With every story I finish I seem to see more flaws in my writing style. And then have to wonder whether they’re flaws or features.
For example: I’m not good on descriptions, and tend to make them brief when I do use them. Which means the prose isn’t necessarily as immersive as some might like. Conversely, they don’t slow the story down. So in that way it could be considered good.
If it’s not something I feel I need to, or can, change, then I’d probably have to consider it a feature of my style.
I’m becoming convinced epic fantasy is not what I should be writing, because it doesn’t really fit my style. Or anything that long.
The third part of Dwimmerfall (I think it’ll be four parts) feels like it has too many meetings. It’s an inevitable part of the story, since much of this part is world building based on the disappearing of the dwimmer (magic) that’s so ingrained into civilisation. A couple of viewpoint characters are leaders, and getting stuck in meetings is unavoidable.
Some problems I’ve shown, where the character (either the leaders or another) can go to an example of the failure, and do other things while there. But there’s some stuff where discussing it is more useful for the examination, and I want differing opinions.
In meeting scenes, I try to have some degree of different agendas, but I’m not sure if that’s enough. I don’t necessarily have much real plotting (characters plotting, not story plotting), where the viewpoint character has to get seriously involved and have a sub-plot that occurs during the meeting, or over a few meetings.
I’m not sure whether I should have something like that, or whether it’d slow the story down too much. They aren’t really necessary for the overall story, and I could easily lose control of things if I go too far along that path.
My inclination is that unless such a subplot can actually say something about the situation that otherwise wouldn’t be covered, to leave it out. But I also worry that without the added drama the meeting scenes may fall flat, dragging on without having any real punch.
They’re only in first draft at the moment, and it could be a while before they get any revisions (maybe not until after the first draft of part 4, sometime after I work out what happens in part 4), but it remains a problem I increasing think about: am I writing scenes with too little depth?
Which of course comes from the idea that there’s a proper way to write stories, which is possibly ridiculous. I need only as much detail as is necessary to tell the story I want to tell. Everything else is texture and flavour.
Or is that philosophy simply an feature of my style?