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