Garren Jacobsen
Auror
Alyssa ejactulated adverbially.
-
Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!
Serious writer voice
- Thread starter Steerpike
- Start date
Alyssa ejactulated adverbially.
Alyssa
Troubadour
FifthView
Vala
I think the problem is this:
Stripping out variety means limiting choices, and this basically reduces the pool of distinctive author voices.
You might say that X shouldn't be done, ever, and you might say that Y and Z or A-Z also should never be done, and I can understand why some authors would follow these common rules as a kind of preemptive measure for reducing instances of detrimental usage. But never using these things means never considering how they might be used, never making those selective choices that will help to shape a distinctive voice.
I read an interesting article today about dialogue in fiction, He Said, She Said: Comments on Dialogue in Fiction | Kobo Writing Life. It's a good article. Near the bottom, the author uses an example from Tolkien which includes these two lines:
Can one snort his speech or laugh his speech? If at the time the rule on saidisms had existed, and if Tolkien had been the sort to fear breaking the rule, these might have been written differently. But something would be lost. And maybe if Tolkien had slavishly followed the "show, don't tell" rule in addition to the saidisms rule, the pacing of the whole passage (not all included here) might have slowed down rather than be the fast clip it is.
I read an anti-adverbial dialogue tag article today in which the author mentioned that "curtly" might be a fine adverbial dialogue tag insofar as showing rather than telling would take a lot more words and kinda, sorta defeat the meaning of curtness:
It is this kind of conscientious choosing that helps to develop a distinctive author voice—when the choosing isn't so much about which rules to follow or break but rather about what works best here and here and here. (Then again, some authors do conscientiously choose to follow their own particular rules and follow them religiously, and this, too, may lead to the development of a distinctive style.)
The adverbial dialogue tag issue particularly interests me. I'd make a sharp break between those adverbs which describe the speech vs those that primarily reveal or tell something about the emotional state or personality of the character:
Do I read these two lines in a peculiar way, or do others see the same difference? If someone speaks curtly, that may reveal something about her, just like haughtily would; but the curtness seems to focus a little more on the manner of speech itself, the sound of it, the shape of it, its relationship to whatever else has been going on, whereas haughtiness is almost entirely a description of the speaker's present attitude, personality, etc. I prefer the first sentence over the second as a general rule, although for pacing reasons or tone I might use something like the second in some given project, on a case-by-case basis.
Stripping out variety means limiting choices, and this basically reduces the pool of distinctive author voices.
You might say that X shouldn't be done, ever, and you might say that Y and Z or A-Z also should never be done, and I can understand why some authors would follow these common rules as a kind of preemptive measure for reducing instances of detrimental usage. But never using these things means never considering how they might be used, never making those selective choices that will help to shape a distinctive voice.
I read an interesting article today about dialogue in fiction, He Said, She Said: Comments on Dialogue in Fiction | Kobo Writing Life. It's a good article. Near the bottom, the author uses an example from Tolkien which includes these two lines:
“Nonsense, Lindir,” snorted Bilbo. “If you can’t distinguish between a Man and a Hobbit, your judgment is poorer than I imagined. They’re as different as peas and apples.”
“Maybe. To sheep, other sheep no doubt appear different,” laughed Lindir. “Or to shepherds. But mortals have not been our study. We have other business.”
“Maybe. To sheep, other sheep no doubt appear different,” laughed Lindir. “Or to shepherds. But mortals have not been our study. We have other business.”
Can one snort his speech or laugh his speech? If at the time the rule on saidisms had existed, and if Tolkien had been the sort to fear breaking the rule, these might have been written differently. But something would be lost. And maybe if Tolkien had slavishly followed the "show, don't tell" rule in addition to the saidisms rule, the pacing of the whole passage (not all included here) might have slowed down rather than be the fast clip it is.
I read an anti-adverbial dialogue tag article today in which the author mentioned that "curtly" might be a fine adverbial dialogue tag insofar as showing rather than telling would take a lot more words and kinda, sorta defeat the meaning of curtness:
This does not mean we should avoid adverbial dialogue tags altogether. We can still use them if they offer us an effective way to show an action or an emotion without interrupting the flow of the story. For example, ‘she said curtly’ is better than adding a long sentence that includes actions and body language to show that she is being curt.
It is this kind of conscientious choosing that helps to develop a distinctive author voice—when the choosing isn't so much about which rules to follow or break but rather about what works best here and here and here. (Then again, some authors do conscientiously choose to follow their own particular rules and follow them religiously, and this, too, may lead to the development of a distinctive style.)
The adverbial dialogue tag issue particularly interests me. I'd make a sharp break between those adverbs which describe the speech vs those that primarily reveal or tell something about the emotional state or personality of the character:
"I'd prefer to save my money," she said curtly.
"I'd prefer to save my money," she said haughtily.
"I'd prefer to save my money," she said haughtily.
Do I read these two lines in a peculiar way, or do others see the same difference? If someone speaks curtly, that may reveal something about her, just like haughtily would; but the curtness seems to focus a little more on the manner of speech itself, the sound of it, the shape of it, its relationship to whatever else has been going on, whereas haughtiness is almost entirely a description of the speaker's present attitude, personality, etc. I prefer the first sentence over the second as a general rule, although for pacing reasons or tone I might use something like the second in some given project, on a case-by-case basis.
Last edited:
TheCrystallineEntity
Istar
Oh. 
I guess I use adverbial dialogue tags a bit too much, then.
I guess I use adverbial dialogue tags a bit too much, then.
FifthView
Vala
Addendum to my last comment:
And then there are the adverbial dialogue tags that are simply redundant: "I hate all of you!" he screamed angrily. Um, ok. Heh. So that type of usage would go in my own personal Never bin.
And then there are the adverbial dialogue tags that are simply redundant: "I hate all of you!" he screamed angrily. Um, ok. Heh. So that type of usage would go in my own personal Never bin.
TheCrystallineEntity
Istar
^Or "Sorry." He apologized.
No, no you don't. It will take you down dark places. Places where you accumulate grime that can never be washed away, and you curse the teachers who taught you to read.
Is that when one is in the throws of passion and shouts, "Fancifully, Strictly, Deservedly, Simply, Agreeably...?"
Man it was hard trying to keep that tasteful and G-Rated.
Garren Jacobsen
Auror
No, no you don't. It will take you down dark places. Places where you accumulate grime that can never be washed away, and you curse the teachers who taught you to read.
Is that when one is in the throws of passion and shouts, "Fancifully, Strictly, Deservedly, Simply, Agreeably...?"
Man it was hard trying to keep that tasteful and G-Rated.
You did admirably!
DragonOfTheAerie
Vala
No, no you don't. It will take you down dark places. Places where you accumulate grime that can never be washed away, and you curse the teachers who taught you to read.
Is that when one is in the throws of passion and shouts, "Fancifully, Strictly, Deservedly, Simply, Agreeably...?"
Man it was hard trying to keep that tasteful and G-Rated.
*muffled snickering*
Alyssa
Troubadour
I never ejaculate simply...
C
Chessie
Guest
One of my favorite topics. At this point, I trust myself enough to follow through, again and again, refining each time. I understand my voice and what she's trying to say. What she likes to explore, how she likes to explore it. What sorts of characters, themes, and plots match her tone, etc. The more I let my creative side play, the more enjoyable writing books is. I don't let others into my drafting process either. That's been total manuscript death for me in the past. Far as serious writer voice goes, it's something I've been recovering from thanks to building trust in my own creative process.
At this point, I trust myself enough to follow through, again and again, refining each time. I understand my voice and what she's trying to say. What she likes to explore, how she likes to explore it. What sorts of characters, themes, and plots match her tone, etc. The more I let my creative side play, the more enjoyable writing books is. I don't let others into my drafting process either. That's been total manuscript death for me in the past. Far as serious writer voice goes, it's something I've been recovering from thanks to building trust in my own creative process.
