I like the comment/quote about stories being as long as they need to be to tell the story. As someone who reads for a living, I often read manuscripts that give the impression the writer was padding the page count because he/she was paid by the word. I just read a thousand-page fantasy that had about enough sory for a solid 450 pages and the rest was filler. In fantasy, I like solid world-building, but this was filler--lavish and elaborate and redundant descriptions. I had flashbacks to reading THE SEVEN GABLES where Hawthorne described his house in such minute detail I felt like I could have built a replica without consulting a blueprint.
Yes, it always surprises me that publishing companies can't seem to wrap their heads around the fact that a story doesn't have to be 500 to a 1000 pages long.
I love the old novellas that come in at a 150 pages. It's a complete story with no words wasted.
3 comments:
Hey Sandra,
Praise be.
Most books, in my opinion, should be edited down to under 150 pages.
(Unfortunately, these 73-pagers might only be long short stories sadly in need of editing.)
Stephen
I like the comment/quote about stories being as long as they need to be to tell the story. As someone who reads for a living, I often read manuscripts that give the impression the writer was padding the page count because he/she was paid by the word. I just read a thousand-page fantasy that had about enough sory for a solid 450 pages and the rest was filler. In fantasy, I like solid world-building, but this was filler--lavish and elaborate and redundant descriptions. I had flashbacks to reading THE SEVEN GABLES where Hawthorne described his house in such minute detail I felt like I could have built a replica without consulting a blueprint.
Yes, it always surprises me that publishing companies can't seem to wrap their heads around the fact that a story doesn't have to be 500 to a 1000 pages long.
I love the old novellas that come in at a 150 pages. It's a complete story with no words wasted.
Post a Comment