Day one in writing exile, and there are pages for my trouble. And another lesson.
No matter how much I write, the longer the passage, the more glitches surface during revisions. Having wrestled this anomaly for a few years now, it’s clear this is probably a bit more complicated than say, give a dog enough rope and he’ll hang himself with it.
For ages, critics slogged Pink Floyd, charging them with overly minimalistic songs and melodies. But there was a practical reason behind the simplicity. They discovered that while recording, if they made a mistake, and tried to cover it up with production or mixing, it made the error even more noticeable. The whole song lurched. Keep in mind, their reign predated real time digital intervention. Now engineers extricate sour notes with a point and click. Back then, musicians had to get it right. And they were, by their recountings, musicians of average skills. So in order to nail it without going crazy or spending a billion years in the studio, they used stripped down arrangements.
They sold 200 million records. So I’d say maybe people like their entertainment less complicated.
Right now, I also lack a digital mixing board or engineer to automagically fix my mistakes. In lieu of these resources, I keep the chapters under 5 pages and paragraphs under 6 sentences. Wherever possible, sentences are short, independent clauses.
Call me Simple Man.
Minimalism is highly underrated. It’s the reason why the lit critics never really got behind Hemingway. Not because he wrote about particularly controversial subjects, but rather because his style of writing was so spare. It’s almost as if they critics thought, Well, he doesn’t use enough words, therefore he must not be very good.
Same goes for Stephen King. Doesn’t matter if you love him or hate him, you can’t deny the guy’s success or the impact he’s had on literature. But, because a large portion of his work is horror, he automatically forfeits a certain amount of respect in the eyes of the critics who think that horror (or any other type of genre fiction) is somehow inferior in quality to Literature.
It’s just another form of prejudice, really. And quite honestly, I’ve never not read a book or not gone to see a movie or not bought a CD based on what someone else told me.
Funny you mention Hemingway, Ian. I enjoyed a few of his books, though it’s hard to believe reading him now he ruled the literary roost. His stuff is sparse.
The King Paradox is another matter. Rarely does he get establishment respect, a blackout that will likely continue as long as he writes what people enjoy reading. Or as the critics accuse him of, pandering to the lowest common denominator.
I’ve not studied his style very closely but his work is not always simple. One of his greatest strengths that strikes me are transitions. He has a way of knowing exactly how and when to change gears. As if he mainlines into the literal pulse of the paragraph.
I don’t think his chosen genre precludes critical approbations. Their problem has more to do with his astronomical sales figures. Let’s face it, in the late 80’s to mid 90’s he occupied multiple spots on the hardcover and paperback fiction bestseller lists. His greatest competition was himself.
No one likes sucking up the fumes of a blowout.
It’s very true. Critics have always been very suspicious of popular novels and successful writers.
To have such problems. To have such problems.