Originally posted by Secret Master
Now, the logical question to be derived from this is: is character, plot, or setting most central to writing a good yarn? If it's not character, then our less-is-more clues might come from setting or plot instead.
The answer here really depends of the AAR you are writing I suppose.
Also, the "less is more" rule does not apply to everything.
Can you define a style as being "less is more" ?
In your example, you mixed both: I agree with you that style should probably adapt to both the time of the action, and the characters. But does style needs to adapt to description of settings (i.e. descriptions those are not part of the action) ?
If not, this is where the "less is more" rule applied at the best.
I think the "less is more" rule applies to the content, more than to the style.
When I am thinking about characters described first by only a few quirks, I am thinking about characters' "content". And for such character definition, yes, at first, less is more. Description of settings is also probably inherently a "content" object.
On the other hand, style is a much more complicated matter than content IMHO. As said, style has to adapt to many things, and mainly the rhythm of the action. I won't advise an amateur writer to describe quick actions by lengthy descriptions, but they are exception in the English literature, like Joseph Conrad's "Typhoon" (I personnally found the pace of the book terribly slow, while it is supposed to describe the dramatic situation of a boat caught in a typhoon).
Sometime, a style that inherently appears as "flawed" is necessary for the story as well. My best example is "The History of the Siege of Lisbon" by Jose Saramago. The story is about a character, and a book describing other characters (a book within a book, like Shakespeare's "play within a play"). During the story, everything is mixed and the main character begins to talk with characters in the book. To confuse the reader on purpose and makes these dialogs possible, Saramago has a very distinctive style: Dialogs are like description sentences without any specific punctuation. It is hard to read at the beginning, but it makes sense because of his whole story.
I will try to reproduce it (badly) with the homework about the siege of Artois:
The camp of the English army was resounding with celebration of the New Year’s Eve amongst the troops, whereas the future of the besieged town of Artois was looking grim. Poor soldiers, during all these long months of waiting for the French to surrender, they must have suffered of cold and hunger. Not exactly, in fact we manage to steal goods that the Frenchies were trying to sneak in by the postern. But General, attritions must have heavily taken its toll on your troops. That’s probably the fate of all armies in a campaign. Looking back, that was probably the harsher early Renaissance fight between the two countries. And my soldiers bravely assault and captured the town in August. The encyclopaedia reports the date of the victory being the 8th, to be more precise. That must have been the official date of surrender on the French document, but the fights probably end a few days before.
What is interesting in this style is that some of the sentences are descriptions you could encounter in any story:
"The camp of the English army was resounding with celebration of the New Year’s Eve amongst the troops, whereas the future of the besieged town of Artois was looking grim."
"Looking back, that was probably the harsher early Renaissance fight between the two countries."
Some of the sentences could be the English General's words (a character in the story):
"Not exactly, in fact we manage to steal goods that the Frenchies were trying to sneak in by the postern."
"That’s probably the fate of all armies in a campaign."
"And my soldiers bravely assault and captured the town in August."
"That must have been the official date of surrender on the French document, but the fights probably end a few days before."
And some of the sentences could be the narrator's words:
"Poor soldiers, during all these long months of waiting for the French to surrender, they must have suffered of cold and hunger."
"But General, attritions must have heavily taken its toll on your troops."
"That’s probably the fate of all armies in a campaign."
"Looking back, that was probably the harsher early Renaissance fight between the two countries."
"The encyclopaedia reports the date of the victory being the 8th, to be more precise."
"That must have been the official date of surrender on the French document, but the fights probably end a few days before."
Some sentences are descriptions. Some sentences are a dialog between the narrator and its character (talking one with each other quite painlessly for the reader). And for some sentences, you just can't know. Nevertheless the whole paragraph seems an horrible long description, without pause normally given by punctuation marks: " , - etc... However you can't achieve the same effect without this style.
If you are curious, I strongly recommend the book, not only because it is an interesting style, but also because it tells a wonderful story.
Cat
