: Cutting down on paragraph size As a novice writer of fourteen, I've tried a few attempts at science fiction (military science fiction, to be specific), and of course my writing's got HUGE mistakes

I hope this explains what's been said as opposed to reiterating it.

-ing phrases slow the pace. Subsidiary clauses slow the pace. You're writing action. Don't slow the pace. Modern middle school English teachers ask students for sentence variation. -ing phrases are a common result. These phrases may sound scholarly, but they do not work in fiction.

If you introduce on an -ing phrase, you introduce simultaneity. All actions that follow must occur at the same time. Rearrange your sentence and the law is obvious: He coughed blood while switching his reactivated communicator. If you introduce the sentence on the -ing phrase, you keep the reader reading for the payoff; when will I know what is happening simultaneously? I have ADD. I can't pay attention until I know. The reader cannot even begin to understand the sentence until the subject shows up. Who is acting the action? Without the actor, our minds are blank. Introductory -ing phrases encourage the reader to read over those initial words. If you rearranged them, the reader would keep at it linearly.

One way to envision the process: Write as if you were your character in that moment. Don't write as if you are your character retelling his war story. Example:

Giving all his effort not to utter so as much as a moan from his agony, he gave himself three seconds of reprieve…

Sure enough, in three seconds the mental assault subsided, if only to a tolerable level.

If you were Sinclair in the moment, you'd say:

He needed to moan. He shouldn't. He gave himself three seconds reprieve. The mental assault subsided, if only to a tolerable level.

Is that no fun? Does that take away the poetry of authorship? The voice of distance? No. You inject the voice subtly. Your voice merges with Sinclair's. The word reprieve? I doubt Sinclair has thought to himself: I will give myself three seconds reprieve. He might say rest. He might say, "I'll give myself a fucking break." You say reprieve. The reader understands the merge between voices, and you are allowed to make Sinclair's profanities into poetry. Understand, however, that in this complex relationship, Sinclair's voice is more immediate and more enticing than yours. In the action plot, stick with his voice as much as possible. That beautiful word choice? You can get away with it. But only so long as it is not the entire foggy lens through which the reader has to muck in order to get to the good stuff--the plot. Make that lens as clear as possible. I hope this description helps.

---

(0)

All around, it's actually not too bad. Some tips:

The natural tendency when you're writing action scenes is to over-describe -- so start cutting bits. Look for things that are redundant, and especially look for things that are over-specific with limbs (hands, legs, etc.), and with measurements. The readers don't need to know where all the limbs go unless it's relevant to the story.
For instance, compare what you had here:

Exerting strenuous effort, Sinclair rolled onto his chest, the ground
below him uttering grinding cracks of protest, and his upper body
burned likewise, then stood to one knee as he braced one forearm to
rise up to full height, for a split-second watching as the Lutetian
soldiers continued to valiantly hold off another flurry of the
infernal hellspawn, then swiveled on an armored boot, retrieved his
railgun rifle laying askew several centimeters away from where he
crashed.

To the same sentence as I've edited it:

Sinclair rolled onto his chest. The ground below him crackled under
his grinding weight and his arms burned as he pushed himself up. But
he stood up anyway, rising to his full height for a split second --
just long enough to see that the Lutetian solders where valiently
holding off yet another flurry of the infernal hellspawn -- before he
snatched up his railgun from where it lay when he crashed.

Better? I think so. I cut out the bits about forearms and knees, and armored boots a-swivelling and several centimeters away a-laying.

This also turned out to illustrate several other points:

Cut the sentances down. I turned that one sentence into three, and it could have easily been five instead. That's a bigger problem for you than the overall lengths of your paragraphs. Action is, well, active, so short, tight sentences work well.

Sentences should generally start with the subject. This is especially true at the start of a paragraph. We don't need to know about "exerting strenuous effort" until we know who it is that will be exerting that effort.

And finally, beware "-ing" words. Sometimes they are necessary, but they should only be allowed in your fiction under grudging duress. "-ing" words tend to weaken writing -- and they also lengthen it. You're doing better than most with not having "-ing" words, but there are still plenty to cut. You'll find your writing becomes much stronger, and tighter, when you re-write the "-ing" words away.

---

(0)

Paragraph length isn't the problem here, although the paragraphs could stand to be broken up a bit. The biggest problem here is a problem of focus and organization. A paragraph should have a fairly concise point; it's not simply a container for sentences.

The main problems here are those of organization (on the large and small levels) and editing.

Focus

Writing is telling a story by giving the reader clues. It's not about telling the reader everything there is to know.

To use your the first paragraph as an example: I'm not clear on whether I should focus on Sinclair or the battlefield. Which is more important in this paragraph?

If you want to set the scene and then zoom in on Sinclair, rewrite this so you describe the battlefield and only then focus on Sinclair. On the other hand, if you want the reader to pay more attention to the character than the battle, then reverse the order: Describe the action and the character, being very sparse. Only then do you start filling in the details of the battlefield. The more important the information you're conveying, the easier it should be to absorb.

Rhythm and chunk length

I said that a paragraph isn't simple a container for sentences, and that's true. But it is made of sentences. Scenes are made of paragraphs, chapters are made of scenes. There should be a clear structure and rhythm of language, on the level of the entire book as well as the level of the individual word. Using many long, packed sentences will preclude any sort of rhythm, because there's no place for the reader to rest.

Consider breaking up your sentences into many shorter chunks. It may feel strange and staccato-like at first, but they will read more easily and your readers will thank you.

Of course, you can't have all sentences be very short; there should be the occasional longer sentence to break up the rhythm, generally when you have a complex thought or situation to convey. Establish your rhythm, but don't forget - sometimes you need to break stride to startle the reader. They'll pay attention to those outlier sentences or paragraphs.

You can count on it.

Editing and breaking things up

A few exceptional talents aside, our first drafts are always a mess; and that's okay. We go back to them and make them make sense later on. You can learn how to self-edit your writing more thoroughly.

There's no quick way to do this. Read the piece you've written, look for places that seem confusing. Your readers will look at your story with different eyes. They may need more detail than you provide in some places, and less detail in other locations.

And pay attention to pacing by looking for overlong chunks. A good way to break up paragraphs: Look for natural stopping places, places where the reader needs to take a breath. Try reading your prose out loud if need be; where would you stop and take a breath, or have a sip of water? (Reading is thirsty work, after all.)

And sentences can be broken up in many ways. Overuse of dashes, colons, and semicolons - these are often indicative that your sentences are too long.

Planning

All this will be easier if you plan your writing first.

When you're not out on a limb, writing to a plan, it's easier to write in an organized, readable way. There's no single, "correct" way to do this. You could make a detailed outline, or sketch the main points on the back of a cafe receipt; as long as you have a general idea of what the scene will cover, it'll be easier to write it. (If you already are doing this, perhaps re-examining your workflow is in order.)

And you can plan on the paragraph level, too. Decide which thoughts need to be connected to each other and in what order the reader should see them. Break up your chunks so they make more linear sense.

Conclusion (and inspiration)

The problem here is one of planning and editing. After you establish good habits, much of this will come more easily and you may find your first drafts are coming out in a more organized way.

If all of this seems difficult to comprehend, try reading books with simple language. You may be inspired by Isaac Asimov, Ernest Hemingway, Kurt Vonnegut, Robert A. Heinlein. Don't restrict yourself to science-fiction; writing is writing.

However, long, ornate language can be done well. You may not yet be at the point where you can pull off longer sentences, sentences where you lead the reader down the garden path, bringing them to a conclusion they didn't expect. But for examples of longer sentences done well, it's harder to to better then Gene Wolfe or Ray Bradbury. Michael Crichton's The Great Train Robbery is a good example of longer sentences in a pseudo-Victorian style that manage to be easy to read.

Eventually you'll find your own style, of course. Best of luck, and keep writing!

---

(0)