Specific vs General Time

[BWFoster78]

Which is better:

The duke entered a few minutes later.

The duke entered three minutes later.

In general, it's taught that, the more specific your writing is, the better it is. I struggle with this advice regarding time, however. I don't want to convey that my hero is watching the sundial and knows that the duke enters exactly three minutes later. On the other hand, I feel I should be specific.

Does one of these bother you more than the other?

 

[Chilari]

I would go with "a few" or add "about" if you want to count the minutes. There's being specific, but then there's being believable. Unless someone has been waiting impatiently and has a watch, they're not going to know precisely how many minutes something has taken. If your characters don't know something as insignificant as that, neither should your readers.

 

[Mindfire]

In this kind of situation, dealing with such small time increments, I'd say only be specific down to the minute if your POV character is a very precise person or obsessed with specifics. Other wise it's unnecessary.

 

[Ankari]

I think you know my answer. I wouldn't even use the word "minutes." Instead, I ould simply state "the duke entered a short time later."

 

[ThinkerX]

Hmmm...I would say a lot of it would depend on the situation and social status of the people involved.

A peasant working in the field...'last half of the day' or 'right before the supper bell' works fine. For a peasant, precision isn't required.

Somebody like a Duke, though...he is going to have meetings and appointments scheduled for pretty much every waking moment. He pretty much has to, in order to get anything done. In a crisis situation or holiday type deal he could back bench some stuff, but there will be a cost to be paid later. Almost certainly the Duke (or even a Baron or town Mayor) would have a an official whose main purpose would be to work out the schedule. 'Lord High Chamberlain' or 'Executive Secretary'.

 

[The Din]

A fart, a cough, and an uncomfortable silence later, the duke entered...

 

[Saigonnus]

A handful of minutes later, the duke entered.

 

[Lawfire]

Moments later...?

It might just be me, but moment seems less "defined," than minute.

 

[Telcontar]

Unless you have good reason, less specific is better. I've found that it especially applies with time spans of days or more - you start getting into plot-wide chronology at that point and you don't want to accidentally contradict yourself.

 

[Hypervorean]

Yeah, I think both would be fine. They would just give the reader two different impressions of the character.

 

[BWFoster78]

I tend to like rules and principles, and I'm trying to define these standards for my writing.

I'm still unsure as to which rule to use:

1. Writing should be specific. It's better to say I drive a Jeep Cherokee than to say I drive a car. Thus, when dealing with time, it's better to say I waited fifteen minutes than I waited a while.

2. Being hyperspecific about time is a characteristic. It should only be done if the POV character would both think in those terms and have access to accurate time telling devices.

What say you: one or two?

 

[Hypervorean]

I say number two, as I believe I already made clear. It just wouldn't make any sense to be hyperspecific about time if the character wouldn't know/care.

 

[Ireth]

I vote rule 2 as well.

 

[Steerpike]

Depends on how tight the POV is. If it is a very close POV with respect to the character, then rule 2 seems to work best. If you are in a more distant POV I think you can use either one because you're not filtering everything through the POV character to begin with.

 

[Devor]

2. Being hyperspecific about time is a characteristic. It should only be done if the POV character would both think in those terms and have access to accurate time telling devices.

This, as a rule, with the caveat that the needs of the scene come first. There's times where the reader may care when the character wouldn't, and those needs might in some cases trump.

 

[BWFoster78]

This, as a rule, with the caveat that the needs of the scene come first. There's times where the reader may care when the character wouldn't, and those needs might in some cases trump.

Excellent response. Thanks.

 

[Amanita]

I'm usually for more general terms for time. Especially in an alternate world, the question arises if the characters even measure their time in minutes and hours. If not, the terms wouldn't help the reader much and even make them more confused. There are situations where exact time measurement can be useful but it's not always the case.
Everyone writing in pre-modern time periods should keep in mind that exact time-measurement wasn't as omni-present as it is now, pocket watches and the like have only been invented relatively late into the middle ages. If I remember correctly around at the same time as gun powder, but I'm not absolutely sure anymore.

 

[BWFoster78]

I'm usually for more general terms for time. Especially in an alternate world, the question arises if the characters even measure their time in minutes and hours. If not, the terms wouldn't help the reader much and even make them more confused. There are situations where exact time measurement can be useful but it's not always the case.
Everyone writing in pre-modern time periods should keep in mind that exact time-measurement wasn't as omni-present as it is now, pocket watches and the like have only been invented relatively late into the middle ages. If I remember correctly around at the same time as gun powder, but I'm not absolutely sure anymore.

I think it's okay to use minutes and hours. I'm translating to the reader the character's thoughts. Maybe the character looks at the sun move and uses it to reckon that ^!% (since the don't use our numbering either) plycaons have passed. I determine that ^!% plycaons is approximately equal to an hour and a half and use that terminology since that numbering system and plycaons have no meaning to my reader.

 

[Saigonnus]

Clocks were around in the 14th and 15 centuries, but were insanely expensive so most ordinary people simply couldn't afford one, thus accurate time pieces are somewhat rare before the 18th through 20th centuries.

I would say if it is important to the plot, use a specific time frame, but if not a general one will work better. Everyone has a different concept of general terms like "while, moment, bit etc." A patient person could consider a "while" to be ten or fifteen minutes or more while one more impatient could consider it to be less than five minutes.

 

[Erica]

If it's a situation where your pov character would be counting the minutes (like he's sitting in a waiting room, watching the clock hands), then being specific makes sense. But in general, we are not that precise in our internal measure of time, so I'd say a few minutes later would normally be a more realistic portrayal of how your pov character would be perceiving things.

The advice to be specific does not mean that it's a good idea to bog your story down in minutiae. It's more about picking what is most relevant and realistic in the current situation and portraying it concretely.

An example of a situation where being specific about exactly how much time has passed might be reasonable: Bob changed position in the hard, plastic chair for what felt like the fiftieth time. He glanced up at the clock. God, had it really been only five minutes?

Distances are another place where it is usually a mistake to be too accurate.

John's unmoving form lay a few feet away.

Unless the pov character has a tape measure with her (and uses it), she wouldn't know that he's lying precisely three feet six inches away.