My favourite published novel is by Edgar Allan Poe. He is much more descriptive in his dialogue than the standard formula fiction. Past this I enjoy Les Misérables, in which, like Poe, Hugo spends countless pages describing the intricate dialogue which occurs.
I would like you to for a moment contemplate the idea of formula fiction and compare this to the standard classic in literature.
In formula fiction, it is the author's duty to ensure simplicity, flow, and ease of reading. In these stories, authors such as Nora Roberts, J. K. Rowling, and Stephen King have the sole duty to create stories that people want. And, truth be told, in 2010, people want simple escape. This simplicity has really been the case since the mid 1960s, growing to represent an ever larger proportion of the market. This means that people who have been brought up in this era (demographically speaking, you two) have been exposed primarily to this formulaic representation of what a story should be and, because the successful authors are such solely on their ability to manipulate audiences, you have been manipulated to think that these represent the status quo.
On the other hand, you have classic literature. Poe, Hugo, Dickens, and Wilde among others. These books date back centuries and yet are still held to the very core of "quality" literature. In them, you will notice distinct and decisive description of dialogue. These do not necessarily represent one specific era nor were they the most popular books when published. In fact, more than a single author that I listed above was socially exiled because his books were seen as sub-par. This happened and yet we are still reading and discussing them today. They did not fit the mold of popular whim nor did they follow the guidelines set up by limited success of the time. Instead, they followed the format necessary for the construction of an enduring and lasting piece of literature.
25-Feb-2010 12:24:11
- Last edited on
24-Jun-2010 02:21:47
by
Yrolg
