I've had this question for a really long time. A lot of my work seems quite 'floaty' and 'old style' because I describe things in a very metaphorical and surreal way. For example:
Her eyes were made dull by the inclement sky.
I have this obsession with describing eyes to be shinier than anything imaginable. I think this description is quite bad because of the word 'inclement', it just seems a bit old and unused.
The horses galloped wearily through a river, barely being able to keep increasing their speed in tandem with (unnnamed's) kicks.
Woohoo that's a way better description! Okay so I think this is a little metaphorical and old-style because I haven't just said that the horses were tired, rather I've created an extended sentence to describe the horses being unable to perform to how the rider wants them to. I don't know if this is showing not telling or plainly bad and metaphorical description.
It howled at their ears, like a pack of wolves, and rushed in streams around their faces and skin.
That's the best quote to describe what I mean. This sentence is referring to the wind. I'm not just saying 'the wind was loud, and fast', instead I'm using a simile and personification. The wind can't rush, and it doesn't howl. This style of description is reminiscent of some older-style works.
So in short, the question is this:
- Is it better to have metaphorical descriptions, or upfront ones that get the point across?