Running With Quills, Blogsite for Jayne Ann Krentz, Elizabeth Lowell, Stella Cameron, and Suzanne Simmons
Susan Andersen
Suzanne Simmons



Stella Cameron
Stella Cameron




Lori Foster
Suzanne Simmons



Jayne Ann Krentz
Jayne Ann Krentz




Elizabeth Lowell
Elizabeth Lowell




Suzanne Simmons
Suzanne Simmons






Welcome to Running With Quills, your online newsletter designed to keep you up to date with what your favorite authors (that would be us) are doing throughout the year. Here you will find the release dates of our new books and get information about our backlists. We'll preview our cover art here long before the books hit the stores and we'll keep you informed about works-in-progress and special projects. You'll also receive advance notice of signings and appearances. From time to time we'll give you a peek at our worlds, tell you what we're reading, and introduce you to some new authors.

Thursday, June 22, 2006

Jayne here, still out on the lanai






Still here in Hawaii, still doing a lot of reading out on the lanai. There is something so special about Hawaii. It's in the air. You feel it the instant you step off the plane. It is soothing to the soul and stimulating to the senses...and the palm trees are so, I dunno. Whatever.

And that is about as much of a description as you are going to get from me because, as a writer, description is my weak point.

When I hit a section of dialogue, I fly. The conversation on the page opens up the characters and the story and I can't wait to see what will happen next. But when I hit a passage wherein I have to actually slow down and describe something, I feel as though I am writing through molasses. Can't wait to get through it to get back to the fun stuff, the dialogue

I just finished Barry Eisler's THE LAST ASSASSIN. Eisler's story takes place in exotic locales like Tokyo and Barcelona. One of his skills is that he can make those locations come alive on the page; make you see them in dark and different ways. When he describes the hardware that his assassin character uses, I find myself actually reading those passages. Normally I skip over any paragraph in a book in which the word "gun" is accompanied by some numbers and dots as in .38 or .22. I generally find descriptions of weapons and cities boring. But I will read Eisler's descriptions because he is so very good at them.

I have come to the conclusion that writers -- at least the ones I know personally and the ones I read -- tend to fall into two camps: those who have a natural inclination and a talent for description and those who have a natural inclination and a talent for dialogue. Of course, to be successful, you have to pick up at least some skill in the thing you're not so good at. Still, I've got a hunch that the instinct for many if not most of us is to tell the story to ourselves first either through description or dialogue. We then share that story with the reader, filling in with the missing ingredient -- dialogue or description -- as needed.

Therefore, I would really appreciate it if those of you who read me would make it a point to slow down and read every word when you get to a descriptive passage in one of my books because you now know that I had to work very hard on that bit.

Who do you read for description and who do you read for dialogue? Or do you even think in those terms? Maybe it's just me.



33 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I visited Seattle a couple of years ago to see a cousin. I know as I was doing the tourist thing, running around (and under) Pioneer Square and not to mention a long walk down 1st Avenue to find a bus to take us back to West Seattle and the drive up Capital Hill and Queen Anne districts (is the last even a district, I'm going from memory here?) I could remember your books set in those locations. I came home and re-read 'Trust Me' which I think turned into a spree of re-reading your books. So while I don't know how clearly I pictured your books before the trip to Seattle, I know having been there I see clearly where your characters live. (At least the ones living in Seattle). By the way, when are you setting a book in Hawii?

Rachel

9:06 PM  
Anonymous Ranurgis said...

I guess I'd say that I like both description and dialog and that, personally, I'm equally bad at writing both. That's why I'm not a writer. I recently started reading books by a writer who's very good at describing emotion. It's very striking. I guess that's why she gives workshops in that category. I truly can't think of anybody else that I've read or read now who describes emotions even half as well as she. Most writers bring it out in the conversation and to some extent in inner monologue. That's not to say one way is better than the other but she does have a special gift for it.

I *finally* found "Ghost Hunter" today. It sure took a while. Now I have to wait til next month to look for more books. I certainly hope I can get into it soon. It know they're always fun and I love your understated, dry ways of saying things. Sure tickles my funny bone. That's my type of humor: bantering between the main characters who always understand each other and where this banter is one of the first real points of contact. Is that also why you don't include much actual history in your Quick novels?

Have fun out on the lanai. (Have to look up what exactly that is. I just have a vague idea.)

ghjrzy - Get her just right, zealous you.

9:19 PM  
Blogger Allison Brennan said...

Funny, I find your books are great in both dialogue and description!

Jenny Crusie and Janet Evanovich are masters (mistresses?) of dialogue. Dean Koontz is a master of description. So is Tami Hoag.

Dialogue is hard for me, but I'm working on it.

9:30 PM  
Anonymous Ranurgis said...

Oh, yeah, I went to see "The Da Vinci Code" today, mainly to relive my visits to Paris, London and Lincoln Cathedral where some of the shots were taken instead of at Westminster Abbey. When we were taking our tour of Britain, we had the most time to look at Lincoln Cathedral. When we first got there, there was a service of some kind in progress. We just sat down and took in the Cathedral, the speaker and the choir. It was truly a wonderful experience.

I was a little late and I'm glad I didn't have to suffer through all the violent previews. Now I remember why this is only my 5th or 6th visit to a cinema in more than 25 years. There are few that have the type of banter a la Thin Man or Spencer/Hepburn, the only type of humor I really like. But mainly, they are so full of violence it almost made me sick. And this is what our kids grow up with from the time they are a year or two old. I can only shudder.

9:35 PM  
Anonymous Julie Rowe said...

I read for dialogue and I write that way too. Every word of description I have to pull out of my head with a tow truck.

Maybe we should start a club?

Cheers, Julie

10:05 PM  
Blogger Lori Foster said...

Jayne, some day I'd like to see Hawaii. But right now, with my two little doggies, it's too far to go away.
So what is a lanai? I have no idea!

I think you're a master at both dialogue and description. I always have a good visual when reading your books, and I can hear the people talking when I read your dialogue.

Like Julie, I read mostly for the dialogue anyway. In some books, if the descriptions get too long, I skim past them anyway. LOL.

Ranurgis, I'm a movie junkie. Love them. I can watch just about anything except slapstick and chic flicks and epics. Horror movies, or kick butt movies are my faves.
It's the only time I eat popcorn, and one of the very few times I allow my self to drink colas.

Happy Friday everyone!
Lori

2:12 AM  
Blogger DFender said...

Jayne,
You're books are just right, descriptively speaking... lol. Not too much, not too little. Yeah, I'm Goldilocks.

Anyway, I tend to gloss over really descriptive portions of books unless the description turns out to be really necessary and I miss something, then I just go back and really read it...lol.

As long as I can get a sense of what the main characters general likeness is along with some background I'm a happy, happy camper..er...reader.

Jenny Crusie is great with "conversation"... as are all the authors from this blog... Dialogue runs the show as far as I'm concerned. Dialogue is what'll make me laugh, cry, groan and think. It's why I read.

Thank you Jayne...

Deb

Lanai: a veranda or roofed patio often furnished and used as a living room

tfvodty: Try flying vacations - oddly daring to yearn.

4:12 AM  
Blogger DFender said...

Oh... I do hafta mention, though, that if I'm reading a story set in an area that I've been... I tend to get more into the swing of things descriptive-passage-wise. Like Stella's books... I love the New Orleans area and her books remind me of how much I miss being there. Same thing with many of my other favorite authors. I'll even pick up an unknown author to read if the setting is somewhere I've been before.

Deb

ppmutls... Oy.

4:14 AM  
Blogger Emeraldax said...

As someone who daydreams about someday writing a romance novel, I am practicing practicing practicing in the delightful genre of fanfiction. The more I write, the more I learn - its been great.

I notice that my chapters tend to have more dialogue than anything else. Part of that is because the reader should already know what they are "seeing." For instance, if I say "Zach walked into the Pine Valley Inn bar" - the readers know that setting already. I can be lazy that way. I'll throw in certain action directions, almost like I'm writing a script - "Kendall sat down, nervously twisting the ring on her finger."

The hardest scenes for me to write are love scenes. That requires a lot of description and not alot of dialogue. I tend to cheat and fill it up with what the characters are thinking. Otherwise my characters would have a lot of quickies.

The more I write, the more I truly admire what goes into writing a novel. I've become more analytical about what I read and write. "What is it about my scene that falls flat?" I'm glad I found this blog, because it is great to be able to get a glimpse into what goes on in your heads. Thank you!

5:30 AM  
Blogger Cbell said...

I am so glad you asked this question as I am reading a book that is increasingly annoying. Why? Because I believe in description, but it needs to be done in moderation. This particular book has a line of dialogue, and then TWO PAGES of description before the reply to the initial line and then TWO MORE PAGES of description before the reply, etc. Those paragraphs will have me skimming through at will. I love dialogue and I love descriptions as well, but balance is the key.

...and now, I'm stepping off this soapbox. :)

5:44 AM  
Blogger justine said...

I never thought about, but now that you mention it, I think that is why I enjoy your books so much. Sometimes in books the descriptions are so boring, I skip pages or skim until someone starts taliking. I love the way you write dialogue. Last night, I was reading Second Sight, and my family kept looking over at me like I'm nuts, becuase I would be laughing out loud at something a character said. I think you put in the right amount of description. Just enough to let the reader visualize, but not too much to the point where the reader thinks, "Who cares, get back to the story please!"

6:06 AM  
Anonymous claire said...

I think description is good if you need it in a book, lets say for flashback or to give clues about something that will happen in the future. Too much description to fill up a page to get the required number of words for a novel is a bad, bad idea! Readers do tend to recognize it for what it is and they either skip all those descriptions or think the author is just stalling.

On the other hand, too much dialogue is tiring to the mind. The reader's tendency is to play the dialogue in his or her mind and imagine how the conversation is going. If it gets too lengthy, what happens is, it gets boring, like when you're listening to a lecture or a sermon.

In you case, Jayne, I think you have a good combination of both. That's why readers like me love to read books from authors like you!

7:45 AM  
Blogger Jayne Ann Krentz said...

Thanks for the comments! Lori, someone up above defined lanai but in case you missed it, that is the term used to describe balconies here in Hawaii. Our hotel room has a lanai and that is where I spend most of my time.

--Jayne

9:53 AM  
Anonymous AgTigress said...

Jayne, your blogs always make me think of so many things to say that I hardly know where to start!

A good novelist finds her own natural balance of dialogue and description, and it will not necessarily be the same as another author’s. Jayne excels in witty and subtle dialogue, but she uses description elegantly and eloquently too, balancing it pleasantly and naturally with the dialogue. It flows every bit as well as the conversations, and never looks as though she had any trouble writing it.

There is no ‘correct’ proportion. Neither dialogue nor description are good or bad things in themselves: if a book appears to have either ‘too much dialogue’ or ‘too much description’, either the author is not very good at writing whichever element seems to be dominating the book, or she is not good at creating a just balance, as in the case someone mentioned above in which a conversation is disconcertingly broken up with long passages of description.

And because dialogue is not intrinsically ‘better’ than description, I am bothered by the way in which it is taking over more and more in popular fiction, to the point where some books read more like screenplays than novels. This impoverishes them. In a play, the actors fill in information that needs to be written down in a novel. If it is not written down, the result is insubstantial and unsatisfying. I have the impression that today there are publishers and editors who like to excise as much descriptive writing as possible. Why is this? Probably they fear descriptive writing because it is a little more difficult to read than conversation. Spoken English is easier than written English because the syntax and vocabulary are simpler and more limited, with shorter sentences and shorter, fewer, words. A story containing a very high proportion of dialogue results in an easier readability score, meaning it can be understood by a younger and less well-educated reader than one with a more challenging score. This makes the work more ‘accessible’, and is therefore deemed to be a Good Thing.

The same applies to the use of excessively simple and colloquial language even in non-dialogue sections, up to and including short sentence fragments without verbs – exclamations, in fact. This trend drives an undesirable wedge between fiction and good non-fiction writing, as well as reducing comprehension between speakers of different varieties of English. Written English is more international than the spoken form. The trend also panders to an insulting view of the reader as a very simple-minded creature with a short attention span, and leads to books that are easy and quick to read, and equally easy to forget.

I love well-written description, and well-written, by definition, means that it is NOT BORING. I admire the accurate ear for speech that Jayne and others here demonstrate so beautifully, but for a book to be memorable, and as enjoyable on the 50th reading as it was on the first, descriptive writing, too, seems to me absolutely essential.

10:54 AM  
Blogger Suzanne Simmons said...

Wonderful blog, Jayne!

agtigress, what fabulous comments from you, too. I especially liked the idea that each and every writer discovers their own balance between dialogue and description.

I know I started out with more description in my books and the emotional impact was greater than many of those I eventually wrote with primarily dialogue. (I learned how to write very spare for contemporary romances with humor.)

Now I'm back writing a much richer style again for my paranormals and I hope the emotional impact is back as well.

Aloha to all! (Even those of us who aren't in Hawaii.)

11:23 AM  
Blogger Stella said...

An excellent topic.

Balance is everything. Nothing in the writing should shake a reader out of her/his dream. One unfortunate construction to avoid is dialogue interrupted by a big block of distracting narrative.

"If you turn me down, I'll shake you until your teeth fall out. And then I'll make you eat raw meat and if you complain, you're gums will be history, too." Jack looked satisfied with his threat.

Mara sweated because the temperature in Houston had hit
105--celcius. The office plants wilted. The smog had to be as foul inside the building as out. But even air thick enough to grab didn't hide the paint bubbles puffing up on the walls and probably about to burst and expel some noxious slime.

Jack leaned on her desk. "So, do I get the job or go to work with the pliers?"

Okay, so that's extreme but it shows how easy it would be to lose the whole point of an exchange.

Stella who really does have plenty of things to do:) Stella who also needs subtle, sometimes witty dialogue and enough description to stop her from floating in space, any space.

12:19 PM  
Blogger robin said...

Do you think its a generational thing, the dialogue vs. description issue? We're so used to dialogue moving stories along on tv and in movies, that we don't have patience for it in books? I don't know. Maybe not. It could be that I just have a very ADD-esque attention span, but I'm a dialogue reader as well. I will say that Barbara Parker's "Suspicion of Rage" had great description, as most of it took place in Cuba. I found myself really paying attention where I would normally glaze over.

And while writing description effectively is hard, writing GOOD dialogue is hard too. Sometimes, especially in series books, I start to glaze over there as well because they all start to sound the same.

Faye Kellerman does both really well. Kelley Armstrong does both really well. One of my all time favorites, George Pelecanos, does both really well. Robert Crais does both really well. Lori's "Too Much Temptation" does both really, REALLY well.

12:44 PM  
Blogger Karibear said...

I like both dialogue and description, but they have to be well done. Description has to move the story along and dialogue has to portray the characters. Some of my favorites are the ladies here, of course [or I wouldn't have found this blog in the first place], Crusie, Evanovich, James Agee, Peter Bowen's Gabriel DuPre series, Tanenbaum's Butch Karp series, Jane Smiley's Horse Heaven, and too many others to mention.

One thing that totally turns me off is an inaccurate description of a place I know reasonably well. If _I_ know it's wrong, why didn't the writer bother to do at least enough research to get it right? One writing seminar I attended stressed how important it was for a writer to write what they knew. That is undoubtedly one of the most important bits of advice I've ever gotten.

2:49 PM  
Anonymous Tammy said...

:::hiding behind couch:::

I actually don't think about the dialogue or descriptions UNLESS somethign is missing.

With your writing Jayne I'd say you've got a good balance - The descritpion is where it needs to be as much as needs to be, same with dialogue.

Course I've found this to be true of all the Quills.

4:51 PM  
Blogger talpianna said...

I hear the characters talking in my head, but I have trouble visualizing scenes and people. I have always attributed this at least in part to spending much of my early childhood with uncorrected myopia--I didn't get glasses till I was in fourth grade.

For dialogue, I'd particularly recommend Georgette Heyer. For description, you can't beat Mary Stewart.

The author I cut my literary teeth on (my grandfather read him to me before I could read myself) was Rudyard Kipling, who excelled at both description and dialogue--once you get past the fact that much of his stuff is written in dialect (Cockney, Irish, or Yorkshire for his "Soldiers Three" stories). He was quite simply a wonderful writer.

There is a favorite passage of mine that I like to quote as an example of vivid description in a variety of senses, not just sight but sound and smell too. It's written in Irish dialect, so I'll quote it in a separate post here so people can skip it if they prefer.

avjxf -- Amanda 4 visuals; Jayne 4 expertise & facts.

5:28 PM  
Blogger talpianna said...

Excerpted from ‘Love-o’-Women’ in Many Inventions by Rudyard Kipling

‘Ye know the turn of the pass forninst Jumrood and the nine-mile road on the flat to Peshawur? All Peshawur was along that road day and night waitin’ for frinds—men, women, childer, and bands. Some av the throops was camped round Jumrood, an’ some wint on to Peshawur to get away down to their cantonmints. We came through in the early mornin’ havin’ been awake the night through, and we dhruv sheer into the middle av the mess. Mother av Glory, will I iver forget that comin’ back? The light was not fair lifted, and the, first we heard was “For ’tis my delight av a shiny night,” frum a band that thought we was the second four comp’nies av the Lincolnshire. At that we was forced to sind them a yell to say who we was, an’ thin up wint “The wearin’ av the Green.” It made me crawl all up my backbone, not havin’ taken my brequist. Then right smash into our rear came fwhat was left av the Jock Elliott’s—wid four pipers an’ not half a kilt among thim, playin’ for the dear life, an’ swingin’ their rumps like buck-rabbits, an’ a native rig’mint shriekin’ blue murther. Ye niver heard the like! There was men cryin’ like women that did—an’ faith I do not blame them! Fwhat bruk me down was the Lancers’ Band—shinin’ an’ spick like angils, wid the ould dhrum-horse at the head an’ the silver kettle-dhrums an’ all an’ all, waitin’ for their men that was behind us. They shtruck up the Cavalry Canter; an’ begad those poor ghosts that had not a sound fut in a throop they answered to ut; the men rockin’ in their saddles. We thried to cheer them as they wint by, but ut came out like a big gruntin’ cough, so there must have been many that was feelin’ like me. Oh, but I’m forgettin’! The Fly-by-Nights was waitin’ for their second battalion, an’ whin ut came out, there was the Colonel’s horse led at the head—saddle-empty. The, men fair worshipped him, an’ he’d died at Ali Musjid on the road down. They waited till the remnint av the battalion was up, and thin—clane against ordhers, for who wanted that chune that day?—they wint back to Peshawur slowtime an’ tearin’ the bowils out av ivry man that heard, wid “The Dead March.” Right acrost our line they wint, an’ ye know their uniforms are as black as the Sweeps, crawlin’ past like the dead, an’ the other bands damnin’ them to let be.

‘Little they cared. The carpse was wid them, an’ they’d ha taken ut so through a Coronation. Our ordhers was to go into Peshawur, an’ we wint hot-fut past The Fly-by-Nights, not singin’, to lave that chune behind us. That was how we tuk the road of the other corps.

‘’Twas ringin’ in my ears still whin I felt in the bones of me that Dinah was comin’, an’ I heard a shout, an’ thin I saw a horse an’ a tattoo latherin’ down the road, hell-to-shplit, under women. I knew—I knew! Wan was the Tyrone Colonel’s wife—ould Beeker’s lady—her gray hair flyin’ an’ her fat round carkiss rowlin’ in the saddle, an’ the other was Dinah, that shud ha’ been at Pindi. The Colonel’s lady she charged the head av our column like a stone wall, an’ she’ all but knocked Beeker off his horse, throwin’ her arms round his neck an’ blubberin’, “Me bhoy! me bhoy!” an’ Dinah wheeled left an’ came down our flank, an’ I let a yell that had suffered inside av me for months and—Dinah came!

5:32 PM  
Blogger talpianna said...

I can't resist adding these links to excerpts from JOHN BROWN'S BODY by Stephen Vincent Benet--some of the best American poetry ever!

http://oldpoetry.com/opoem/38925

http://www.gdg.org/Research/Authored%20Items/benet.htm

6:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am visual in my reading so description is very important. When it is working, it just flows and the story plans out beautifully in scenes. I cannot even get past the first few pages of any book if it isn't working.
Dialogue is also very important to me. But while I am always fascinated when it is really working, I know that most people aren't as good in the real world as some of the fictional characters I 'meet'. When I do have the opportunity to participate in such a dialogue, it is the best stimulant there is and I can only hope that I'm up for the ride!

10:38 PM  
Blogger Samantha Majhor said...

Well crafted dialogue and description are equally essential to a good work of fiction. What I really love, when it comes to description, is when an author doesn't overdo it. I know it is tempting to go nuts with the adjectives, but the best descriptions show the reader the story-scape without all the flowery frills. Particularly, if an author unfolds a scene with simple words and throws in that one really awesome word (like sacrosanct or obeisance or juggernaught...any cool word that makes me want to look it up in a dictionary and use it in my next poem), and leaves it at that, I feel such gratification as a reader. What is reading worth without those little surprises?

Hey...I'm an English major...we think about little things like words.

2:27 AM  
Blogger Shelli Stevens said...

Hawaii sounds fabulous. A little hot, but fabulous.

I love dialogue. I'm a dialogue whore. If I hit too many parapraphs of description I start skimming ahead. An author who does great description, though, I don't realize I'm reading parapraphs of description. I've become the character. So to speak :)

11:55 AM  
Blogger Jay said...

I prefer writers who write a good balance. If there's too much dialogue, I lose my mental image of where they are. Too much description and it gets boring.

I've just finished reading a book that had a number of sex scenes in it - I've no problem with that, except each one averaged five pages long. After the first two, I started skipping through to the post-coital scene where the story picks up again. Unless they're going to start swinging from the chandeliers in gold lame bunny outfits, there's only so much sex scene descriptive I can stand before it gets boring and breaks the thrall of the story.

Same with too much dialogue - they'll be arguing in the car, and suddenly they're facing off across the loungeroom. Hello - how did they get there? I have actually read books that didn't have the segue in them - apparently the reader is supposed to fill in the blanks.

That said, there's some who manage to pack a page of description into a single sentence. Jayne, you can do that, which is why it doesn't matter if you don't cram a lot of description in. You give the reader enough visual to carry the story - and that's your balance.

There's others, Iris Johansen comes to mind, who can carry their story with a minimum of dialogue, simply because what they DO say packs a punch.

I guess it's all in how the writer uses what they're good at. :)

7:04 PM  
Blogger talpianna said...

The Mole agrees with the Platypus, Jay! A seemly balance between dialogue and description, with the note that the description doesn't have to be visual--there are other senses.

My pet peeve is long passages of dialogue where one gets lost as to who is saying what to whom. One can't put "John/Mary said" in all the time; it's clumsy. But one needs to put in clues, like "John walked over to the sill and leaned against the window" or "Mary plucked nervously at her apron." Or having one of them address the other by name. I HATE going back and counting speeches!

onaxblr -- Oh, no! Ann, Xena's blog looks rude!

12:58 AM  
Blogger Emeraldax said...

I don't know if this falls under the category of description, but I just have to praise authors that make you love, or at least become intrigued by, what the characters care about. I'm almost finished reading Tell Me No Lies and Elizabeth Lowell has certainly piqued my interest in Chinese bronzes. She did the same with ancient manuscripts when I read Moving Target. Jayne Ann Krentz has done the same with glass, Art Deco, alchemy (heh), etc.

6:03 AM  
Anonymous CCHirsch said...

Jay: I totally agree.

And Emeraldax: for me, Black Pearls from Lowell. And bronzes. And from Jayne: event planning, glass, art deco, photography, art appreciation as sensual...the list goes on.

I think in some ways we're all word junkies or we wouldn't be here.

Here's my mangled metaphor for today [and further evidence of my choice NOT to attempt to write]: Every recipe calls for basic ingredients, but in the hands of a seasoned chef we taste a finished product. Too much of one ingredient throws off the batch. And in the hands of a master chef, the fiinished product is so much more than the simple mix, that the flavor lingers beyond the act of consumption. Eh voila -- a Jayne!!!!!

--Chris

7:26 AM  
Blogger Lisabella said...

I had to add my two cents here...I agree with talpianna, Mary Stewart transports the reader to Greece, Austria, France, etc., in the most compelling way. M.M. Kaye is unparalleled for her descriptions of India...she actually made me want to go there, though I don't think I would enjoy it as much as I do on the printed page. But she also describes Crete, Africa, and Zanzibar in some of her other novels, truly taking to the reader to that place.

Strangely, Jayne, I never noticed any lack of description in your novels...I guess I'm having too much fun reading. You excel at dialogue...just check the "quotes" on the JAK website to see how many quotable quotes our Jayne has given us!

I'm sure I will be taking more note of dialogue versus description in my future reading...thanks for making me think about this!
Lisa

4:30 PM  
Anonymous Saralee said...

I agree with everyone who said "balance."

I read "The Historian" by Elizabeth Kostova, and liked the descriptions there. They satisfied the armchair traveler in me. And I love authors who excel at world-building, like Barbara Hambly does in her fantasy and historical mystery novels -- just wonderful.

But I adore snappy dialogue, too, which is always the special treat in any Krentz/Quick/Castle story.

Now my questions: Are the dialogue-writers basically storytellers at heart, who hate to slow down and slog through the what/where/when details? Are the description mavens like poets -- expert manipulators of language?

I've been thinking about good storytellers and good poets, and wondering if preferences for dialogue or description can be related to those two tendencies. You've got to be a little of both, and I think you can learn whichever one you need.

Okay, that's enough from me now.

Saralee

7:47 AM  
Anonymous Shoshana said...

Saralee, what an intriguing thought!
Come to think of it, one of my favourite authors for description is Laurie R King, and if I saw a book of poetry with her name on it I'd buy it without question.
And I can easily picture Jennifer Crusie, for instance, gesturing on a stage telling a story.
JAK, you tend to balance so well I'd never have known which category to put you in if you hadn't said something. I get such clear pictures of your worlds (I LOVED Shield's Lady, by the by) and hear such distinct voices from your characters that it never occurred to me you would like one better.

6:19 AM  
Anonymous Sharon said...

Jayne,
What I think is great about your books is that I don't get distracted by the writing. I'm drawn into the characters and the story. I'm not thinking about "my that's a lot of dialogue" or "wow, what a lot of description." Your books celebrate true love and commitment and honesty between people. In other words, they're about real things, not just words on a page. :) Anyway, I'm a new fan, but definitely a fan!

2:33 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger