of your character and opinion of your female adversary. The mere ten words of dialogue spoken by Mrs. Must-keep-up-with-the-Jones' open a window deep into her psyche. By referring to her as ‘the self-appointed neighbourhood watch-widow’ you conjure up an image of a very officious and predatory, even dangerous, female of middle to advancing years. Despite the mention of ‘risk’, we can see how you really hold her in contempt rather than respect. How she deludes herself behind her mask of self-importance and how her dialogue (and remember, everyone, that is accurately quoted from a real person) exposes her deep-rooted insecurities (fears) and lack of fulfilment in life. How this woman has predominantly an indirectly aggressive personality. She is one who seeks to dominate, control, and manipulate in order to impose her will upon others, and the fact that her words caused readers to experience the emotional reactions they did illustrates this point very well. However briefly, this woman, whom only Jack has met in person, took control – and the readers ALLOWED her to do so, thus exposing their own vulnerabilities in the process! But relax, now that you have all experienced at first hand a little of the ways of the indirectly aggressive personality, you are better able to recognise it in life, as in fiction, and forewarned is forearmed. It is also useful to note how, in turn and as a learning opportunity/teaching device, Jack has purposely manipulated the readers. (More about the writer/reader relationship another time.) In this piece, the writer (Jack) does not act on the temptation to reply, thus avoiding the risk of escalating the conflict between them. This appears to indicate he has a passive personality type – but is that correct? Despite admitting his negative emotions (fears) in the first draft version of the piece, and therefore the woman’s initial ability to intimidate and control him emotionally, rational thought kicks in. By his own admission, self-knowledge and awareness of the similarities between them, and the upsurge of anger (fear) he experienced, acted as natural defensive or warning mechanisms. The lure of the cosy hearth, pot of tea and the peace and quite of his home proved stronger than the desire to do battle, and the perceived threat an illusion rather than reality. Saying that, if Jack was developing the piece as a fictional story, then he could have chosen to have the protagonist behave very differently; perhaps escalating the conflict into a full-scale feud between neighbours – and all due to a comment about a whiffy dog uttered by a woman with an indirectly aggressive personality! Now do you recognise how potentially dangerous they are? (But how vital as tools for the writer.) The ending, encapsulated in the final sentence, does more than state the obvious; although its mischievous, tongue in cheek, inference toward scent recognition of character type might be lost to the average reader. However, Jack would appear to have recovered his errant wit.
|
|
PsychoJo
Wolf Team Member
Some mistakes are too much fun to only make once!
Posts: 1,403
|
Post by PsychoJo on Oct 29, 2005 13:47:15 GMT 1
Al, I appear to have my "dozy head" on this morning, sorry ..... I am having difficulty placing this woman as indirectly aggressive, I had her marked as aggressive?
A beginner's error? I think I just need to go and find some info on the characteristics of the four personality types.
*scuttles of to do a web search!*
|
|
|
Post by Old Dragon (Al) on Oct 29, 2005 14:44:39 GMT 1
Jo, here we are looking at only the four very basic personality types and from a writer's perspective, rather than that of a psychologist or psychiatrist's clinical definition. If you think here, in simple terms, of an aggressive character as being directly and physically loud, violent and threatening, then the indirectly aggressive character is, outwardly at any rate, less physically threatening; preferring to utilise indirect means to influence the behaviour of others by preying on and manipulating their emotions to achieve their goals. Yes, they are still aggressive, but they don't brandish a fist or gun, or issue direct verbal threats as a first line of attack.
|
|
PsychoJo
Wolf Team Member
Some mistakes are too much fun to only make once!
Posts: 1,403
|
Post by PsychoJo on Oct 29, 2005 15:20:08 GMT 1
Thanks for that, Al!
If I understand you correctly, for the purposes here, an indirectly aggressive uses all but physical aggressive means for example; facial expressions or words - or is it that they merely insinuate aggression? (or have I simplified that too much?)
Subtltey (sp?) is not my strong point! (I can't even spell it - PMSL) and I keep forgetting how much or how little the use or lack of it can affect a written piece!
I h
|
|
|
Post by Al on Oct 29, 2005 18:51:38 GMT 1
You are on the right track there, although there's a little more to it, Jo; notably that they rely on their victim's own emotions to administer the pain caused by their behaviour. However, they may be blissfully unaware of that or the effect they are having on others without evidence enough to satisfy themselves. (E.g. If Jack got rid of his dog.)
Does the mother of a disobedient child realise they are undermining the child's self-confidence when they say things like 'why can't you be like your brother/sister?' Does the child know its feelings of inadequacy lie at the root of its anger and are key to its bullying of children it perceives as weaker and even less adequate? Probably not. All it knows is that it feels better and more important because of its actions.
At this level, we are still in the realm of the 'normal', rather than abnormal or criminal personality types. Referring to the ordinary people involved in office power struggles; dog-training club committee disputes and other personality clashes that provide for conflicts writers depend on.
|
|
|
Post by Jack D - AKA Mr Meldrew on Oct 29, 2005 20:00:58 GMT 1
Jo, you were the first to mention here how writing is proving cathartic. In the third rewrite, little has changed, but enough to alter the meaning of the final sentence; that significantly from a personal and cathartic perspective. The latest version now reads… ‘You should get rid of that old dog, it smells,’ said Mrs. Must-keep-up-with-the-Jones'. Of course, almost everyone who has walked a large, hairy dog in the rain knows that pungent odour. It was tempting to reply, ‘Madam, you smell; Sally stinks,’ but was the self-appointed neighbourhood watch-widow worth either the effort or risk? Especially not when only yards from a warm hearth and pot of hot tea. Surely, any dog-lover would rather share their pleasure with a temporarily malodorous bitch than a permanently bigoted one? Yes, a seemingly subtle change but… Now onto some observations about your piece. As you say, your original is notes - these written for your own benefit and not the readers’. However, from the notes, it is possible to identify three possible individual subjects to write about or that could have bearing on a storyline or integrated into a single work of longer length. These being: the move, the report, and the director/forklift truck incident. Firstly, you need to decide what you want to write - an article; a story; a brief filler or humorous anecdotal piece? Additionally, you have to select your main theme or subject. Once you have decided those things, consider how best to grab the readers’ attention as quickly as possible. Whether you plan to write an article, story or filler, the reader will expect to discover the ‘what, when, where and whom’ ingredients vital to the creation of their mental picture of the scene and understanding of it. For example, compare the following with your original first sentence. ’Today began as any Monday in the ? (office or warehouse), except for a tinge of excitement at the imminent move.’ Minor adjustments, but the reader would then know the answers to three out of four of the above and the difference between impending and imminent, although subtle, brings the reader a sense of immediacy and accounts better for that ‘tinge of excitement’. (Most readers would associate ‘impending’ with ‘doom’ in a wordplay game; therefore few with excitement at the prospect.) Moving onto your first rewrite, second paragraph, am I to conclude that huge steel girders and metal sheets are being dismantled and loaded onto trucks? (To me the ‘fabric’ of a building indicates this.) Is the warehouse itself being moved or only its contents? Either way, can that be done with any measure of subtly? Can the staff truly remain sufficiently unmoved and stress free as to claim ‘business as usual’? What are they, zombies? These are the questions that spring to mind when reading your rewrite. This twenty-page report - in neither version do you state it needs to be written. If only supplied, what makes it so daunting? Is the file containing it lost or the copier dismantled? ‘Director-in-charge-of-Moving’ has immense potential for escalating the chaos. What a wonderful tool for mayhem you have in him. We already know a little of the over-sized forklift truck episode – but don’t TELL us more, SHOW us! Let him speak to the readers. Let him react to the stresses and surrounding atmosphere of the scene. Your characters are as important as the words you choose as tools with which to portray the events taking place, but there needs to be consistency – and less is often more. Punctuation can be used to good effect to speed up the action/panic. Short sentences increase pace. Longer ones convey a more relaxed atmosphere. To have your readers on the edge of their seat and sensing the growing panic, up the tempo. Perhaps have the director ‘snatch’ up the phone. ‘Bark’ into it. Become intolerant. Abusive, even. As a writer, you control the tap and the thermostat. Never forget that.
|
|