Two short excerpts I want comments on: -- "You remember Roxanne?" Jimmy said. "Michael? And the little one over with the alphabet blocks is Justin."
Simon nodded at everyone. -- I'll never refer to Roxanne or Justin again. Should I replace this with Jimmy made introductions.? Putting in the names allowed me to make it dialog. But I'm concerned about overwhelming with names.
I have exactly the same question with the other excerpt, which is a news report. The fact of the riot is important, but the characters' names don't really matter. -- "The violence was contained later, when police chief James Minnifield ordered an overwhelming force of officers to disperse the crowd. Eighteen injuries were reported, and two deaths: Oliver Norwood, who apparently was mistaken by the crowd for Mr. Ledbetter, and was beaten to death. Suspects are being held for questioning. Mrs. Thelma Williams also died, in the fire that consumed her home at 3208 Cooper Street."
"Local resident Paul Evans had this to say."
[This message has been edited by wbriggs (edited May 09, 2005).]
Posted by Minister (Member # 2213) on :
I think the length of the piece is a big factor; if it's a novel, I think the naming lends an air of realism; if a short story, the reader expects every detail to be significant, so you might want to keep unnecessary details to a minimum.
Posted by djvdakota (Member # 2002) on :
I agree with minister on the names. However, I might add that if you're going to do it, use nondescript, forgettable names. Roxanne, for example, sticks out for me as unusual and interesting, therefore I might be more likely to remember it, her, and think she might come back into the story later.
Posted by Dude (Member # 1957) on :
On the first excerpt it's hard to say whether it's better with or without the names. There's not enough there to tell. I would say to lose the names if you aren't going to use the characters again. You could change it to "Jimmy made introductions" like you said and, if you want one to be remembered, have Simon notice something different about that character, so the reader remembers the name, or the next time he meets that person he remembers this meeting.
I think you need to leave the names on the second excerpt, because news agencies always report names if they have them. It is more realistic to keep them in the report.
Posted by shadowynd (Member # 2077) on :
I think the first instance might be replaced by "made introductions" or something similar, as you suggest.
I have a question about the second passage: Is Mr. Ledbetter a significant character? Of the names mentioned, his is the one that caught my attention and held it. I found myself wondering who he was that someone should be beaten to death simply for being mistaken for this Mr. Ledbetter.
If you wanted to leave out the name Oliver Norwood, you could have your reporter note that "An unidentified man, who apparently was mistaken..."
Or, of course, names might be withheld pending notification of next of kin.