Eol - Well, have you read any books by Terry Brooks? For me his descriptions of internal character deliberations (while good) seems to scoop away wonder and become character rants.
Lets compare this type of character description to say mythological stories (Greek, Norse, whichever) and they tend to describe the character through actions. This distinction between "Through Action" and "Through Words" (Not words as in speech) to me is an integral part when your writing. Concentrating too much on character deliberations (except if its what your going for in a more philosophical story) can prove to add a negative aspect to the story.
I just thought of another example, in
Return of the King when Frodo is nearing Mount Doom, Tolkien uses Frodo's behavior & action to describe feelings. Becoming sluggish, tired, worn and carrying a great burden are all descriptions we as readers see and then decided that the protagionist has gone through a major shift in attitude.
Quote:
|
or example, jake whyte spends close the three pages describing how the soldier got stabbed through the groin with a spear( or something to that nature) more detail then I really needed to know! That is the type of description I do not want to read.
|
Ummm, ouch. Was this a coroner's report?
Anyway, it may be that I am just a picky person or that I am trying to recreate/rediscover the wonder I experienced during LOTR. But nothing can beat the feeling you have when you know a character through how he acts instead of how the author is
telling you how he acts. Its like going on a rollercoaster, the feeling is not the same when someone tells you about it. True feeling comes through experience.
[ August 29, 2002: Message edited by: Shadowstrife911 ]
[ August 29, 2002: Message edited by: Shadowstrife911 ]