Modren

Hypnosis/MC erotica writer


JuniperTheory
@JuniperTheory

This isn't me not knowing the definition of the world, it's more that so many people use it in so many different ways i've found online. What does it mean when a book has good prose? What about bad prose? What defines good prose to you, and what seperates it from good writing? Is the word specifically describing something good, or is it a word you add "good" or "bad" to to clarify what kind?


sarahzedig
@sarahzedig

because of the way i write fiction, i tend to think of prose and dialogue as the two primary units of written storytelling. this isn't absolute, as dialogue can be part of the prose and vice versa, but generally that's the difference. of course, every writer has their strengths and weaknesses. dialogue comes very easily to me, where prose/exposition often does not. so my perspective here is naturally colored by that.

prose is place-setting, internal monologue, exposition, all the stuff that isn't characters talking to each other. what determines good prose, in my opinion, is to what extent the author imbues their prose with character. it's easy for narration to be faminously utilitarian (especially today, as fewer people read books written before the dominance of TV, and so tend to think of their stuff as visual media that's been temporarily compromised into a book, and the prose as rarely more than stage direction. i am very guilty of this myself).

good prose doesn't just set a scene, it sets a tone and a mood. it grounds you in a reality or gets you thinking about its rules or history. good prose is just as energetic as good dialogue, stops feeling like mandatory place-setting and becomes an essential vehicle of thematic conveyance. as someone who finds describing locations and appearances exceedingly tedious, i'm always impressed when a writer manages to do so in a way that keeps me rapt and attentive.

conventionally speaking, prose is where an author has the most leeway to press their hand without (unintentionally) breaking the reader's suspension of disbelief. it's much easier to clock author mouthpiece dialogue than it is author mouthpiece prose, in my experience. there's an elegance and restraint to good prose. it's where you can really gauge the maturity of an author's craft. this isn't to say good prose is necessarily brief! there are no universal prescriptions when it comes to writing.

the measure is the same as any art: what was the author trying to do, and how close did they come to achieving it? good prose is good when you read it and go "damn, that was some good prose."


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @JuniperTheory's post:

Speaking only for myself, I feel like I tend to make a distinction between "writing" and "prose" that's a bit like the distinction between a "game" and "gameplay." Prose, for me, is evokes the textural feel or artfulness of the sentences themselves as I read them, the granular details of writing. In this sense, "poetry" and "prose" are two different sensibilities in writing, reflect different intended experiences by the author: A sentence can be "poetic" or "prosaic." Not all good writing is poetic writing (indeed, someone who puts too much mustard on every sentence is exhausting to read, especially when one is simply trying to make an argument clearly), so I reject the notion that "prosaic" writing is bad or unartful. "Good prose" is writing that feels clear and goes down easy, to be distinguished from "bad prose" that fails to do so. A lot of poetic writing is, in this sense, good writing but not good prose (because it's not aspiring to be prosaic).

I tend to use prose to mean the most text-specific aspects of writing. Does it sound good? Is it easy or difficult to read? Not much (directly) to do with characters or plot, just the words themselves and the sounds they make.

Different kinds of prose are good for different things. Different stories and themes and situations call for different kinds of prose, bad prose is prose which is innappropriate for its context. In general, that usually means either cringe or really boring and dull to read.

prose (as a quality to be judged) is primarily rhythm/flow and enticing word choice. it's interesting because it's hard to recognize good prose until you suddenly have to come up for air from a book, realizing that the writing itself, not the content, had enthralled you. it's only happened to me a handful of times, I can't even remember when. But good prose does tend to disappear. it reduces itself to the point that the window you're reading the world through seems to be nothing but air. the words you read are the ones you'd think of, but smoother, clearer, than your own thoughts could ever be

and so I think, perhaps, that prose quality has an audience. a certain kind of person is enamoured with the apt usage of uncommon words which they are familiar with but haven't seen used in such a way, another is dashing to the dictionary every other sentence. Another person is enjoying the flow of simple words used well, and yet another is frustrated at the facile writing. You're rarely going to be entirely happy with someone else's examples of good prose. even time shifts the sands of vocabulary, subjecting even such lists written within your lifetime to an early dusty grave.

note: spellcheck says I spelled enamoured wrong, but screw it, it's my language