Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

I'm an author that likes to go right to the "Juice". I don't want the reader to go through pages and pages of things, that really could have been left out. I feel that fluff question's the readers intelligence and also disrespects their time.

To balance what is needed, and what could be left out, is a real balancing game, that brings me a lot of fun. Some authors like to write, but for me writing is a tool to get my message out...without fluff : )

Someone once wrote that the only things contained in a novel should be to elucidate the characters or move the plot along. Everything else is fluff, and should be deleted.

Thanks for posting Frank and sharing, I was starting to think I was the only one feeling this way : )

I absolutely agree, Vivian! I get very frustrated with books (and any other kind of literature) that goes on tangents or gives unnecessary information that doesn't have something to do with the plot, subplot, or characters. I'm an editor and I help my authors with this all the time. I also always state in my Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ reviews whether a book could have been shorter without the fluff. I write with that in mind too.

Hi Christie! Welcome and thanks for joining the discussion. I am happy to see that you actually include in your reviews whether a book could have been shorter. I feel if the message/plot is good and interesting enough, it is worth the read...no matter how many pages it contains.

Yes, I completely agree, Vivian, I'll still continue if it's a great book. I just usually can't give it the full 5 stars. Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged is a book that I wouldn't say has fluff, but it certainly repeats itself so, so, so many times in ways that are unnecessary because its points have already been stated at great length. It's still one of my favorites!

One great book that I did read to the end, after pushing myself through a lot of fluff, was A new Earth by Eckhart Tolle. I am guilty of repeating myself. I noticed that in my last book. I repeated myself a few time and I was considering to take it out, but then left it in because it was important enough to emphasize it and it made sense in a different context as well.

Although various writing and public speaking courses may differ in approach and methodology, they all agree upon one basic philosophy: Say what you have to say as succinctly as possible. Once you have made your point, stop. Anything that comes after is superfluous.

I agree Jim and thanks for joining the discussion. So what may be a reason an author would add "fluff"?

Vivian wrote: "I agree Jim and thanks for joining the discussion. So what may be a reason an author would add "fluff"?"

Vivian,

Some may add fluff just to make their book longer when they run out of actual ideas or they may actually believe that this is a normal part of the writing process.

Unfortunately, too many who claim the title of professional writer have never bothered to expend the time and effort to take a writing course or study and develop proper technical writing and narration skills on their own.

I agree, though there have been a couple of books I've pushed through (despite the fluff) because I did really like the story, but I did skip one or two pages when description went on a little too much and didn't actually miss out any of the real story, which means those pages really weren't needed. I'm an editor by trade and this is one of the main things I come across. Even as a writer I often find myself deleting entire scenes during my edits as I find they do not do anything for the story and feel happier with the novel as a result.

I am not really a writer. I am however an author. Writing to me is a tool to express and share my ideas.

I sometimes find myself writing too little, and assume the reader knows what I am talking about. It is something I am working on and love the inputs.

Define: "Fluff"

Hi James! Thanks for joining the conversation.

To me "fluff" is that which is added into a book/movie that really has nothing to do with the plot and can be left out. I feel there could be fluff even in a sentence.

It's like watering down apple juice : )

Vivian wrote: "To me "fluff" is that which is added into a book/movie that really has nothing to do with the plot and can be left out. I feel there could be fluff even in a sentence.

It's like watering down apple juice"

Hi, back.

And I'm not be contentious, but your definition and analogy don't go together. You can water down apple juice because it's too acidic, for you. This would be more akin to reading a cozy, rather then a hard-boiled pulp yarn. (not really about fluffy filler)

So what about characterization?

If a character's job is referenced, but it doesn't directly have anything to do with plot... is that fluff?

I noticed everyone talking about not liking fluff, which seems a simple thing to agree on. But I also noticed that it's likely everyone is using one word to mean various different things.

Is there any way (an excerpt, for example) to show what you mean by, "fluff"?

The Merriam-Webster English Dictionary defines fluff as follows:

n 1 : DOWN 1 <~from a pillow> 2 : something fluffy 3 : something inconsequential 4 : BLUNDER; esp : an actor's lapse of memory.

I believe the third definition is the one applicable to this discussion. Fluff is usually the initial target of many conceptual editors. If the removal of a sentence or paragraph will have no significant impact, positively or negatively, on either the reader or the story line, more often than not, it should be eliminated.

I personally don't really need to know the print of the kitchen curtains. To me, that's fluff.

Hey James,
I find it interesting that you ask what fluff is. Perhaps there are two different kinds of drivers/readers/writers. One driver likes the shortest path and appreciates short cuts, but then there are those that just go along for the ride. They enjoy the ride and take their time to see/describe everything that is happening around them even outside of the road their on.

Debbie wrote: "I personally don't really need to know the print of the kitchen curtains. To me, that's fluff."

Yes I agree Debbie.

Jim wrote: "The Merriam-Webster English Dictionary defines fluff as follows:

n 1 : DOWN 1 2 : something fluffy 3 : something inconsequential 4 : BLUNDER; esp : an actor's lapse of memory.

I believe the thir..."

Thanks for clarifying Jim!

Jim wrote: "If the removal of a sentence or paragraph will have no significant impact, positively or negatively, on either the reader or the story line, more often than not, it should be eliminated. "

That's impossible to determine.

Debbie wrote: "I personally don't really need to know the print of the kitchen curtains. To me, that's fluff."

Unless it turns out, later, to be relevant. Anything can be Chekov's gun on the wall. So no specific item can be identified.

I strongly suspect that this is going to boil down to a Potter Stewart type of "I know fluff when I read it" type of thing.