[deleted]
Comments
[deleted] OP t1_jeg9gur wrote
[removed]
TheSSChallenger t1_jedc3k0 wrote
Clarity.
You can be as loquacious as you want if you arrange your words so that the structure, cadence, and meaning of each sentence is clear.
It only becomes "purple prose" when your ornamentation gets in the way of the meaning and flow of the sentence. If people have to slow down, back up, and read through several times to figure out how the hell that sentence was supposed to be read, that's purple.
farseer4 t1_jee4g8d wrote
> If people have to slow down, back up, and read through several times
Ok, but what "people"? Because what's very difficult for a reader may not be difficult at all for a different reader.
TheSSChallenger t1_jeeelb5 wrote
Sure, a certain author's writing can be too difficult for some readers.
But that's why we have the concept of reading levels, which measures an individual's ability to handle complex writing.
But reading skill is kind of weird because the speed and ease with which we read is very much determined by our ability to recognize patterns--a good reader doesn't even have to look at every word in a sentence before their brain has picked out the important words and anticipated what is being said based on comprehension and convention. That's why, for example, we don't even notice most small typos.
So, if a writer's prose doesn't follow language conventions--if their sentence structure is weird or they go way too heavy on the euphemisms--then even a very skilled reader is going to have to grind to a halt and start unpacking each sentence piece-by piece, which is exactly what you don't want good readers to have to do.
Of course there is also variation in language convention. It's going to be easier to read a Regency-era novel if you're familiar with how English was spoken in the Regency Era... but those are still conventions, which a skilled reader can learn and adapt to.
Whereas "purple prose" (this term showed up in dictionaries in 1598, by the way) doesn't quite follow any particular linguistic population's language conventions--it's just that author ignoring the rules and writing whatever sounds good to them.
Sumtimesagr8notion t1_jeegd85 wrote
Idk I enjoy prose like that. If I have to slow down a little and really focus, it's usually an enjoyable book. Nabokov, McCarthy, Pynchon, Joyce, all fantastic authors.
Griffen_07 t1_jef0qdx wrote
Yes but that also goes back to intent. There is a fashion in certain literary circles to make it so a work has to be picked apart and footnoted to make sense. This is stuff like Ulysses or Finnegan's Wake that are not made to be enjoyed. However, when you get to non-standard form and style while trying to be a book sold for entertainment that it is purple.
Sumtimesagr8notion t1_jef1gg1 wrote
Ulysses is made to be enjoyed lol. I get what you're trying to say though. I've just never came across a book that I didn't enjoy because the prose was too complicated.
Where do you draw the line between books that are for standard entertainment and books that aren't? Should all genre fiction be written as plain as possible?
Griffen_07 t1_jef492x wrote
I think it goes back to the intent of the author. If the book matches the niche the author is aiming at then it is fine. Commercial fiction should include the full range of expression from simple to complex. The lines are different for an author that is deliberately aiming for a non-commercial thing.
Readers will self-sort to the kind of books they like.
codece t1_jed7scf wrote
I'm still trying to decipher your run-on sentence.
KoeiNL t1_jedyuh7 wrote
The irony here is palpable.
HeySlimIJustDrankA5 t1_jed5ww9 wrote
Purple prose is completely subjective and changes based on time period. A lot of Victorian-era works are full of it because back then books would be censored and refused by their publishers more easily. A lot of publishers would add unnecessary passages to replace sections deemed too inappropriate for societal morals.
Bookanista t1_jedlkqn wrote
Because you’re probably referring to a style of writing that those who like it would call “descriptive” or “romantic,” not purple.
No_Poet_7244 t1_jee6y47 wrote
“Purple” prose is not gauged by any objective measure, and that subjectivity means that all but the most spartan of writing will be labelled as “purple” by someone. There are certainly hallmarks of good and bad prose, and general rules one should follow when writing, at least until they know how to break those rules effectively, but everyone uses a different yardstick to measure and some folks like their prose more descriptive.
nearlyFried t1_jedyo86 wrote
I read The Sympathizer lately. I liked it. The prose was good. It wasn't in the way of the story and wasn't very purple by my reckoning.
Tea_4_thee t1_jefzk01 wrote
Purple prose doesn’t just mean prose that is very descriptive and verbose, purple prose is when the prose is so verbose and flowery that it becomes impossible to actually understand what’s being said. The example you listed isn’t purple prose because it is not impossible to understand the story.
Pipe-International t1_jeduq8w wrote
Some get away with it because they’re good in other ways as well. Winning cures everything.
boxer_dogs_dance t1_jee5ud6 wrote
I enjoyed the Sympathizer, partly because of the creative metaphors he uses and his lyrical descriptions. I wouldn't call it purple at all. It's not exactly window pane prose, but his meaning is clear, not confusing.
What is considered good writing has changed over time. But for me, the Sympathizer is well within modern standards for good writing.
Edit, for anyone considering reading the book, some of the content is brutal.
Icy-Cartographer-409 t1_jeeif8z wrote
I love it in the Anne of Green Gables series, because it helps accentuate the way that Anne sees the world.
It vividly paints a clear image of what is there for the reader. What I find is ironic is that your sentence feels very difficult to read, and needed multiple full stops. I'd rather read a book with decided "purple prose" than writing of the level you just made me read.
[deleted] OP t1_jed60tg wrote
[deleted]
[deleted] OP t1_jeecout wrote
[deleted]
[deleted] OP t1_jed6gg9 wrote
[deleted]
AlunWeaver t1_jed68yv wrote
To me, good prose has the same qualities as music: it has rhythm, cadences, and modulations of tone and tempo; it pleases the ear.