Maia's right. A lot of new writers think that they need to have these massive paragraphs with flowery words. A lot of times, a short, more concise paragraph works better then the large one, and keeps the flow better. Simple words, when used appropriately and in context, a lot of times work better then trying to use ones that a reader would need a dictionary to understand. Myself, I enjoy descriptive sentences that are nicely written. Unfortunately they're not just for your enjoyment, There's a reader to consider, and he/she may lose patience if they have to read a slow, ponderous book. Giving words and sentences somewhat extra attention, like you reguraly come across in poetry. Poetry is a different writing style then short stories and novels. They do not have a limitation of words necessary. 'The Bells' by Poe is large and there are other examples. Literary writing is, until you prove your ability to sell, a box. Word counts are limited and the more flowery words, the less is in the plot. Which means by the time you edit it out, you might have 30k words from 140k. Projecting the thoughts of my characters on the world I am creating. Nothing wrong with that.. To what degree can one use descriptiveness, similies, details and flowery language? Description slows the pace of your story, so it needs to be planned as to when to place it in. As Cog has said in his post, and I am a firm believer in, use what is necessary and not a word more. For example, let's say you have a sleazy bartender in your book. A quick description of greasy, unwashed hair and a couple teeth missing can do the job-especially if not a major character in the scene. A reader can build what they want around that, so a paragraph describing him is unnecessary and it runs your word count up. Remember the box analogy. There's a certain number of words you can use in a book if you want to be published by one of the Big Six. Thus, each word needs to be efficient and get your point across with as few as possible.
btw, the correct spelling is 'similes'... the singular is 'simile' so there is no third 'i' in the plural...
