 And I think that's okay. Obviously, I'm the arbiter of what is good prose. Well, it's mostly famous for being unfinished, but that takes talent. Well, that one book had great prose. If you have watched my channel for a while, you're probably aware that I can be a bit of a prose snob. And I think that's okay. So I wanted to talk today about good prose, prose that is good for me, and some of the authors that I think of as great examples of at least the kind of prose that I like to see in books or books that I would specifically call out for having quality prose. So what is prose, as opposed to say grammar or syntax? Well, grammar is to prose, as structural integrity is to interior design. So like with structural integrity, there is little to no debate to be had over grammar and syntax and that kind of thing, whereas there's a great deal of debate and subjectivity when it comes to interior design or prose. In fact, grammar and structural integrity can both sometimes be undermined or ignored in service of design or prose. So since we just established that prose or good prose is as subjective as good interior design, I think we should talk about what I think is good prose. And I obviously am the arbiter of what is good prose. But in all seriousness, I think it's important to establish what one's tastes are and what one is looking for. Cause if someone just says, oh, this book has really, really good prose and you pick it up and read it and you're like, this is the worst thing I've ever read, like particularly the prose. That's probably for the same reason that somebody could say, oh, this famous interior designer designed this room and you go into it and you're like, wow, this is the ugliest room I've ever seen in my life. But somebody designed it that way. Somebody thinks that that is gorgeous. So I think prose is pretty similar in that respect. So again, back to me and what I think is good prose. I've come up with sort of like five overarching categories. Ways prose can be good and in a perfect royalty would hit all five. But like some combination of these things, these factors is what makes me go, ah, this prose, this prose is quite good. First step, lyrical. For me, the words should flow. They should sound good strung together. They should have a cadence, a rhythm. There should be beauty just in the shape and sound of them. Next, artful. So I think there should be cleverness to the choice of words. Tricks of meaning, subtle flourishes that add dimension, playing with expectations, wit, double meanings, things like that. Next I have lush. I think the good prose to me should be evocative. It should be filled with imagery and sensory detail. I like prose to employ a lot of metaphors to kind of form pictures out of words, to transport you to the experience that's being described. Next I have poignant. I like there to be phrases that sort of like resonate beyond the story that is being told where you can find greater, more widely applicable truths or wisdom, observations, reflections, things like that that's sort of like that it's poetry in and of itself even when taken out of the context of the story. You know, the quotable quote, the kind of thing that you put on a bookmark, on a t-shirt, on a poster. Even if someone has not read the book or the scene or the sentence in its entirety, just the quote by itself like holds some kind of like resonant truth or reflection that anyone looking at that can kind of go, oh, uh-huh, yeah, I get, I get what you're talking about. And lastly, I have verisimilitude. One of my favorite words. So verisimilitude really just means that like, you know, that you're faking it. You're faking it really well. It's like giving it the sense of being, oh, I'm finding it's really difficult to actually explain verisimilitude. So like, even if something isn't like historically accurate, for example, but verisimilitude is like that it does a good job of like feeling authentic if that makes sense. So I think that pros, effective pros, good pros is going to effectively like evoke the era or the style or the type of story that it is telling. So even if it's not perfectly imitating it because then, you know, that's not verisimilitude anymore. It's just replication, if that makes sense. So if you're telling a story that should be kind of like fairy tale-esque or is based on folklore, then you're not necessarily going to use the exact kind of language that you would actually find in a fairy tale or actually find in like an old English legend, but using pros that kind of evokes that vibe. So it feels kind of like it really is fairy tale-esque. Similarly, like again, with like historical fiction or historical fantasy, where again, maybe you're not actually using the language that would have been used in this time period or in the time period that is being evoked in this fantasy. So like, fantasy worlds are fantasy worlds, but if this fantasy world is like clearly based on like 1700s France, then like, okay, you're not writing in French and you're not writing in the actual language they would have used in the 1700s even in England, but it kind of like the formality of it, the terms of phrase, the kinds of words used, that it does a good job of evoking that vibe, even if it's not actually replicating that. So it should sound a little more formal, a little more old fashioned, a little wordy or things like that. By contrast, grim dark fantasy should probably sound less lyrical and should have more cutting and harsh prose that sounds more like what you'd imagine men of action employing, like the kinds of phrases and the kind of language and the kind of brevity that you'd expect from people that aren't academics, that aren't scholars, that aren't poets, that aren't the aristocracy. These are like so boots on the ground so they probably wouldn't speak in very flowery language. So then again, like this is where actually lyricism and beauty in the prose might actually be a detriment to the verisimilitude of the picture that you're painting. So now that we've established what I like in prose, let's talk about some of my favorite authors for prose. I think the first one that comes to mind for me and for many people is Patrick Rasmussen. The name of the wind I think is pretty famous for, well it's mostly famous for being unfinished, but Patrick Rasmussen's prose, that's a thing that people talk about, it's a thing that people know about, it's a thing that people remark on when they read the book. And many a negative review will say, I hated this book, the prose was beautiful, but I hated this book. Now of course there are certainly reviews that say I would have liked this book better if it wasn't so goddamn flowery. So again, your mileage may vary and your taste can be the exact opposite of mine in interior design. But Patrick Rasmussen is known for having this kind of like lyrical lush flowing prose. One of my most quoted quotes ever that it, cause it just like comes up a lot. So for being such a long quote, I'm kind of surprised by how many times I've had occasion to use it. I'll do it again. And that is loving something because is easy. That's like putting a penny in your pocket. But to love something despite, to know the flaws and love them too, that is rare and pure and perfect. So the name of the wind, it isn't necessarily written in a really archaic way. It's not that formal in its prose. So it's not doing that. It's not doing the thing of like trying to sound like Shakespeare, but it is still very kind of like evocative, filled with imagery, filled with kind of extra descriptions of sensory detail kind of thing. So you're transported sort of like to the place, the time, the smells, the sounds of what the character is experiencing. Next on my list is an author that when I first picked up the book, my first reaction was like, not since name of the wind, have I seen words like this? And that is Laini Taylor. And fittingly enough, Patrick Rothfuss blurbed a Laini Taylor book saying, wow, I wish I had written this book. So I feel vindicated in my reaction to Strange the Dreamer and going, wow, this is like name of the wind. So Laini Taylor is more flowery even than Rothfuss, I would say, with even more sensory detail, even more kind of metaphorical imagery than Patrick Rothfuss uses, more fantastical things that is also because the stories that she tells are more fantastical. There is magic in the name of the wind and the circular chronicle, but it isn't as like whimsical as Laini Taylor's magic. Laini Taylor has like lots of fanciful things happening where like inhuman things, flying things, you know, all kinds of magics and color and different places and things. And it's just like a lot more lush with like stuff going on. So there's just a lot more occasion to be describing things that are fantastical, which just like adds a layer of whimsy to the already fairly whimsical prose. But I think one of the most famous quotes from Strange the Dreamer, I think it was probably on the ARC covers was that, it was impossible of course, but when did that ever stop any dreamer from dreaming? Now again, a lot of people who don't like Laini Taylor's books would probably cite her prose as one of the main reasons, not necessarily the only reason, not necessarily even the reason, but I'm saying it's very possible to dislike it for the prose because it is whimsical, it is flowery, it is filled with imagery and metaphor and some people find that super annoying. Next, I have Neil Gaiman. I think Neil Gaiman, along with one other person on this list, I think the prose is not necessarily something that gets called out. And I think that's a shame because I think Neil Gaiman's prose is one of the many, many reasons that he is my favorite author. I'm not necessarily loving every story that I'm reading from him, but I'm always loving the prose. I think that there's a lot of art to his brevity. A lot of the types of prose that I've described that I like, you know, the flowery imagery-filled, metaphor-filled kind of prose tends to be more verbose. Doesn't have to be, though. Neil Gaiman is a great example of somebody that does employ imagery, does employ evocative sensory detail, but he's really concise. He's really to the point. He chooses his metaphors with surgical precision and it's a thing of majesty to behold. When I'm reading Gaiman, I'm just sort of in a constant state of awe at his ability to just choose the right words to tell this story. And he can tell you the story in like five words and that combination of five words is just like chef's kiss. So I think next time you're reading Gaiman, and I hope you do read more Gaiman, and if you've read everything he's written, well then read it again. Pay attention to the prose because he makes it look easy. You know, I think that's another reason people don't observe it because when you're reading something that's filled with imagery, you kind of notice it. It sometimes takes people out of the story that might be why people don't like that kind of prose. If I like the prose, I don't really mind noticing it. But with Neil Gaiman, it just kind of flows and it's very efficient. So you don't even really have time to stop and think about it unless you're kind of paying attention to it on purpose, like me, where you're just kind of going like, how did he do that way? Let me go back and reread that because like, how did he do that? Pay attention to his prose. There's a reason he is the legend that he is. Next, I have one that I definitely know people dislike for the prose, but this is one of the main reasons I love Maggie Stevar. Her books are even more whimsical than Lenny Taylor's in as pertains to the prose. The story is, I think, I don't know, you could debate that, which is more of a whimsical story. But the prose itself is extremely kind of whimsical and filled with imagery and metaphor. And I certainly talk to people who read Maggie Stevar's writing and are like, what is she talking about? What does that even mean? That doesn't mean anything. That's nonsense. And for me, when I read that, I think she's so clever at evoking the feeling of something, even if like the way she's just phrased something like doesn't actually make any sense or can't be possible or can't be true. But it still conveys an idea. It conveys a feeling. It conveys a situation. I realize I should probably offer you an example of what I mean with Maggie Stevar's writing. So on the fly, I found this quote, not a perfect example of what I'm talking about, but it should serve. As the hours crept by, the afternoon sunlight bleached all the books on the shelves to pale gilded versions of themselves and warmed the paper and ink inside the covers so that the smell of unread words hung in the air. The smell of unread words, like, isn't a thing. And yet, like that sentence, that passage is extremely evocative of the vibe of the room, the vibe of this moment. So that's what I love about her writing. But it's perfectly valid to read that and go, that doesn't mean anything. That's not a thing. That's not a smell. So I get it, if that bothers you, but that's what I love about it. And if you don't like Maggie Stevar, then you definitely, definitely should not ever read the next author on my list, which is The Head of Mafia. People make fun of Shatter Me for good reason. When I first started reading Shatter Me, I thought I hated it, which is to say, I guess I did hate it. Because it is excessively flowery and metaphorical and intense about all that. And so when I first started reading it, I was like, this is ridiculous. The more I read it, the more I fell in love with the poetry of it. And the more impressed I was with the genuine poetry of The Head of Mafia's writing. The series itself, it's kind of corny. It's got like, you know, it's a love story dystopian YA thing. Not the greatest story I've ever read. But her prose, I think, does contain genuine poetry. It is not easy to do what The Head of Mafia is doing. And again, you don't have to like it, but it does require a great deal of talent to do what she's doing. So I came to actually really, really appreciate what she's doing and enjoy it, like sort of on its own terms. And yeah, just kind of admire what she's doing with language because it is extremely artful. But I repeat, if flowering is bothers you even a little bit, never ever read The Head of Mafia's writing. Next I have Jean Wolfe. Now I've only read Book of the New Sun and Earth of the New Sun. I haven't read his other books. So as I understand it, his prose in other works is quite different from the prose and Book of the New Sun, which is quite formal and archaic and filled with a lot of unfamiliar words for a reason. But nonetheless, I think that the prose and Book of the New Sun is really stand out. It's really stellar, it's really beautiful. And there are definitely like, when I said there should be sort of poignancy, sort of universal truths, passages that you could tease out of their context and just admire for themselves. I think Book of the New Sun is filled with stuff like that. I think Jean Wolfe is a wordsmith and that art is on display in Book of the New Sun. And then of course the incorporation of archaic words is also impressive kind of in itself and he uses them so naturally. So yeah, I definitely think that the prose, irrespective of the story or the contents in Book of the New Sun is gorgeous. Next is the other author who I think their prose is overlooked. And that is Joe Abercrombie. Here, it's kind of similar to Neil Gaiman in the sense of it's quite concise and to the point it's not extremely verbose. It's not very flowery. It's not filled with like sort of like formal flights of fancy. It's like the opposite of something Leonie Shiller would write. Nevertheless, it takes a lot of skill to do what Abercrombie does. And again, I would employ this theme sort of description of surgical precision in choosing the right word, the right turn of phrase. And the various similitude here is partly the sort of like this is men of violence. So the phrasing should be kind of quick and to the point and as harsh and efficient as the lives that they are leading. But it's also his ability to find the different voices of his characters. And so then not just write what generally this world would feel like but how the world would feel for each character and how they would express that. And again, I think that people talk about his character voice being really strong and it certainly is. But part of the reason for that is that he is such a master wordsmith and he is able to employ language to serve his needs with such mastery. And that's part of why he's able to pull off what he's able to pull off, why he's able to do what he's able to do. And he makes it look easy, which is why I think people don't remark on it because it just flows, it's efficient. It's comparatively simple in structure. But again, it's deceptive in its simplicity because to put things that concisely and effectively and efficiently in a way that gets you transported to this place, to this time, to these characters, to this vibe, that takes talent. But back on the flowery end of things. The next one I owe Donna Tartt. This is true in both of the books that I've read by her but more true I think in the Secret History than in the Goldfinch. When I was reading the Secret History I remember just kind of marinating in like the velvety lush decadence of her prose. And I think the story wouldn't work half so well as it does if it wasn't for her prose. Now, this again is one of those situations where the prose is extremely appropriate for the story being told. The book is about really pretentious academics who are up their own asses about their academia to their detriment, to their demise. And so there is like a pretension to the verbose nature of the prose which is exactly suited to the type of characters that she's writing about and whose perspective she's writing from. And so in addition to just being gorgeous and poetic in and itself it also transports you to the mindset of the characters that she's writing about. And here again, like it's filled with sensory detail. So in addition to transporting you to their mindset in terms of, I guess it's just the pretension of it it also again, transports you to like the moment the sights, the sounds, the smells, the feelings that are being felt by the characters in any given situation in that book. Next up I have an author more I can again to like to head a mafie or Maggie Stevewater and that is Catherine and Belente. I have only read one book by her, is that true? I own more books by her but I think I've only read the one. Well, that one book had great prose. That one book being deathless. And here this is blending folklore with history. And I think she does it, it is through her strange wild metaphorical lyrical prose that she's able to pull off this seamless blending of history and mythology in a way that feels true in a weird way. It's about utterly fantastical things and the line is so blurred between what is real and what is fantastical. And the prose is what allows that to be possible. Again, if this kind of prose annoys you, it never read deathless. But if the kind of prose I'm describing appeals to you, then I highly recommend deathless. On a slightly less insane note, a similar author in terms of prose that evokes the mythical, I think is Catherine Arden who wrote The Winter Night Trilogy. The Winter Night Trilogy does a good job of evoking Russian folklore and fairy tale. Catherine Belente kind of takes that one step further and it's totally wild in terms of the fairy tale-ness of it all and it's a bit chaotic because of this blurring of lines. There isn't really so much a blurring of lines in Catherine Arden's book. Thus the whole thing just kind of feels cohesively like its own fairy tale. And it does, it effectively feels, this is again where Varys and Militude comes into it. Like she's not actually writing in Russian and she's not actually writing in like, even like historical English. But it does have this kind of like formal yet whimsical quality to it with a lot of transliterated Russian words that effectively evokes this feeling of I'm reading an old Russian story. And again, that's, it's not imitation, it's not reproduction of that exact thing. I mean, we'd have to be reading it in old Russian. So I think she does an effective job of giving you this vibe convincingly. On a similar note, Madeline Miller who wrote Song of Achilles and Cersei. Again, she's retelling the stories of Paul from Greek Myth. We would have to read it in actual ancient Greek for it to feel authentic, but she is kind of stripping away some of the myth in the first place. So she's making it sound a little bit less mythic than a myth would, because she kind of wants to tell a story about like, well, okay, well, let's think of these characters more as three-dimensional humans, not purely mythical figures. They are figures from myth and to be able to go along with a story like that has to be told in somewhat a mythic quality so you can kind of go with it when it comes to them doing or experiencing or being around things that are fantastical and mythical. So I think she straddles that line quite effectively through the prose, through making it sound like a myth while also telling it like, slightly less mythical than a myth so that you can take seriously these characters as sort of more three-dimensional, almost like historical fiction characters, straddling the line again. And last but not least is J.M. Berry. And I think he does kind of all the things that I've been talking about. If you read the original Peter Pan, there's amazing turns of phrase and moments of poignancy that can be stripped from their context and you know, put it on a poster, wow, that's a universal truth there, sir. It feels like a fairy tale, but it also feels insanely true. Part of the historicalness of it is it may have been contemporary for his time so he really is just like writing of his own time so he can't really take credit for that. However, his pirate character, Captain Hook, is speaking from an even older time and so he's able to sort of like convey that this is this sort of timeless ancient pirate from yet further bygone era through the way that Captain Hook speaks. So I think that's done very effectively and subtly. It's filled with again lush imagery, artful turns of phrase, clever poignant expressions and observations, it does transport you. Even though Peter Pan, I mean, it's kind of become a myth now when he wrote it, it wasn't one. So I think the reason that it's become one to us is partly because of his ability to write a story in a way that feels like it is a myth even though he's inventing it himself. So yeah, those are some of my favorite authors for prose. Let me know in the comments down below your favorite authors for prose. If you hate all the authors that are just listed, if you like the authors that are listed despite their prose, if you think there's some better examples for amazing prose, whatever you let me know, I post videos on Saturdays, other random times as well, but I'll take Saturdays so I can subscribe for my Patreon if you feel so inclined and I'll see you when I see you.