Ok, I got notes back from a lit. agent on my latest novel, and I'm having a little trouble, a quandary, over how to tackle this cliche note.
I thought I recognized what a cliche is, and at the same time avoiding purple prose. But this note on ridding cliches has me perplexed, because its cliches on a different level than the obvious.
She pointed out: fear mounted, vice-like grip, fragile hope, flashed to life , harbinger of death, stabbed at his heart, heart pounding, a rotting corpse, full of life and hope, etc.
to me cliches are like: bark up the wrong tree. hit it out of the ballpark. the devils in the details. etc.
I'm guessing what she means about these simple phrases is not just about cliche, but I noticed they are mostly 'telling' phrases and I should rewrite them to do more 'showing'
Do you think that is right?
I also got a note on 'great action', but she says I need to fill in more detail on the surrounding world/place to immerse the reader even deeper the uniqueness of my fantasy. This seems like a delicate balancing act to add more detail but not lose the pace of the action. Anyone have any good advice/reference/reading of how I should approach this? The irony is I did several rewrites to trim what I thought was unnecessary detail to boost the pace, now I need to put some back in without loss of action. Ugg, who believes writing is easy?
and just to share with the group, I also got notes on reducing semi-colon/colon usage. that I slipped out of the proper pov on occasion, she gave me examples. And to change either my protag's name or the antagonist's since both names started with a 'A' which she says causes some confusion.
She gave me some positives also, and a note she is interested in rereading if I make the adjustments.
Thought this would be good to share with the forum, and I do need the help anyways.
Thanks,
W.
Posted by Meredith (Member # 8368) on :
quote:Originally posted by walexander: Ok, I got notes back from a lit. agent on my latest novel, and I'm having a little trouble, a quandary, over how to tackle this cliche note.
I thought I recognized what a cliche is, and at the same time avoiding purple prose. But this note on ridding cliches has me perplexed, because its cliches on a different level than the obvious.
She pointed out: fear mounted, vice-like grip, fragile hope, flashed to life , harbinger of death, stabbed at his heart, heart pounding, a rotting corpse, full of life and hope, etc.
to me cliches are like: bark up the wrong tree. hit it out of the ballpark. the devils in the details. etc.
I'm guessing what she means about these simple phrases is not just about cliche, but I noticed they are mostly 'telling' phrases and I should rewrite them to do more 'showing'
Do you think that is right?
Maybe. But she might also be asking you to stretch for a more original way of describing these things. The phrases don't bother me, but I'm more about a great story than poetic prose.
quote:I also got a note on 'great action', but she says I need to fill in more detail on the surrounding world/place to immerse the reader even deeper the uniqueness of my fantasy. This seems like a delicate balancing act to add more detail but not lose the pace of the action. Anyone have any good advice/reference/reading of how I should approach this? The irony is I did several rewrites to trim what I thought was unnecessary detail to boost the pace, now I need to put some back in without loss of action. Ugg, who believes writing is easy?
It's hard to give much detail during an action scene. I usually try to find an opportunity to squeeze it in before the action starts, hopefully while ratchetting up tension before the action starts.
quote:and just to share with the group, I also got notes on reducing semi-colon/colon usage. that I slipped out of the proper pov on occasion, she gave me examples. And to change either my protag's name or the antagonist's since both names started with a 'A' which she says causes some confusion.
I've had the advice to start character names with different letters, too. Especially if they're going to be in many and/or pivotal scenes together. Fortunately, name changes are fairly easy.
quote:She gave me some positives also, and a note she is interested in rereading if I make the adjustments.
Thought this would be good to share with the forum, and I do need the help anyways.
Thanks,
W.
Congratulations! It's hard to get to that revise and resubmit. Or this kind of detailed feedback.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
Clichés are hackneyed idioms, once upon a time vivid and lively metaphoric or rhetorical expression that misuse, overuse, triteness, and trivialness made as common as breath. Any expression, includes dead metaphors, some dead on arrival at first use yet persist anyway, like "dead on arrival."
Clichés substitute for robust, fresh, and original expression. Deeper investigation of cliché and types might be wanted, see Webster's, UNC Chapel Hill, Writing Center Online, and Wikipedia.
Descriptive details want more than mere description detail. Those want drama's antagonism, causation, and tension, especially tension's several emotional facets.
A red ball bounced downhill is lackluster, dull, unlively, and an artless tell. Such wants at least emotional context and texture: who, when, where; what, why, and how, plus, as practical, entails want and problem complication and stakes at risk conflict forces' setup, wrap, delivery, and follow-through. That brief sentence could easily expand to a several or more sentence paragraph that describes the ball from a viewpoint persona's external and internal perceptions and responses. Personal and intimate viewpoint persona emotional attitude is a patent show distinction from tell.
Among robust action, context and texture details, especially texture, leavened, not summary or explanation tell blocks before, amid, or after action, rather, part of the action, leavened with personal, emotionally charged details at least as dramatic as the action and of a proportion to action sequences. Leavens in proportionate Description, Introspection, Action, Narration, Emotion, Sensation, Summarization, Exposition, Conversation, Recollection, Explanation, and Transition modes and overlaps thereof as indicated for the wants of a scene, sequence, and segment. Mnemonic: DIANE'S SECRET, and SPICED ACT, Setting, Plot, Idea, Character, Event, and Discourse; Antagonism, Causation, and Tension.
Of DIANE'S SECRET modes, some want more weight than others, Explanation and Summarization least of all. Descriptive Sensation and Emotion most of all, includes Action, Introspection, Conversation sensations, especially emotionally charged sensations. Not to mention that Exposition is widely misunderstood and often compared to expository composition. Exposition is introductions, period, at any time or place within a narrative. Backstory is exposition, in deft hands, is artful appeals. In less skilled hands, backstory is artless, drama-less (ACT-less), lackluster, unlively, static, and dull.
Mindful that descriptive details and action might merely mime intent and not set up, wrap, deliver, or follow through on portentous promises. See "Being a Glossary of Terms Useful in Critiquing Science Fiction," edited by Clarion workshops' David Smith, SFWA hosted.
"Mime conversation. A dialog supposedly loaded with portentous significance to all participants – contorted facial expressions, heavy word emphasis, significant looks – completely opaque to readers because relevant facts are neither stated nor inferrable. 'But when you told me that – ' '-s! And thus he couldn’t – ' 'Of course, and I was such a fool, so now if — ' 'not if, but-when! And — ' Such conversation infuriating to the reader and also cheat him of the genuine emotional conflict and change that are core to viable fiction. (CSFW: David Smith)
More than "mime conversation" any of DIANE'S SECRET SPICED ACT modes can be portent-fraught and empty mimes.
Overuse of semicolons and colons misses an overall prose punctuation function, that is, emphasis. Overuse of special punctuation forces emphasis, as like an excess of exclamation marks, who's overexcited? Writer? Narrator? Or viewpoint persona? Or who's more sophisticated than readers, re semicolons and colons and syntax and diction that support their uses? See Noah Lukeman, A Dash of Style, for comprehensive, artful punctuation use, a descriptive prose method text, not a how-to.
Copious special punctuation, and any punctuation mark overused, may appear "smart" though cause discursive and recursive jumbles, cause read and comprehension difficulties. First Law of effective prose -- facilitate read and comprehension ease.
Prose's emphasis punctuation workhorse is the dash, which substitutes for colons, semicolons, even commas, yet is prone to overuse and misuse, too. A congruent opposite shortfall is scarce punctuation, missed commas, and conjunction and preposition joined run-on sentences most of all. If too bumpy a sentence or paragraph punctuation, recast syntax and diction to suit. No quick fix, except recast syntax and diction for stronger sentences, where the words do the work and punctuation supports the words.
"slipped out of the proper pov" What, narrative point of view inconsistency? Or viewpoint glitches? No "proper" about either case, creator design lapses, maybe.
Narrative point of view is a narrative's overall grammar mechanics of person, tense, mood, and objective-subjective tone axis (overall attitude toward a focal topic or subject), plus apt auxiliaries.
Viewpoint entails narrator quantity, quality, type, and motility of psychic access to a focal viewpoint persona's or personas' interior or exterior external and internal perceptions, thoughts, and responses. Much daylight spans between narrative point of view, dozens of distinct possibles, and viewpoint, which is near infinite potentials.
The instinct to use two or so similar names for pivotal characters is a verbal tic, and that might indicate either a change to distinctive names or, perhaps, a subconscious cue to conflate two characters into one. Or a more remote clue that such characters' names indicate other similarities, say, each a "hero," or villain or nemesis, or aligned friends, etc., who maybe share more complication, conflict, and attitude than meets the eye.
Such an agent-editor's strong efforts, no mere impersonal no thank you decline or rejection slip, indicate strong interest for the novel. Worth the midnight candles burnt, on agent-editor's watch and writer's incentives to rise to the rewrite and revision occasions. Worth note, too, none of the adjustment requests appear to usurp writer-creator creative vision -- that's larger than might be as yet realized.
[ May 21, 2019, 08:04 PM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by EmmaSohan (Member # 10917) on :
quote:Originally posted by walexander: Ok, I got notes back from a lit. agent on my latest novel, and I'm having a little trouble, a quandary, over how to tackle this cliche note.
I thought I recognized what a cliche is, and at the same time avoiding purple prose. But this note on ridding cliches has me perplexed, because its cliches on a different level than the obvious.
She pointed out: fear mounted, vice-like grip, fragile hope, flashed to life , harbinger of death, stabbed at his heart, heart pounding, a rotting corpse, full of life and hope, etc.
to me cliches are like: bark up the wrong tree. hit it out of the ballpark. the devils in the details. etc.
I'm guessing what she means about these simple phrases is not just about cliche, but I noticed they are mostly 'telling' phrases and I should rewrite them to do more 'showing'
Do you think that is right?
Could you provide the sentence or phrase for these?
rotting corpse. Is there any other kind?
When you wrote about the vice-like grip, where did you imagine the vise holding? How big was it? You probably didn't imagine a vise, and neither will your reader.
But that's a normal process for idioms. Worse, I don't know how else you describe a vise-like grip. It's really a good simile. I'm not sure how you're going to improve on that, unless there is something about the context.
Fragile hope. The potential problem with a cliche is that it can be produced without thought. If fragile is the right word, great. I am trying to think if I have ever had a fragile hope. Can you give an example of a fragile hope?
Added: A common theme here is thinking about your metaphoricals. Many published authors don't, but I think it can improve your writing.
[ May 21, 2019, 06:28 PM: Message edited by: EmmaSohan ]
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
Good point about the metaphors (and similes). If your fantasy world doesn't have tools that are called "vice grips" then why in the world would a narrator or viewpoint character refer to one or to any similar tool?
What would someone in your world use to refer to a really strong, inescapable hold - terriers in our world are known for their refusal to let go when they bite into something (in fact that is a kind of metaphor for a "vice-like grip"). Alligator bites are even more powerful. Could you use a metaphor or simile that refers to, say, a dragon bite-like grip? Or make up some other kind of critter?
Thinking about the metaphors people would use in your fantasy will help you avoid cliches that refer to our world.
I remember hearing someone point out that two of the most common metaphors our culture refer to football and war. They claimed that "grid-lock" in traffic is a football metaphor and listed others that I'm drawing a blank on now (sorry!).
Other possibilities for the cliches your listed: instead of having fear mount (increase or climb onto the person?) could you have fear seep into the skin?
Instead of a fragile hope, could you have a flower-puff hope that dissipates with the smallest breath of wind?
A harbinger of death refers to a particular cultural metaphor (like a banshee) that comes from our world. What would your world use to warn someone that death is approaching? Maybe an unusual color of shooting star?
Instead of stabbing at his heart, could whatever it is (since it is probably a metaphor and not a real knife) clench at his throat or freeze his guts?
Instead of a rotting corpse, you could have a stinking corpse, or a recently-exploded corpse, or a dripping corpse (the fluids forcing their way out and into the ground), or a buzzing corpse (from the insects)?
Anyway, these are offered in hopes of helping you apply what is part of your world and what would be the metaphorical analogs to what are cliches in our world, so that your reader truly experiences something different and fantastical.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
A point of information about "vice-like grip."
Vise is the U.S. dialect variant for the machine bench tool and clamp pliers. Vice is the British variant.
Did the agent note that? If not -- well, competent about prose craft facets, not as attentive to vocabulary facets.
By the way, did the agent offer contract terms? If so, did you read the fine print clauses? One nefarious fine-print clause has of late been inserted into representation, publication, and edit contracts, and that stipulates whoever contributes to edits owns copyright of an as-edited finished work and charges writer a $$$ or $$$$ quit fee for the services and rights release at contract expiration. Such clauses indicate plain ignorance of intellectual property law, and amount to, more often than not, incompetent edits.
Smaller, newer firms attempt that property rights grab gambit more than larger, long established, and reputable firms. That clause type goes against every part of copyright law precedent; however, if agreed to and signed, irrespective of if understood or overlooked, contract law prevails. ---- An alternative to cliché expression, and potent if apt, uses stronger show, or reality imitation, objective detail evidence. For example, instead of "vise-like grip" tell, subjective expression, describe the strong hand that grips? or whatever, and the sensation force and effect, show, that is, the visual, aural, tactile, as the situation wants, and -- and -- emotional sensations, maybe olfactoral or gustatoral if indicated.
Grip on what, too? A forearm? Numbness and needlepoint tingles of the forearm hand from the crush force, hot sensations of clenched nerves and muscles, adrenaline fight or flight and anger surges, maybe blue fingertips or whitish or bluish-reddish crush zone bruises? As like a tight tourniquet cuts off blood flow and clamps muscle bundles and nerve conduits?
Include emotionally charged descriptors, adverbs and adjectives if must be, or best practice predicate verbal metaphors akin to crush, clutch, squeeze, press, pinch, clench, clamp, cramp, etc. And all in an apt concision of words economy.
Word economy is directly proportionate to the significance of a given circumstance: less significant, fewer words, less emphasis, or excise altogether; more significant, more substantive words, more emphasis by word count alone, plus apt force amplification. Also, an early instance might be less words, a next, later instance further words and significance, more emphasis from repetition, and a later yet instance further words and significance : Chekhov's gun, also, L. Rust Hills' segment sequence tension setup (preparation), tension relief delay (suspension), and partial or complete tension relief (resolution), segments in short succession, longer succession, and overall.
[ May 21, 2019, 11:35 PM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Jay Greenstein (Member # 10615) on :
From the sound of it, the agent feels you're violating rule one of of Orwell's six, too often:
1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
2. Never use a long word where a short one will do.
3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
4.Never use the passive where you can use the active.
5.Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
6.Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
George Orwell's six "rules" are from "Politics and the English Language," bottom of page 9 of 10. (First publication in Horizon, London, April 1946: Issue 76, pages 252 – 265. U of Texas Dallas hosted text PDF.)
The essay discusses the ugliness of political expression and truth manipulation in Orwell's time. Timeless.
Orwell's complete works online at george-orwell.org
Posted by Grumpy old guy (Member # 9922) on :
I happen to agree with everything your critic had to say. Any common phrase in current usage is bound to be cliche in creative prose. Find a new and more interesting way to say he's as dead as a Dodo and you'll be an instant success. So long as you can pull it off.
Phil.
Added later: The trade-off between action and setting is difficult. A reader needs to know where action is taking place. It is also important to point out that location influences how and why action takes place.
P
[ May 22, 2019, 03:22 AM: Message edited by: Grumpy old guy ]
Posted by Reziac (Member # 9345) on :
quote:Originally posted by walexander:
And to change either my protag's name or the antagonist's since both names started with a 'A' which she says causes some confusion.
I contend that this is a nonsense complaint -- provided the characters are sufficiently distinct.
You'll have no trouble telling Bill from Bob if they're presented as different people. But if the people blur together, so do their names, and then the critic seizes upon the obvious flaw and whines about same-first-letter.
But valid or not, it's become codified, so critics feel they must complain of it.
However, I agree about the cliches -- and not so much because they're cliches, but rather because they all kinda tell us about something, rather than letting us heft it in our hands, or get bitten by it. (I also got the impression that some may be out-universe terms, thus break internal reality.) Hence the gripe about not enough detail -- an external description is not a detail used or experienced by a character.
The semicolon complaint may mean misuse, or may indicate a more general problem of punctuation that's not generating the right "eye-voice" for the reader.
I get the feeling you're at the stage where you're good enough that your prose is slick, but this also makes it hard for you to see the flaws. This is where a mercilessly sarcastic editor could get you into the habit of hearing what you really wrote, so henceforth you'll catch it on the fly, and can get it right with far less effort.
As to "rotting corpse, is there any other kind?" Zombies, mummies, bog men, freezer-burned... Posted by Grumpy old guy (Member # 9922) on :
Also, setting provides context.
Phil.
Posted by Grumpy old guy (Member # 9922) on :
Reziac, Bill and Bob are names we are familiar with. Alfwen and Alfred are more problematic until the reader gets the hang of 'things'.
Phil.
Posted by walexander (Member # 9151) on :
Thank you all, this has been some wonderful advice and put me on track to yet another rewrite.
There is one other 'note' on an area which I believe I am structuring wrong. I am not sure how to format this exchange in dialog. The main protag. is hearing the voice of a dead companion, never sees anything, believes it is just him talking to himself, and yet there is an unsurety/mystery of whether he is in a real conversation with a ghost or not.
He is actively talking out loud, that's easy to deal with. But the voice I did in italics, no quotation, to symbolize inner thought, though tagged to the ghost's name. The voice is never heard aloud by anyone else in the book.
Does this seem like a proper format, or how would you tackle it?
@R - The protag and antag are brothers, thus similar names.
@M - not that easy to change names when you've done four drafts and a ton of revisions and the name is fused into your subconscious brain.
@E - No contract offer yet. It's just a half a page of notes. A paragraph on what she liked, and at the bottom that if I made the changes, send the revised version back to her.
@Everyone - Again, a lot of great advice, I'm glad I posted. Thank you all.
W.
Posted by Grumpy old guy (Member # 9922) on :
If you're looking for examples of mixing setting and combat then read ERB's first three Martian books. For bigger-picture stuff I suggest you read some of F. Lorraine-Petre's books on the campaigns of Napoleon. They demonstrate how you can describe large tracts of land (battlefield description) in a way reader's will find comprehensible.
Phil.
Posted by Meredith (Member # 8368) on :
quote:Originally posted by walexander:
@M - not that easy to change names when you've done four drafts and a ton of revisions and the name is fused into your subconscious brain.
W.
Well, I was more or less referring to Word's Find and Replace feature.
But, yeah, I've been there, too.
Posted by EmmaSohan (Member # 10917) on :
If your two characters are easily distinguished (male and female, Sneezy and Sleepy), same first letter isn't a problem. Otherwise, it is. Maybe those names are seared in the author's brain, but they are not seared in mine.
So not using the same first letter is pretty standard advice and it's good advice.
Posted by EmmaSohan (Member # 10917) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reziac:
As to "rotting corpse, is there any other kind?" Zombies, mummies, bog men, freezer-burned...
Good catch. And I saw it coming: whatever they do to corpses in a funeral home. Formaldehyde?
And maybe it was important to make the point that the corpse was rotting. We don't have context. But when a body is found on the ground, I think the presumption is that it's rotting.
We can imagine a brilliant detective saying, about a body in the room, "But its not rotting." Maybe it's a zombie pretending to be dead. Maybe the killer dipped the body in an odorless preservative.
Of course, I have no idea how the detective would know that the body isn't rotting. Biological assay?
Of course, if the body was rotted, that would be a clue. But then why wouldn't the author say that? Why not a rotted corpse? Yes, I am being too picky here, but my point was to think about it, not just write it without thinking.
If I came upon a dead body in the woods, I would be more concerned with smell or looks, not ongoing biological activity.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
quote:Originally posted by walexander: There is one other 'note' on an area which I believe I am structuring wrong. I am not sure how to format this exchange in dialog. The main protag. is hearing the voice of a dead companion, never sees anything, believes it is just him talking to himself, and yet there is an unsurety/mystery of whether he is in a real conversation with a ghost or not.
He is actively talking out loud, that's easy to deal with. But the voice I did in italics, no quotation, to symbolize inner thought, though tagged to the ghost's name. The voice is never heard aloud by anyone else in the book.
Does this seem like a proper format, or how would you tackle it?
Italics format for thoughts is a fantasy convention. However, to me, that's format acrobatics that tell from narrator and writer hands more than show from viewpoint persona experiences. Maybe words and punctuation and setup beforehand, amid, and afterward would work as well or better.
If the ghost's thoughts are tagged in the ghost's name, does that untimely defuse the wanted mystique? Subjunctive mood's conditional or optative aspects might defuse that mystique spoiled prospect.
The craft and rhetoric modes on point are dramatic irony. The live persona doesn't know a ghost occupies his thoughts. If or when should readers know? If or when, later than readers, does the live persona know? Dramatic irony occasions strong appeals.
To me, the longer an apt delay in certainty, first, for readers, then maybe for the live persona, the longer the mystique prevails, the longer dramatic irony appeals, yet gradual realization dawns nonetheless, for readers at least.
At first, the thoughts could be believed the live persona's reflections of the dead companion's speech patterns. A gradual next step, transition, that is, would use distinct stream of consciousness grammars that signal to readers the thoughts are the ghost's, not clarified yet, though signaled. The live persona could think he remembers, "channels," the companion's thoughts from life, out of grief, for example.
The Kübler-Ross five stages of grief then is a pattern for the ghost presence realization process, if wanted: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance. Denial the thoughts are his dead companion's. Angry that memories of his companion pester him, and a cold yet welcome comfort, too, that the two are together in the live persona's thoughts. The bargaining phase is, really, a process of maybe ghost convincing live persona, and somewhat drawn out by exigent interruptions. Depression would be a phase where the live persona adjusts to a new reality realization of a ghost's possession. Acceptance, full realization the thoughts are of his dead companion's ghost. That is the long tail end of a covert (subtext) dramatic movement's tension sequence relief.
Such a sequence delays certainty, appeals from readers know before the live persona, if ever, subtext, dramatic irony, and which might accompany an overt action movement sequence or sequences or scenes. Delay of an apt extant is the stronger appeal. Long enough readers are timely in-clued, not so long that readers wonder is the live persona that obtuse, and thus spoil the mystique and appeal. Those are dramatic irony essentials, that is, delayed, timely, judicious realization processes and progress and yet in an apt economy of words. Or preserve the mystique throughout and yet readers cued in anyway.
If all at once in one scene readers and the live persona realize the ghost's thoughts preoccupy his, the payoff and dramatic irony are unearned and spoiled.
"Microwaving the soufflé. A tendency to rush past important setup material in the author’s haste to get to the payoff. Generally leaves the reader feeling frustrated on two counts: (1) the setup, being rushed, is uninteresting, and (2) the payoff, being insufficiently set up, is not earned. (CSFW: David Smith)"
Are the live persona's thoughts italicized, too? Maybe altogether too much italics? Maybe save the italics for apt emphasis? If not italicized, either case, and limited thought attribution, then a number of craft methods signal thoughts otherwise, stream of consciousness grammars per each persona, personal speech and thought diction and syntax (idiolects per each), and emotionally charged expression foremost.
[ May 22, 2019, 08:43 PM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Jay Greenstein (Member # 10615) on :
If those words the protagonist hears are an actual communication you might use italics to indicate that no one but him can perceive them, and enclose them in parenthesis to indicate that they're not his thoughts.
Posted by Reziac (Member # 9345) on :
quote:Originally posted by walexander:
@M - not that easy to change names when you've done four drafts and a ton of revisions and the name is fused into your subconscious brain.
Also, there's the problem that the surrounding prose was written to fit the sound and rhythm of that name. So changing a name may require altering other bits, to avoid spots that go CLONK.
Be cautious about rewriting when you're not sure what the problem is, especially when it's done to satisfy a critic. Frequently such rewrites sand all the character out of the work, or generate gaps and inconsistencies.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
Punctuation and formats entail an emphasis, essential-ness, and writer status hierarchy. Parentheses are next-most to brackets, braces, and carets, respectively, for least emphasis, least content essential-ness, and most obvious writer insertions.
General punctuation hierarchy from least visible to most visible writer insertions; emphasis and content essential-ness are other and different considerations:
Likewise typeface formats: single, plain roman text typeface, or mixed typefaces and point size variants: serif, sanserif, book, periodical, broadside, or decorated: italics, bold, underline, strike-through, superscript, subscript, all caps, medial case caps, drop caps, small caps, all lowercase; plus, layout formats: standard indented paragraph format, unindented, or verse format, block indented, or visually representative typography (calligram), Peter Matthiessen, Far Tortuga, 1975, for example, mixed indents, mixed line spaces, and mixed typeface point size dimensions for an observable rhetorical function.
[ May 23, 2019, 01:42 AM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Grumpy old guy (Member # 9922) on :
I find that readers are quite open to various formatting styles for non-verbal communications. It doesn't matter what you do, what really matters is consistency and a clear introduction to that method of communication.
By this, I mean you need to create a small set-up-scene that walks the reader through what you intend in the future, like Chekhov's gun. So, for the disembodied voice no-one else can hear, I would set up a scene that both demonstrates how you will be formatting such communication and to make it crystal clear to the reader no one but the main character can hear it. After that, just treat the invisible character as any other character. Readers aren't stupid.
Phil.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
A challenge for how to tag the ghost's thoughts, this particular situation, is preserve doubt the thoughts are the live persona's or the ghost's.
Usual thought punctuation and format conventions might untimely clarify the thoughts are the ghost's. Again, if given me, I'd show the ghost's thoughts differ by degrees from the live persona's yet show the ghost's thoughts are the decedent persona's personal diction and syntax idiolect for readers' sakes -- of another "voice."
Later, live persona and ghost thought distinctions could be someway tagged or free attribution for discernment purposes, if wanted that the live persona sometime knows the ghost's thoughts are the ghost's.
A paragraph break and quadruple em dash open tag (double indent) for the ghost's thoughts maybe, and thoughts inline otherwise for the live persona? Note that second person reflexive auxiliary addresses the self, indicative second person addresses another, and would be apt auxiliaries for thoughts irrespective of grammar person and whose thoughts, preserves doubt whose thoughts. The paragraph break also wanted regardless. Two em dashes equates to Standard Manuscript and Publication Formats' paragraph indent. Nice -- white space, simple, elegant, more or less invisible signals. Calligrammatic!
[lorem ipsom placeholder text] Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Aldrin rammed the Stridecaster into a lamppost, shattered the dang windshield. Miserable cur, Jason thought, craven yackhole. As if you're such a wise and noble gent yourself.
Ghost's thought the last line, might be construed as the live persona's thought, either-or as wanted.
Single indent subsequent lines, or narrowed page width section for same paragraph ghost thought if more than one type line. This is a standard block quotation format variant per grammar handbooks, style manuals, and publication sciences and arts texts.
[ May 25, 2019, 01:19 AM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Grumpy old guy (Member # 9922) on :
quote:Originally posted by extrinsic:
A challenge for how to tag the ghost's thoughts, this particular situation, is preserve doubt the thoughts are the live persona's or the ghost's.
Usual thought punctuation and format conventions might untimely clarify the thoughts are the ghost's. Again, if given me, I'd show the ghost's thoughts differ by degrees from the live persona's yet show the ghost's thoughts are the decedent persona's personal diction and syntax idiolect for readers' sakes -- of another "voice."
I still think you need to clearly set out the parameters of the game. If you don't the readers may feel either cheated or manipulated.
Then again, maybe the writer doesn't want to indulge in such nuances as a mad King who can't differentiate between his own thoughts and those of a wronged, tormenting ghost. And, maybe he does. The point is the readers should be let in on the rules of the game and, perhaps, once they know them, they are 'invited' to guess whose thoughts are whose as the story unfolds.
Layers upon layers, if the writer is up for it.
Phil.
Added later: Saying the above, I expect a writer to reveal the rules of the game using subtlety rather than shouting it from the rooftops.
P.
[ May 25, 2019, 08:21 AM: Message edited by: Grumpy old guy ]
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
The paragraph indent layout and second person reflexive, first or third person auxiliary illustration above works the subtle mischiefs Grumpy old guy suggests, as well as leaves doubt open whose thoughts are whose, until, ideally, targeted readers are timely soon enough in-clued, and maybe even affirmed.
However, when I've used those block indent methods for prose in the past, some readers balked and some readers delighted. Like two combatant forces faced off on a battlefield and no twain to meet. Delighted readers are versed in and appreciate formal essay block quotation methods and layout signals. Readers who balk gripe about and balk at formal essay layout methods, for essay and prose, and are less familiar with the methods and consider those gimmicky -- maybe cheated and manipulated, per Grumpy old guy.
Over the years that I've experimented with the methods, I've realized less experienced readers are slower on the uptake and, therefore, want stronger aesthetic functions and persuasions than the sole mechanical signals' manipulations. Two or more aesthetic functions stronger and clearer than the mechanical functions are wanted, and setup and payoff that support the functions.
This thought experiment, for me, has shown a way to accomplish that; that is, offer an aesthetic function appeal or two, re dramatic irony at least, that pays off soon. Timely reader suspicion, anticipation, and soon enough realization the second person reflexive, first person auxiliary block indent quotations are the ghost's thoughts achieves the least greater aesthetic function wanted. Nice would be another, stronger and clearer yet, aesthetic function and payoff or two, someway essential to dramatic movement and event, setting and milieu, and character characterizations.
[ May 25, 2019, 08:04 PM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
Another approach might be to put the ghost's thoughts inside parentheses ( ) and thereby make it look like they might be the protagonist's parenthetical thoughts.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)