/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6104411]

Due to most literary fiction taking place in contemporary or otherwise 'sophisticated' settings, I feel that the ability to clearly depict action is an underrated element of good writing. Some might say it's the property of genre fiction.

But being able to lay out a fight so that the reader can follow it is surely a sign of good prose, right? It's just as much of a challenge, in its own way, as writing good dialogue.

Do you have some favorite describers of action, /lit/?

Pic related, Robert E. Howard is quite good at it.

[Anonymous No.6104585]

Agreed, good action is difficult to write so I respect people that can do it well without bogging down the story.

I just started reading Darkness Weaves by Karl Wagner and he is pretty good with the sword and axe play. There is an early fight done between like twenty people on horseback that is just really well done without being over the top.

Larry Correia does great gunfights. He is really good at conveying how different weapons work in combat situations and how much damage they realistically put out while keeping things moving. There is a zombie siege in the Monster Hunter Vendetta that is just glorious to read.

Hideyuki Kikuchi does anime style fights really well in Vampire Hunter D: moving faster than normal people can see, strange abilities, exploiting small weaknesses like a pro. Just lots of badassery.

Those are some of my favorites.

[Anonymous No.6104604]

>>6104411
action isnt what the medium of text is good at. text is best at descriptions of landscape, inner thoughts, and dialogue.

watch a film if you want kung fu or variants of "and conan swung his axe and it chopped off zeltar's head"

[Anonymous No.6104611]

>>6104604
the medium of text isn't good at anything per se.

[Anonymous No.6104630]

i disagree thoroughly about writing action vs dialogue. the best dialogue will have nuance and subtext that illuminates the characters. action scenes barely delve into the characters' thoughts about the situation, much less try to say anything meaningful about the characters.

zelazny was good at writing action. he was a fencer and aikidoist so he knew what he was talking about, unlike many writers.

[Anonymous No.6104631]

>>6104611
keep tellin yourself that fuccboi

[Anonymous No.6104639]

Good action is over quick. That's the most important thing, I think.

[Anonymous No.6104642]

>>6104631
medium specificity is as pleb as you can get. but what can you expect with someone who recommends film.

[Anonymous No.6104673]

>>6104630
>action scenes barely delve into the characters' thoughts about the situation, much less try to say anything meaningful about the characters.

A well written action scene can do that and you know it. A book is not the same as a movie you make it sound like a written action scene is just describing where the sword strikes land.

[Anonymous No.6104675]

>>6104411
I feel that when it comes to action it's hard to outdo Homer or the Icelandic sagas, but there are also hardboiled writers like Cornell Woolrich and Dashiel Hammett who can do an amazing amount with a short phrase.

Some more longwinded writers like Faulkner or Krasznahorkai have beautiful descriptions of action too.

[Phil Ossiferz Stone !!esSirF6LRYN No.6104680]

>>6104411
Writing about sex and violence is boring.

Writing about what the participants are feeling and thinking -- and describing this for the audience -- is good entertainment and good writing.

And yes, R.E. Howard was peculiarly good at it. He remains a great source of inspiration for me.

[Anonymous No.6104710]

>>6104673
>a written action scene is just describing where the sword strikes land
that is what most action scenes do. going deeply into the character's thoughts hurts action scenes because it slows it down. combat is not a time to be distracted about how the character misses the wife whose death he's avenging. doing this actually endangers the character's life.

[Anonymous No.6104931]

>>6104411
>Robert E. Howard is quite good at it
Really? You must not have read any Howard. R.E.H. is master of meditative purple prose and wacky sociopolitical commentary. Writing 'action' is something he sucks badly at.

[Anonymous No.6106082]

I think the key for good action is that nebulous quality of 'energy.' Your writing should be really moving during a fight.

[Omar B !xeS.CIM.Jk No.6106116]

I agree with REH. Also Moorecock and Mickey Spillane. Honorable mentions to Ian Flemig and Robert Ludlum.

[Anonymous No.6106219]

Interesting point, OP.

For armed combat, Karl Marlantes' Matterhorn probably has the best-written battle scenes I've read. Thom Jones is good too, both for battles and for boxing; "The Pugilist at Rest" grabbed me and would not let go.

>>6104585
>Larry Correia does great gunfights. He is really good at conveying how different weapons work in combat situations and how much damage they realistically put out while keeping things moving.
You know, I kinda think you're right about this. I actually stopped reading the first Monster Hunters book after it got too Mary-Sue-ish or something, but you're right about the man being able to write action.

>>6104675
>Homer
Yep.

[Anonymous No.6106229]

>>6104675
>>6106219
Homer really is the original writer of action scenes, and he IS great. Homer is particularly good at describing scenes between humans and monsters or humans and gods or normal men and demigods. Achilles killing his way across the fields of Troy is so fucking great. Most modern fantasy writers could learn how to depict the fantastical from Homer.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6106237]

>>6104411
>Conan
>black hair

I thought he was supposed to be an Aryan superhero.

[Anonymous No.6106253]

>>6106229
I've only read the Fagles translations, I think, but I would imagine it depends on the translator too. Pope might not be as lively.

>>6106237
Black Irish, like Howard himself.
>“Hither came Conan the Cimmerian, black-haired, sullen-eyed, sword in hand, a thief, a reaver, a slayer, with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.”

[Anonymous No.6106265]

Dan Abnett writes good action. It's not realistic but realistically described battle would be confusing and boring as fuck, he strikes just the right balance

[Anonymous No.6106267]

>>6106253
Isn't Conan supposed to be fairly tan, though? Howard often describes him as 'bronze.'

[Anonymous No.6106280]

>>6106253
>Hither
>read that as Hitler
thanks ADD

[Anonymous No.6106281]

>>6106267
Yeah: http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1094/who-are-the-black-irish

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6106292]

>>6106253
Well, the follow up is, can Aryans have black hair? If not what is with the leftist hang-ups over Conan and his supposed symbolism of Aryan supremacy?

[Anonymous No.6106317]

>>6104411
Blood Meridian perhaps? Description of the first indian massacre, if I remember it well, was electrifying.

[Anonymous No.6106320]

On topic: Rafael Sabatini is also pretty good at writing action. Check out The Sea-Hawk and Captain Blood.

>>6106292
>what is with the leftist hang-ups over Conan and his supposed symbolism of Aryan supremacy?
Dunno. First I've ever heard about this tbh. To be clear, Howard didn't like blacks, Jews, and Asians, but he was more interested in the (semi-fictional) Picts--who were supposed to be black-haired, dark-complected more-or-less savages fighting the Romans and maybe the Celts in the British Isles--than he was in anybody you would call Aryan or Nordic.

[Anonymous No.6106388]

>>6104585

How are the VHD books? I LOVED the first film and still watch it once a year around Halloween time, but I was always afraid of the books being terrible and ruining my love of the movie.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6106464]

>>6106320
>the (semi-fictional) Picts--who were supposed to be black-haired, dark-complected more-or-less savages fighting the Romans and maybe the Celts in the British Isles

Wtf? The Picts aren't fictional and they weren't black-skinned or black-haired.

[Anonymous No.6106491]

>>6106464
>The Picts aren't fictional
Yeah, but IIRC Howard learned about them from a pretty fanciful source and went on to add in a bunch of other shit. I suppose "fictionalized Picts" would have been more accurate, but some of the fictionalization was uninentional.

>and they weren't black-skinned or black-haired.
IIRC this was Howard's own attempt to link his so-called "Black Irish" heritage (see >>6106281) to an interesting historical lineage. I'm getting most of this from Mark Finn's Howard biography, which I read a while ago and which struck me as a bit boosterish, so I might be wrong about this stuff.

[Anonymous No.6106544]

>>6106292
>Conan and his supposed symbolism of Aryan supremacy?

That is news to me, most people think of the dude as an uncultured barbarian in the stories. I do know Stormfags jizz over Thor like he is the god of racism tho.

>>6106388
The Vampire Hunter D books are good and well translated too. If you watch the movie that much you will love the books.

[Anonymous No.6108788]

Just finished Red Nails and therefore all of Howards Conan tales.
I gotta say I was really impressed, I didn't think such exciting action could exist in writing. Not to mention Conan is so much more nuanced as a character than in pretty much every depiction since then.

[Anonymous No.6108801]

>>6104931
>calls howards prose purple
Dude if you wanna troll you gotta at least base your criticism off of something from the actual source material instead of just winging it.

[Anonymous No.6108810]

>>6104642
file is superior to text, that much is objectively true. better technology, visual and sound, no contest. The question for sophisticated critics of art then becomes, what efforts should we undertake to save the dying art of text? Or should we at all?

[Anonymous No.6108818]

>>6106292
Where did you get that from? howard makes a point of showing Conan as considerably MORE tolerant of the opposite sex / other races than the civilized men. Also Conan is depicted as an ancient precursor to the Irish

[Anonymous No.6108822]

>>6106464
>semi-fictional
Now fictionalized would have been a better way to put it but that still doesn't excuse your complete lack of reading comprehension

[Anonymous No.6108871]

>>6104411
A Sword of Storms is quite good.

[Anonymous No.6108943]

>>6104710
I think that's why some of the Russian authors I've read (chekhov, lermontov, turgenev, tolstoy) exploit the duel. Even though it fell out of use in the early 19th century, its great for exploring the psychology of the characters involved and it has suspense and a bit of action.

[Anonymous No.6109466]

>>6104604
>murakami
>text is best at descriptions of classical music, incest fantasies and gay Alice in Wonderland bullshit from the inner monologues of a 60 year old pedophile

[Anonymous No.6110031]

>>6104411
I really enjoy quick but precise action that focus on what the person fighting see and is thinking at that moment or if third person it is done quick to show how quick a tide or death can take in the battle field.
I will give my own example:

We met eyes both determined to finish the fight, I rushed in with my sword pointed to his heart. However his reaction was quick and he perceived my attack, replying with his own message of diligence striking my back with his hilt, but I learn quickly to take any chance of survival. I swung the sword back around to catch his rear and cleanly slice his rib as the iron of my blade turned red. With no time, I took the blade and put it directly through his chest, only remembering my octagonal iron hilt as I pulled the blade from a lifeless corpse. I saw through the blood that covered me to approach my next enemy this time more intently.

[Anonymous No.6110211]

>>6110031
This is true, problem is no does it without sounding edgy or cringe worthy.

[Anonymous No.6110699]

You can right good action by describing the character's feelings, the technique and strategy he employs and how it relates to who he is fighting.

The reason moderners are so shit at writing action is because we rarely ever experience it.

[Anonymous No.6112413]

>>6110699
>you can right good
>right

>and the night attacked the other night only to be defeated

[Anonymous No.6113150]

>>6112413
>The two nights fighted but one stabe thh other one and he did
The ideal action scene