Responding to a couple of specific critique comments

[BWFoster78]

I'm a huge supporter of getting a lot of eyes on my work for critiques. Regardless of the source of the comments, however, I'm the ultimate decider of how the final draft looks. Most of the time, I pretty easily decide whether to reject a comment or incorporate its suggestions. One particular section, however, gave me two questions. I'd like to get some additional thoughts.

MINOR QUESTION

No one preaches harder than a convert, and I've been convinced that "said" is the best speech tag. My original goal was to use it solely in my work. I made an exception, however, for "muttered." Here's my reasoning:

Speech tags don't help develop characters, don't describe the setting, and don't do anything for the plot. They're like punctuation, roadsigns to tell the audience how to read the work. Thus, you should minimize speech tags as much as possible. By using "he said" exclusively, it hides in the work. There's nothing to call attention to it. "He implored" or "he responded" becomes much more noticeable.

On the other hand, being concise is important. Would I rather use "he said under his breath" or "he muttered." Obviously, I don't want to overdo it with the muttering, but saving four words is more important than sticking to just "said."

So, now that I've allowed "muttered," it causes a crack in the dam.

The question is: what about "yelled."

In the following case:

A. "Use only 'said' as your speech tag!" he said.
B. "Use only 'said' as your speech tag," he yelled.
C. "Use only 'said' as your speech tag!" he yelled.

I vastly prefer A. C is my least favorite because I feel the "!" and "yelled" used together is redundant. I can accept B, but it's not best, IMO.

The case in question, however, involves characters in a howling snow storm. They're really close to each other and have to yell in order to be heard over the storm. Exclamation points don't work and would have to be overused and "said" doesn't seem to work as its inaccurate. Maybe you have to use "yelled" there. What say you?

MAJOR QUESTION

The guy who made the comment has helped me out a lot. My writing is much better, much more active, because of his influence. However, he and I have a major stylistic difference. He thinks everything has to be clearly spelled out for the reader while I prefer to leave some things up for interpretation.

Example:

The POV character raised his arms.

I'd prefer to leave the sentence above as it stands, leaving it to the reader to interpret from context why the character is raising his arms. My commentor would prefer that I add "in frustration" to the end of the sentence in order to make things completely clear. I'm okay with my viewpoint here and will continue to ignore those comments of his (maybe I'll change my mind in the future, but, for now, I'm happy with it.).

The comment in question involves a situation where he felt confusion over what I'd written. Usually, when a commentor tells me he's confused, I try to clarify the sentence. In this specific case, however, I'm having trouble determining if it's really unclear or if its a stylistic difference. Help please?

Here's the section:

They stopped and dismounted, huddling so they could hear each other and for warmth.

“We need to find shelter,” Brant said. “How about Big Mouth Cave?”

“You mean Big Bear Cave?” Dylan said.

“If you believe Will.” Brant stomped his feet and rubbed his arms over his cloak. “You got a better idea?”

Will is a minor character who has been introduced in a prior scene. The blurb about Will has absolutely nothing to do with the plot; it's simply there to add flavor. If I didn't put that it, I'd have to say something like: "People in town say there's a bear, but I don't believe them."

So, my question. Did you:

A. Easily get that the phrase "If you believe Will" meant that one of the random townspeople spread a suspect story about seeing a bear in or near the cave.
B. Find yourself wondering who Will is and why he has anything at all to do with the cave.
C. Parse out what the author meant in referring to Will but thought he could be much clearer.

BONUS QUESTION

I was writing yesterday and came up with the following exchange:

"I need a favor."

"What's that." (meaning, what favor do you require)

My mind automatically went to Airplane.

"A hospital? What is it"

"It's a big building with lots of patients, but that's not important right now."

I chuckled and revised it to read:

“Good.” Xan tried to figure the best way to approach the subject. He decided on the direct approach. “I need a favor.”

Cocking his head, Dylan looked at Xan. “What’s that?”

Xan couldn’t resist. “It’s when you do something for someone just out of friendship.”

Brant chuckled while Lainey groaned. Dylan waited expectantly, his expression unchanged.

Do you think that:

A. It adds a little humor and shows character. As long as you don't go overboard with the puns, you can keep it.
B. LOL! Every paragraph needs something like that! Fantastic!
C. Please, for the love of God, get rid of it! In fact, edit this post and remove the reference. I'm trying to purge it from my mind and am sickened by the thought of it poisoning others.

Thanks in advance for the help.

 

[Devor]

D. If it fits with the tone of your story, it's good. If it doesn't, I don't think it's strong enough to be an isolated source of wittiness.

 

[Christopher Wright]

My rule is use said mostly. When you're alluding to something specific, use another word. "Muttered" is appropriate when someone is speaking under their breath--it's a more precise description of a form of speech, and when it's pertinent to the story, it should be used. For example:

"This is idiotic," he muttered.

"What's that?" his boss asked.

"Nothing," he said.

Works better than:

"This is idiotic," he said.

"What's that?" his boss asked.

"Nothing," he said.

Context is very important in those situations and you don't want to have him mutter or mumble or whatever all the time. But I'm not an advocate of never using something. Sometimes it works. Sometimes it works better.

 

[BWFoster78]

My rule is use said mostly. When you're alluding to something specific, use another word. "Muttered" is appropriate when someone is speaking under their breath--it's a more precise description of a form of speech, and when it's pertinent to the story, it should be used. For example:

"This is idiotic," he muttered.

"What's that?" his boss asked.

"Nothing," he said.

Works better than:

"This is idiotic," he said.

"What's that?" his boss asked.

"Nothing," he said.

Context is very important in those situations and you don't want to have him mutter or mumble or whatever all the time. But I'm not an advocate of never using something. Sometimes it works. Sometimes it works better.

I understand your point. In your example, however, I'd say not to use "asked" because it is redundant. Same with something like: "Hey!" he exclaimed. The exclamationg point and "exclaimed" say the same thing. The question mark and "asked" say the same thing.

 

[Christopher Wright]

I'd used asked because said paired with a question mark is awkward. Sometimes redundancy is OK.

 

[BWFoster78]

I'd used asked because said paired with a question mark is awkward. Sometimes redundancy is OK.

We'll have to agree to disagree. IMO, "said" is much better in that situation.

 

[BWFoster78]

D. If it fits with the tone of your story, it's good. If it doesn't, I don't think it's strong enough to be an isolated source of wittiness.

Good answer. I'm just not sure whether it fits the tone or not. I don't want the work to be dark at all, so breaking up tense scenes with a pun may be a good idea.

 

[Ankari]

Hello Brian,

I will speak from the point of view of an avid reader, as my technical writing isn't nearly as strong as I want it to be.

My eyes glaze over whenever I see the word "said." How many people have you encountered that simply say something? I'm incorporating the style I'v seen with Steven Erickson, if the speaker only says something and it's easy to deduce who the speaker is, don't add any speech tags.

BWfoster78 face twisted in confusion. "What do you mean?"

"Look at the next quote. It's obvious that you're the speaker," Ankari gestured downward to lead BWfoster78's eyes.

"Yeah, I get it."


Also, I think of the space after the quote as valuable real estate. Why not use it to deepen your story or character? Show him do something or describe the tone of the spoken words. It makes me, as a reader, understand the character more.

The guy who made the comment has helped me out a lot. My writing is much better, much more active, because of his influence. However, he and I have a major stylistic difference. He thinks everything has to be clearly spelled out for the reader while I prefer to leave some things up for interpretation.

Example:

The POV character raised his arms.

Why would you just leave it that vague? Also, is that all you would do when you're frustrated?

"The POV character threw his arms into the air and grunted."

It doesn't spell out everything for the reader, but it gives them enough context for them to understand what the "arms in the air" meant.

They stopped and dismounted, huddling so they could hear each other and for warmth.

“We need to find shelter,” Brant said. “How about Big Mouth Cave?”

“You mean Big Bear Cave?” Dylan said.

“If you believe Will.” Brant stomped his feet and rubbed his arms over his cloak. “You got a better idea?”

I prefer it this way. Since you already introduced Will in a previous scene, keep it. If you haven't, then show Dylan "remembering" what Will said of the cave by having his eyes glaze over, or whatever.

“Good.” Xan tried to figure the best way to approach the subject. He decided on the direct approach. “I need a favor.”

Cocking his head, Dylan looked at Xan. “What’s that?”

Xan couldn’t resist. “It’s when you do something for someone just out of friendship.”

Brant chuckled while Lainey groaned. Dylan waited expectantly, his expression unchanged.

Keep it. From my exposure to these characters, I don't think it's out of place.

 

[Christopher Wright]

We'll have to agree to disagree. IMO, "said" is much better in that situation.

Agree to disagree? We never do that! ;-)

 

[BWFoster78]

First of all, thanks for the comments and for taking the time to try to answer my specific questions.

My eyes glaze over whenever I see the word "said." How many people have you encountered that simply say something? I'm incorporating the style I'v seen with Steven Erickson, if the speaker only says something and it's easy to deduce who the speaker is, don't add any speech tags.

BWfoster78 face twisted in confusion. "What do you mean?"

"Look at the next quote. It's obvious that you're the speaker," Ankari gestured downward to lead BWfoster78's eyes.

"Yeah, I get it."

I agree, but this wasn't really the point of what I wrote. It is absolutely better, IMO, to avoid speech tags where you can. Unfortunately, it just isn't always possible. My comments were in reference to that case. Sorry for any confusion.

Why would you just leave it that vague?

Two reasons: 1) The theory is that the reader gets more out of it if it is their interpretation rather than you imposing your interpretation on them. You describe what happens. The reader does the interpreting. 2) I think it allows you to make your work deeper. The reader may not pick up on something the first time through, and it adds something to subsequent readings. Note that reason 1 is much more important to me than 2.

Also, is that all you would do when you're frustrated?

Not really the point. Just trying to find a quick example to illustrate the principle.

I prefer it this way. Since you already introduced Will in a previous scene, keep it. If you haven't, then show Dylan "remembering" what Will said of the cave by having his eyes glaze over, or whatever.

Why is having introduced Will earlier a factor? Will could have said it or any random townsperson that I never introduce. I'm trying to quickly convey with a little bit of flavor that there's doubt about whether there's a bear in the cave. Am I accomplishing my goal or just adding confusion?

Keep it. From my exposure to these characters, I don't think it's out of place.

Cool. Thanks again for the input.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

1) I'm with you on leaving some of the interpretation up to the reader. If the emotion your trying to convey with action is unclear to the reader then it just needs clarification & context. I hate it when authors tell me how a character feels or offers a redundancy in the passage to feed the information to me like a child.

2) "If you believe Will." - I had to read the sentence twice and look back at previous lines to try & establish context. I believe this can be written better and more clear.

3) Humor is great IF it has relevance to the story. For example, if the joking character is a wise ass but changes over the story because that character arc is integral to the tale then hell yes! However, if it's just thrown in there to attempt some levity, then no.

 

[Devor]

Okay, here's an example I just pulled quickly from my writing.

"You! Out of our way," Kurzo barked at them as he and Zohten veered their dracobikes deliberately towards their quiet spot on the cliff.

Do you really think that would read better as said?

"You! Out of our way," Kurzo said to them as he and Zohten veered their dracobikes deliberately towards their quiet spot on the cliff.

You don't get anywhere near the right impression - the sense of bullying and mockery - with just "said."

I have to ask, BWFoster, how many lines of dialogue do you use on most pages? Because I think the more dialogue you use, the more anything but said will stand out. But if you're blending your dialogue with action especially, there's just no way "said" is always the best choice.

 

[BWFoster78]

1) I'm with you on leaving some of the interpretation up to the reader. If the emotion your trying to convey with action is unclear to the reader then it just needs clarification & context. I hate it when authors tell me how a character feels or offers a redundancy in the passage to feed the information to me like a child.

2) "If you believe Will." - I had to read the sentence twice and look back at previous lines to try & establish context. I believe this can be written better and more clear.

3) Humor is great IF it has relevance to the story. For example, if the joking character is a wise ass but changes over the story because that character arc is integral to the tale then hell yes! However, if it's just thrown in there to attempt some levity, then no.

Thank you for these comments. They are well thought out and helpful.

 

[BWFoster78]

Okay, here's an example I just pulled quickly from my writing.

"You! Out of our way," Kurzo barked at them as he and Zohten veered their dracobikes deliberately towards their quiet spot on the cliff.

Do you really think that would read better as said?

"You! Out of our way," Kurzo said to them as he and Zohten veered their dracobikes deliberately towards their quiet spot on the cliff.

You don't get anywhere near the right impression - the sense of bullying and mockery - with just "said."

I have to ask, BWFoster, how many lines of dialogue do you use on most pages? Because I think the more dialogue you use, the more anything but said will stand out. But if you're blending your dialogue with action especially, there's just no way "said" is always the best choice.

The concept is: if you can't convey what you wish using the words of the dialogue, it's weak to try to use the speech tag to make up for the lack. If you feel you need to give the impression of bullying and mockery, use better words. The speech tags purpose is to tell the reader who's speaking. That's it. (I'll admit that it's awfully tempting to try to make it do more, but there it is.)

I try to use action instead of tags whenever possible, and the quantity of lines of dialogue tends to vary depending on the scene.

 

[Devor]

The concept is: if you can't convey what you wish using the words of the dialogue, it's weak to try to use the speech tag to make up for the lack.

Please take another look at the example and respond to it directly. The character is telling them to get out of the way, and then redirecting their path so that they become in the way. There's nothing wrong with the dialogue; "said" would always fall short.

 

[BWFoster78]

Please take another look at the example and respond to it directly. The character is telling them to get out of the way, and then redirecting their path so that they become in the way. There's nothing wrong with the dialogue; "said" would always fall short.

I stand by my comment. In your example, I like the second version better.

 

[Penpilot]

Minor question answer - I think B is the best choice without seeing a sentence in context and knowing what exactly is trying to be conveyed. To me it's about using the right tool for the job. Sometimes it's 'said', sometimes it's 'muttered', 'whispered', 'grumbled'. The default is 'said' until I find reason not to used it.

Major question - it's fine to let the reader do some of the lifting and fill in he blanks, but you have to give them enough information to fill in the blanks. The blanks can't be too big. It's like algebra x+7=8, easy to fill in. X+Y = 99, too many possibilities. Taking your example of the POV character raising his hands but not mentioning it was in frustration, it has to make sense in context of how the scene is unfolding. The reader shouldn't stop and wonder why is he raising his hands.

For example, if the context was this. -- He slammed the door and yanked at his hair. His body trembled as he threw his hands into the air. "Give me a break." -- In context it's pretty obvious --I hope-- that he threw his hands up in frustration.

But if the context was this. -- He stepped inside the house and threw his hands up in the air. He couldn't wait to take a shower and unwind. -- From this, it's not evident why he's throwing his hands up. It could be from frustration. It could be from exhaustion and he's throwing his arms up in relief that his work day is over. In this case it would be appropriate to clarify by adding 'in frustration'.

The exchange with Big Mouth Cave, it's none of the above. My initial thought was the guy either got the name wrong or was making some joke that I wasn't quite understanding which this friend Will was the key to understanding. There's not enough verbal or non-verbal information that would lead me to conclude Big Bear Cave is referencing a story told by Will about a bear living in the cave. I didn't catch on at all until it was explained.

This is can be addressed if you tweak this sentence-- “You mean Big Bear Cave?” Dylan said.-- so it adds more info. “You mean Big Bear Cave?” Dylan raised his hands like claws and opened his maw like he was going to eat Brant. I think this would be enough to make that connection of Will telling a story about a bear living in the cave, but I'd add just a little more. Maybe have the follow up be "Will's full of it, there's no bear up there." making it absolutely clear.

Bonus question answer.

A would be the default. It's my type of humor, but whether it works or not depends on the set up, the scene, the characters, the story as a whole, and how it fits in with all of those things. If it sticks out like a sore thumb then it's not working. If it fits smooth, adding a little something off beat, then it works.

 

[BWFoster78]

Penpilot,

Thanks for the comments. I leaning in those directions for the most part. Still struggling with the incomplete information. I don't want to confuse the reader, but I want to allow for them to interpret on their own. Not sure exactly how that jives with your answer.

 

[Ghost]

A. "Use only 'said' as your speech tag!" he said.
B. "Use only 'said' as your speech tag," he yelled.
C. "Use only 'said' as your speech tag!" he yelled.

I don't normally use a speech tag after an exclamation mark, but when I do, it's something like shouted, yelled, cried out, etc.

I understand your point. In your example, however, I'd say not to use "asked" because it is redundant. Same with something like: "Hey!" he exclaimed. The exclamationg point and "exclaimed" say the same thing. The question mark and "asked" say the same thing.

I agree with you on using "exclaimed" after an exclamation mark, but not the rest. You may find using "asked" after a question mark or "yelled" after an exclamation mark redundant, but I find using "said" to be a little contradictory.

"Isn't he clever?" he asked.
"Isn't he clever?" he said.

I interepret those in different ways. The first is a genuine question. Maybe the asker doesn't know the person well, and he's asking for more information. In the second, the character isn't being genuine. He's not asking for someone's opinion. He might be sarcastic. He might anticipate the answer will be "Yes, he is clever!" because he's offering someone praise and trying to get others to compliment the person as well.

The guy who made the comment has helped me out a lot. My writing is much better, much more active, because of his influence. However, he and I have a major stylistic difference. He thinks everything has to be clearly spelled out for the reader while I prefer to leave some things up for interpretation.

Example:

The POV character raised his arms.

I'd prefer to leave the sentence above as it stands, leaving it to the reader to interpret from context why the character is raising his arms. My commentor would prefer that I add "in frustration" to the end of the sentence in order to make things completely clear. I'm okay with my viewpoint here and will continue to ignore those comments of his (maybe I'll change my mind in the future, but, for now, I'm happy with it.).

Raising his arms is very general movement. I don't think it's clear enough either. Is he raising is arms to the side like he's pretending to fly? Is he raising them forward like a zombie? Is he raising them upward like a child waiting for a parent to remove his shirt? Is he raising them in a defensive way to prevent an attack? Even with context, I'm not sure I'd get it. When I come across something like that as a reader, I have to go back and reread to see if I missed a clue from the author.

It's stylistic. I prefer specific imagery that puts me in the scene rather than vague descriptions where I have to reread and guess what the author's intent was.

They stopped and dismounted, huddling so they could hear each other and for warmth.

“We need to find shelter,” Brant said. “How about Big Mouth Cave?”

“You mean Big Bear Cave?” Dylan said.

“If you believe Will.” Brant stomped his feet and rubbed his arms over his cloak. “You got a better idea?”

[...] So, my question. Did you:

A. Easily get that the phrase "If you believe Will" meant that one of the random townspeople spread a suspect story about seeing a bear in or near the cave.
B. Find yourself wondering who Will is and why he has anything at all to do with the cave.
C. Parse out what the author meant in referring to Will but thought he could be much clearer.

C. I think it could be clearer. I don't see why the name of the cave would change because someone saw a bear there? I'd think a change like that would take longer than the time frame between Will seeing the bear and the characters going to the cave. I'd prefer something like:

“We need to find shelter,” Brant said. “How about Big Mouth Cave?”

“You mean the cave where the bear lives?” Dylan said.

“If you believe Will.” Brant stomped his feet and rubbed his arms over his cloak. “You got a better idea?”

 

[JCFarnham]

I will try and reply more fully and specifically to the question when I have a proper internet connection, but for now I want to register my interest and throw in a word.

Context.

In every case here context is the key.

If its obvious the guy is frustrated no need to say, and in fact your context definitely neeeds to indicate such. And its the same with said or other tags (though I always allow for narrative voice and author style first) sometimes more is needed and less adds confusion.

I realise I'm preaching to the convert here, but minimalism isn't always the best option. I prefer the flavour of interesting choices and pay as much attention as I can to rhythm... But STILL I'm a story teller. I'm just conscious that I'm not reporting an incident to the police but providing entertainment.

Just wanted to throw in my point of view, because I often find my way of doing things out of vogue (like stylism vs minimalism) and figure the alternative opinion is always good to consider depending on the specific context of the piece of writing in question.