Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!wivax!decvax!microsof!fluke!ssc-vax!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!ariel!hou5f!orion!houca!hogpc!houxm!mhuxa!ulysses!smb From: smb@ulysses.UUCP Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers Subject: Re: writing style Message-ID: <479@ulysses.UUCP> Date: Fri, 1-Jul-83 14:25:04 EDT Article-I.D.: ulysses.479 Posted: Fri Jul 1 14:25:04 1983 Date-Received: Thu, 7-Jul-83 00:31:12 EDT References: <2603@sri-arpa.UUCP> Lines: 22 My feeling is that style is important, but I agree -- it isn't the most critical element in SF. When I read SF, I look for concepts first. Innovative ideas can rescue an otherwise-bad book. At the same time, a certain minimum command of the mechanics of writing is essential, or I'm unlikely to be able to wade through the thing. Where I draw the line, though, is in the other direction: I don't like SF books where the author is solely concerned with his/her own ideas of "style", and totally ignores questions of plot, comprehensibility, etc. Much of the so-called "new wave" science fiction falls into this category, I'd say. (The same, of course, applies to main-stream fiction. I'm not fond of style uber alles; I insist that anything I read appeal to me in *some* other fashion. As a result, I tend to read much more non-fiction than non-SF fiction.) I do admire writers who do have a strong command of style, though. C.J Cherryh is an author who writes very well, but without sacrificing comprehensibility or plot. Nevertheless, the appeal of her novels is in the way she uses the language and her art to totally grab the reader's attention. --Steve Bellovin