quotation or in the “John Smith meets James Brown” sentence. For a textbook, a legal document, or a synopsis, Lewis’s medical quotation is good style; for fiction, the same style would be miserable—not because it is not clear, but because too little is said. With the same amount of words, a fiction writer can say much more.
A good style is one that conveys the most with the greatest economy of words. In a textbook, the ideal is to communicate one line of thought or set of facts as clearly as possible. For a literary style, much more is necessary. A great literary style is one that combines five or more different meanings in one clear sentence (I do not mean ambiguity but the communication of different issues).
Observe how many issues I cover in any one sentence in Atlas Shrugged, and on how many levels. In this context, I want to repeat an eloquent compliment that Alan Greenspan once gave me: he said that I do with words what Rachmaninoff does with music. Rachmaninoff’s compositions are complex; he combines so many elements in his music that one has to stretch one’s mind to hear them all at once. I always try to do the same in writing. (I am not here comparing degrees of talent, but merely pointing out the principle.)
I never waste a sentence on saying: “John Smith meets James Brown.” That is too easy; it is playing the piano with one finger. Say much more, just as clearly—say it in chords, with a whole orchestration. That is good style.
10
Particular Issues of Style
Narrative versus Dramatization
I use the word narrative in two senses. From the standpoint of form, narrative is that which is not dialogue; everything said by the author, as opposed to the characters, is narrative (including the “he said” and “she said in a trembling voice” between the dialogue lines). From the standpoint of structure, however, narrative is that which is not dramatized.
To dramatize something is to show it as if it were happening before the reader’s eyes, so that he is in the position of an observer at the scene. To narrate, by contrast, is to synopsize: you tell the reader about something which has happened, but you do not let him be a witness. This is a legitimate device; in fact, you could not write a novel without using narrative. If a story were presented exclusively in terms of dramatic action, it would be a play.
A silent action—an escape, say, from a burning building, with no dialogue—is dramatized if it is described in detail. Predominantly, however, the dramatized scenes of a novel are those in which dialogue is reproduced.
Conversely, dialogue usually occurs only in dramatized scenes, but there are exceptions. When you synopsize a conversation in narrative, you can quote a single sentence to feature the essence of the conversation, or to sharpen some salient point. A whole exchange of dialogue—four or more lines—constitutes a dramatized scene. But the quotation, for emphasis, of just one line of dialogue in a narrative passage does not make the passage a dramatization.
When is it proper to narrate and when to dramatize an event? There can be as many variations as there are stories, but the one rule is: Always dramatize important events.
Dramatization serves as the emphasis of your story. The key events should be dramatized. The less important material, such as transitions, can be narrated.
The beginning of the chapter “Account Overdrawn” in Atlas Shrugged is a montage of the progressive economic destruction of the country. In order to make the description colorful, I give semi-dramatization to particular details, but the overall passage is merely a narrative of what happens during that winter to the whole country. Then I come to the meeting where the board of directors decide to close the John Galt Line. That is dramatized. In the preceding months, no event was important enough to focus the story on. But the closing of the John Galt Line is an important point in the story; therefore, I dramatize it—I reproduce the dialogue so that you, the reader, are present at that meeting.
Many nineteenth-century novels, such as Quo Vadis and The Scarlet Letter, are written too much in straight narrative. (This is a minor flaw compared to the literary values of these two works.) One good aspect of the old silent movie of The Scarlet Letter, starring Lillian Gish, was that it dramatized (in most cases quite well) important events that in the novel are merely told about.
You must be