The word 'AND.'

[ShelbyDawn57]

I'm working on a story. Duh, aren't we all?

I'm fully aware that one of my dastardly deeds is run on sentences. I'm noticing that more often than not, the culprit is the word 'and'.
I find if I remove it, replacing it with a period and a capitalization, my writing is cleaner and more crisp.

Curious what similar things you might have noticed about your writing. Since this is an Authors hangout, I thought bringing them up might assist writers struggling with form.

 

[KeithD]

Yep, that's one of those techniques we Germanic writers can use to make our prose more snappy.

 

[SimonDoom]

I agree. MOST of the time I do this, I get the same result you do: crisper, cleaner writing.

A good general "rule" is that style rules aren't rules but guidelines. But (notice I'm starting a sentence with "but"--yes, this is perfectly OK) I think the following are useful guidelines for punctuation and prose style:

1. Economy is generally good. Fewer words are generally better than more. If you have no particularly good reason to combine two sentences into one, don't.
2. That said, mixing it up is a good idea. Mix short sentences with longer ones. Mix up the sentence structure. Sometimes, start with the noun subject, and sometimes start with an introductory clause.
3. Most of the time, DO NOT combine two independent clauses with a comma but no conjunction. Example: She entered the house, he wasn't there. Better: She entered the house, and he wasn't there. Or: She entered the house. He wasn't there. Or: She entered the house; he wasn't there. Combining independent clauses (meaning, clauses that can stand alone as sentences) with no conjunction but just a comma is called a comma splice and it's bad style most of the time.
4. Keep it simple with your punctuation. Don't overuse dashes and semicolons. Periods are your friend.
5. Punctuate your dialogue correctly! There are only a few rules to learn. Learn them! Follow them.

 

[MrHereWriting]

I'm working on a story. Duh, aren't we all?

I'm fully aware that one of my dastardly deeds is run on sentences. I'm noticing that more often than not, the culprit is the word 'and'.
I find if I remove it, replacing it with a period and a capitalization, my writing is cleaner and more crisp.

Curious what similar things you might have noticed about your writing. Since this is an Authors hangout, I thought bringing them up might assist writers struggling with form.

But if you like the word 'and' and other conjunctions, there is always Polysyndeton, a technique favored by Cormac McCarthy, and used by other famous authors to create a specific tone for their stories.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

As stated above, I do very much love mixing short and long sentences and mixing sentence structures. It's a great way to make your work flow and read smoothly. Having said that, perhaps I could get a little advice here. The following paragraph is actually all one sentence. I tried to keep it as all one sentence because the idea of the sentence is the journey passing through the club from front to back. I think that it reads very well right up to "... rhythm, into a ..." where it seems to trip as run-on.

She led the detective through the club, past the bar line packed with afros, dreadlocks and shaved heads, even a couple of cornrow tops, then along the edge of the noisy gyrating crowd (of perhaps 400 which was almost certainly in violation of fire safety code for the small joint) on the dance floor under the shifting colored lights, past the left stack of the house speakers and the stage where the gaunt deejay in a rasta bonnet and long thin goatee controlled the beat while the emcee in his thick bare chest and tattooed muscled arms and sideways ball cap had the fingers of one hand elaborately wrapped about the microphone at his lips while his other hand hung over the front row bobbing in rhythm, into a narrow hallway connecting the washrooms and finally to the back door where another bouncer in smooth black leather nodded and pushed it open for them to step into the cool damp night.

How does it sound/feel to you and I'll listen to any suggestions for potential fixes, although I'd love to save the one long sentence structure.

 

[MrPixel]

I'm with Simon, and Mr. Writing. I mix it up. I immediately re-read everything I write to check for flow. If the "double" sentence drags the tempo, it is broken. If a sentence is too short and basically "introduces" the following thought, I might go for a comma and a conjunction, or even occasionally without a joining word, depending on context and flow.

And I enjoy the infrequent polysyndeton - thank you for that, didn't realize there was a term for it. Especially the Keats example, as it creates a crescendo in the flow, even a tension.

I intentionally keep semicolons to a minimum, but don't completely chuck them aside; sometimes they're "just right".

Also, I'm sensitive to my own overuse of "and" in building run-ons. Those thankfully get caught during subsequent re-reads.

 

[Bazzle]

My sentences run marathons and my smelling keeps putting correctly spelt words in, that if you change one letter tends to be the correct one.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

I try to maintain "guideline" discipline with the narrative of a story and save variations to the guidelines for character dialogue.

This is where variations in the flow of words typically holds the greatest impact and by restricting the use of unconventional sentence structure only to these areas, it allows it more emphasis within the story.

 

[samhasstories]

I like 'and.' I'm not opposed to a nice run-on sentence, when used effectively. Mixing up sentence structure is good, as has been established, and also sometimes a good long breathless sentence with too many conjunctions and not enough commas can help bring to life a frenetic sequence of events. Which can be useful.

 

[ElectricBlue]

How does it sound/feel to you and I'll listen to any suggestions for potential fixes, although I'd love to save the one long sentence structure.

For me, that's too much of a breathless grind, trying to keep up with the pace of it. I think the issue for me, is that it is punctuated, all those commas. But you're not giving me a chance to breath and pause, and all I'm doing is moving through a club. Personally, I'd have a few more full stops, mix up the sentence lengths, but vary the pace that way.

I tend to do the opposite - as the pace speeds up, during a sex scene for example, I tend to lose the punctuation, let the phrases and sentences run together into an uncontrolled, crescendic mess (that's not a word, but it is now); then, after orgasm, the prose catches its breath, and slowly returns to normal. When I'm writing the scene, it seems the right thing to, and readers tell me it works.

The beat and flow of my prose is central to my style, I pay more attention to it than anything else.

 

[samhasstories]

crescendic mess (that's not a word, but it is now)

Seconded.

 

[MrPixel]

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/crescentic

 

[SimonDoom]

As stated above, I do very much love mixing short and long sentences and mixing sentence structures. It's a great way to make your work flow and read smoothly. Having said that, perhaps I could get a little advice here. The following paragraph is actually all one sentence. I tried to keep it as all one sentence because the idea of the sentence is the journey passing through the club from front to back. I think that it reads very well right up to "... rhythm, into a ..." where it seems to trip as run-on.



How does it sound/feel to you and I'll listen to any suggestions for potential fixes, although I'd love to save the one long sentence structure.

I agree with your own assessment. Although it's a run-on, it's a purposeful run-on, and I see what you are trying to do. But the problem is that long phrase that starts "past" and ends "rhythm." The problem for the reader is I have to recall what happened before "past" to make sense of "into a." It's a stumbling block. I think you'd be better off sticking a period after "rhythm" and follow it with something like "They ducked into"

 

[ElectricBlue]

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/crescentic

Bastards! Different meaning, though: mine is derived from crescendo, not crescent.

 

[Britva415]

I have this tendency. I agree that punctuating, usually with periods, turns out better.

I usually have some initial reason for writing the run-on sentence. Then the exercise is to rewrite it while still conveying the intended connection between the parts.

Sometimes what I find is that they remain connected without any special effort, after breaking the sentence down into shorter ones.

Not all of my run-on sentences are simply sentences connected with "and." Some are long chains of clauses, with all the right conjunctions and prepositions, but no "and."

I usually write "and" when it initially seems to me that the things should be connected in order to convey a meaning of the relationship. I usually find that whatever that connection's meaning was is so slight that nothing's missing when I eliminate the "and." Sometimes I can't even articulate to myself when editing what was meaningful about the "and," as opposed to the non-run-on version.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

Bastards! Different meaning, though: mine is derived from crescendo, not crescent.

Wictionary, or wicki-dick, as it can be called is user edited. Go add it and see if it sticks. I'd vote for it. Honestly, I can't wait to use it to describe an engorged cresendic cock, or a cresednic orgasm, or, well we all write smut, you know where I'm going. This is a great word.

 

[Britva415]

crescendic

"Crescendoing" would be an uncontroversial construction, but isn't as nice of an adjective.

I think "crescendous" works. Even as a neologism.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Wictionary, or wicki-dick, as it can be called is user edited. Go add it and see if it sticks. I'd vote for it. Honestly, I can't wait to use it to describe an engorged cresendic cock, or a cresednic orgasm, or, well we all write smut, you know where I'm going. This is a great word.

Use it!!!

 

[AlexBailey]

crescendic mess (that's not a word, but it is now)

Perfectly cromulent. No dictionary required.

 

[MrPixel]

Bastards! Different meaning, though: mine is derived from crescendo, not crescent.

Uh... the first adjective sense was "growing" or "increasing". I like your word better, tho'.

 

[Cagivagurl]

I'm working on a story. Duh, aren't we all?

I'm fully aware that one of my dastardly deeds is run on sentences. I'm noticing that more often than not, the culprit is the word 'and'.
I find if I remove it, replacing it with a period and a capitalization, my writing is cleaner and more crisp.

Curious what similar things you might have noticed about your writing. Since this is an Authors hangout, I thought bringing them up might assist writers struggling with form.

I like heavily laden dialogue.
When I'm looking for stories, that's what attracts me.
I love stories told mostly in dialogue.
For it to seem real. I look for writing that reads like conversations I have.
I want the story to seem real.
OK, that means, I don't like short curt sentences. It has to feel like an actual conversation. If the writing is good, then I have already drawn a mental image of the character, and have built what their voice sounds like in my head.
Nobody speaks in short sentences. Well, nobody I know.
We all ramble, and sentences are not structured grammatically. We break all the rules of literature when we speak.
The second point for me is emotion...
When I read, I want to feel something, excitement, sadness, joy, arousal, hatred. I need for the story to explode with emotion. Let me really feel it.
Short curt (Tight) writing often robs the story of this emotion.
At least that's what I find.
We are all different, we write differently. Have our own styles.
I am often accused of being to wordy.
I accept that. I think it is fair criticism, however. I was given great advice by my editor, who said. "Fuck that. You tell your story. You use as many words as you need. It is your story to tell. If people don't like it. They don't have to read it."
When I thought about it. She is right. Stories have a natural flow. They ebb like the tide.

Do I want to write tighter? Yes, but not if it costs me emotion. I have tried, but maybe I'm just a waffling terrible writer...
Who knows?

Bottom line. I don't care.

Cagivagurl

 

[Bramblethorn]

As stated above, I do very much love mixing short and long sentences and mixing sentence structures. It's a great way to make your work flow and read smoothly. Having said that, perhaps I could get a little advice here. The following paragraph is actually all one sentence. I tried to keep it as all one sentence because the idea of the sentence is the journey passing through the club from front to back. I think that it reads very well right up to "... rhythm, into a ..." where it seems to trip as run-on.



How does it sound/feel to you and I'll listen to any suggestions for potential fixes, although I'd love to save the one long sentence structure.

I like this one. It feels like one of those "one long shot" scenes in a movie where the camera follows somebody through several rooms.

I do agree that it falters a bit around "in rhythm". Trying to unpick why it feels that way to me:

It's hard to interpret motive from one paragraph, but my impression is that this paragraph/sentence is more about atmosphere than imparting information. You're not telling us about the DJ's goatee or the MC's tatts because those things are going to be important later in the story; quite likely we'll never see those two guys again. But they help us get a feel for the place, crowded and noisy, and that sets up a contrast to the "cool damp night" that follows.

The intentional run-on fits into that nicely. It evokes the high-sensory atmosphere of the club, all the noise and people, and by the end of it I'm ready to step out the back door to somewhere quieter.

The challenge is to make the sentence complex enough for the reader to feel that high-sensory environment, without making it so complex that it breaks and they have to stop and re-read.

When I read a complex sentence, I don't get to the end of the sentence with every word memorised, then pause to figure out how they all work together. Instead, I'm interpreting it and compressing information as I go, so that I don't have to keep more than I have room for in my working memory.

There are a couple of things you're doing in that sentence that help with this. The structure breaks it into a sequence of separate images:

past the bar line packed with afros, dreadlocks and shaved heads, even a couple of cornrow tops

then along the edge of the noisy gyrating crowd (of perhaps 400 which was almost certainly in violation of fire safety code for the small joint) on the dance floor under the shifting colored lights

past the left stack of the house speakers and the stage where the gaunt deejay in a rasta bonnet and long thin goatee controlled the beat while the emcee in his thick bare chest and tattooed muscled arms and sideways ball cap had the fingers of one hand elaborately wrapped about the microphone at his lips while his other hand hung over the front row bobbing in rhythm

into a narrow hallway connecting the washrooms

and finally to the back door where another bouncer in smooth black leather nodded and pushed it open

for them to step into the cool damp night.

Cues like "past the bar line" tell me we're not stopping here. Once we get to "then along the edge", I know the bar-line bit is complete. I'll remember the general impression it created (lots of people, probably mostly black) but I don't need to keep every word of that image in memory in order to interpret the next image. It works almost like a full stop, but without breaking the momentum of the sentence.

It's that third image that gets difficult. It's much longer than any of the others and until we get to "into a narrow hallway" there's nothing to tell me "that image is done, you can let go of the details now", so it ends up being a bit too much to keep in working memory. I can see why you'd want to keep the DJ and the MC together, since they're part of the same act, but I think for the sake of flow it might be the lesser of evils to separate them. Something like this might work:

past the left stack of the house speakers and the stage where the gaunt deejay in a rasta bonnet and long thin goatee controlled the beat, where the emcee in his thick bare chest and tattooed muscled arms and sideways ball cap had the fingers of one hand elaborately wrapped about the microphone at his lips while his other hand hung over the front row bobbing in rhythm

Changing that "when" to "[comma] where" flags that we're done talking about the DJ and the speakers, so I can file that bit away as "complete" and free up some capacity for thinking about the MC.

Here, you're using "and" rather than commas to separate the MC's descriptors: "thick bare chest and tattooed muscled arms and sideways ball cap". This is a good choice IMHO: you're already using commas for another purpose in this sentence to separate the images, and having commas doing two different things would make it harder to interpret. But earlier on in the bar-line image, you did use commas to separate the hairstyles.

It's not a big issue there, because the bar-line image is early on and relatively short, but for consistency it might be preferable to use "and" there as well. I don't feel strongly about this, just something to consider.

Modified version:

She led the detective through the club, past the bar line packed with afros and dreadlocks and shaved heads and even a couple of cornrow tops, then along the edge of the noisy gyrating crowd (of perhaps 400 which was almost certainly in violation of fire safety code for the small joint) on the dance floor under the shifting colored lights, past the left stack of the house speakers and the stage where the gaunt deejay in a rasta bonnet and long thin goatee controlled the beat, where the emcee in his thick bare chest and tattooed muscled arms and sideways ball cap had the fingers of one hand elaborately wrapped about the microphone at his lips while his other hand hung over the front row bobbing in rhythm, into a narrow hallway connecting the washrooms and finally to the back door where another bouncer in smooth black leather nodded and pushed it open for them to step into the cool damp night.

 

[BarracudaSwordfish]

Just done a revamp of my latest draft based on this thread and have made changes to it and I am happy with it and thanks to the OP for suggesting it and... and...

Seriously, it made me think, as did the thread about starting so many sentences in first person stories with 'I'

Wish I could revisit my 62 published works now

 

[HectorBidon]

[pink_silk_glove's passage] feels like one of those "one long shot" scenes in a movie where the camera follows somebody through several rooms.

I think Branblethorn's analysis and suggestions are spot on. I would only add that the transition from the main bar room into the washroom hallway would involve a big change in the sensory environment since it involves going from the main room where all the action is unto a more confined space. You might try to convey this change a bit more vividly.

. . . over the front row bobbing in rhythm, through the little side exit into the only-slightly-less-thumping washroom hallway, and finally to the back door where another bouncer . . .

 

[Rob_Royale]

I catch these in my editing process.