Unusual speech patterns: how much is too much?

[Feo Takahari]

One of the characters in my current project has a mental block that makes it difficult for her to conform. I'm trying to represent this with an anarchic, freewheeling style of speech, ex.

“Sure as shootin’, brother mine,” Tabitha replied. “It’s almost straight north as the arrow flies. We must be close now.”

But I'm afraid that if I let it get too thick, it will become an irritant. I have a couple workarounds for this already (for instance, she "pulls herself together" when other characters don't understand her), but I'd like to ask for some advice on how to properly balance such speech.

P.S. To give a specific example, one of her lines began as "What say we learn 'em, bro?" I changed it to the more literal "What say we teach them, bro?" because I thought that might be too much.

 

[BWFoster78]

I don't mind the "learn" as much as the "'em." Same thing with "shootin'."

I think you're wise to be considering the distraction factor. If you're trying to achieve reader immersion, you may want to eliminate it all as being too distracting. Definitely anything that a reader has to stop and parse to determine meaning should be removed.

You really need to ask yourself, "Does the benefit of this technique (can't help you there as I don't see much of one) outweigh the negatives (distraction/loss of immersion/calling attention to the writing at the expense of the story/loss of clarity)?"

 

[OGone]

I think it adds to characterization and just reading the two lines you gave have a good grasp of her personality. I like the "learn 'em" line, I enjoy dialects like this in stories. I may be in a minority though, I'm not sure. Anything that enhances a character's personality is good in my opinion.

One of my favorite characters from Mistborn was Spook, I had no idea what he was saying most of the time but in the context of the story it made sense. The fact you couldn't understand him that well was often humorous (sometimes even kind of sad because he couldn't articulate himself) and I don't believe this breaks immersion at all.

Spook frowned. 'Niceing the not on the playing without.'

'I have no idea what you just said, child,' Breeze said. 'So I'm simply going to pretend it was coherent, then move on.'

Kelsier rolled his eyes. 'Losing the stress on the nip,' he said. 'Notting without the needing of care.'

'Riding the rile of the rids to the right,' Spook said with a nod.

'What are you two babbling about?' Breeze said testily.

'Wasing the was of brightness,' Spook said. 'Nip the having of wishing of this.'

Just my opinion but I'd say roll with it...

 

[Chilari]

Is there another way you can portray the mental block? It might be worth brainstorming ways you can use her speech and actions to show the mental block she has with conforming, in ways which bring attention to the block more than the writing and don't compromise understanding.

For example, a stutter that crops up when there are a lot of people around her, using malapropisms, becoming unable to remember common words (which could be supplied by her brother or other character who knows her well, allowing her to continue). Or she subconsciously takes on tics or other fidgeting which in some way reflects but does not copy the actions of those around her, for example, someone pulls himself up to his full height to try to get some sort of authority and she crouches or sits; someone speaks loudly, she whispers; someone motions excitedly, she stands utterly still. Perhaps she has trouble meeting people's eyes or looking at them when they're talking to her or when she's talking to them. Perhaps sometimes she voices her thoughts or fears aloud at times which aren't appropriate, like when in public or trying to be stealthy.

Or, trying to keep to your idea of "anarchic or freewheeling" speech, maybe she easily goes off topic or uses extended metaphors without all the necessary links in place and then gets annoyed or frustrated when others struggle to follow her. She sees the links in her mind, but forgets to make them when she says it aloud, leaving those listening a bit confused because to them it sounds like she's started talking about something completely unrelated as if it's relevant, but to her it makes perfect sense.

 

[BWFoster78]

and I don't believe this breaks immersion at all.

Perhaps we define "immersion" differently.

In my mind, immersion means that the reader flows seemlessly from word to word. He doesn't use his conscious mind at all. Hours pass as he's engrossed in the book.

In your example, you admit thinking something like, "What the crap did that character say/mean?" In this case, how can immersion not be broken? You had to stop reading and attempt to parse the meaning.

 

[Steerpike]

I don't think using the conscious mind breaks immersion in and of itself. Some genres (mystery and thriller) rely on it to great extent, as the reader tries to figure things out along with the characters. Some of the most engrossing books I've read are in those genres. I don't agree with the idea that you don't want to give the reader something to think about consciously, or that if you have you've somehow broken the spell that the story casts over them.

At least, for my way of reading that's simply not the case at all, and I suspect it is likewise true of a great number of readers.

 

[Mindfire]

It sounds to me like you're describing something on the autistic spectrum, and autistic people don't talk like that...

Personally, I don't think the accent works. It annoys me even more than the Redwall molespeak honestly. But that might be more because of the accent type than anything else. I grew up in the South, but for whatever reason those accents have become particularly grating to me.

 

[OGone]

In your example, you admit thinking something like, "What the crap did that character say/mean?" In this case, how can immersion not be broken? You had to stop reading and attempt to parse the meaning.

The characters don't understand him either. It'd break immersion far more if he was speaking perfect RP queen's English and the other characters can't understand him. I don't know, I think we always make conscious decisions whilst reading and they do little to break immersion. I wouldn't turn from page to page if I wasn't consciously longing to discover what happens next in the plot...

@Feo Can you better describe the "mental block", because if you mean some kind-of disability then this may not be the best way to go about it. I just assumed the character found it difficult to drop her regional dialect due to lack of intellect/care. It's stereotypical that a less intelligent character (or person) retains their accent but it works in books imo.

 

[Feo Takahari]

It sounds to me like you're describing something on the autistic spectrum, and autistic people don't talk like that...

Technically, it's contamination with impulses and traits from a being far more powerful than humanity. In practice, it's a contagious mental illness that's turned into a religion, and also grants magic powers. I just call it Chaos. (Then again, this character's brother has its inverse, Order, and I represent that as somewhat similar to OCD. I guess I could model Chaos on a real mental illness as well.)

Also, @Chilari (multiquote's hard on a phone): that's a very good point. I'm doing a little of that already (for instance, she tends to tell the blunt truth when lying would be better, and can't always remember not to discuss her sex life in public), but it would be good to expand on it.

 

[Ayaka Di'rutia]

Probably as long as not all the characters speak like that, I think it would be quite interesting and amusing to have a single character speaking like that.

 

[Mindfire]

Technically, it's contamination with impulses and traits from a being far more powerful than humanity. In practice, it's a contagious mental illness that's turned into a religion, and also grants magic powers. I just call it Chaos. (Then again, this character's brother has its inverse, Order, and I represent that as somewhat similar to OCD. I guess I could model Chaos on a real mental illness as well.)

Also, @Chilari (multiquote's hard on a phone): that's a very good point. I'm doing a little of that already (for instance, she tends to tell the blunt truth when lying would be better, and can't always remember not to discuss her sex life in public), but it would be good to expand on it.

I think you'll get more mileage out of *what* she says than by giving her an accent. Perhaps she's rude, prone to insults or swearing, acts juvenile, makes bad/dark jokes, has a short attention span, says inappropriate things, and overall has no regard for acceptable social behavior (like not discussing her sex life in public as you said). To contrast, her brother might be obsessed with propriety, a grammar nazi, aloof, passive-aggressive, careful about how he treats others, more articulate, considerate of other's feelings, and hold grudges.

Showing these traits through dialogue will perhaps accomplish more than an accent. Also, if order = OCD, chaos might = Tourettes or even something on the autistic spectrum. But tread carefully when basing things on real world mental issues.

 

[MadMadys]

I'm all for people mixing up speech and making dialogue actually interesting. Too many writers just have their robot characters speaking perfect English back and forth as if people ever actually talk like that. It helps make that character stand-out as well as your story so you go for it, Feo.

 

[SeverinR]

I think how a char says something is as important as what they say.
Using slang words of today probably wouldn't fit for ages of past.
"Sure as shootin" This typically applied to the use of firearms by rednecks of today and wild west days of the US, would the slang work for Medievil period?
They shot arrows, but would it have been said? Slang for the average peon?
Would a warrior say lets go "learn them?"

Slang is a tough thing to master in a different period.

 

[Penpilot]

Here's how I'd approach this. First I'd go too far, meaning just have at it and lay it on as thick as you want. Then in a following draft as you go through, focus on that dialogue only, pulling back, or not, as much as you think is necessary while keeping the flavor of the speech pattern but eliminating the rough areas.

 

[Mindfire]

See, the thing with accents is that they're generally high risk, low reward. "Sure as shootin'" may just help you make your character a bit more unique, but it's also very likely to make me hate that character in the process. (And speaking for myself, if a character says things like "sure as shootin'" very often, I'm going to hate them very quickly.)

So what you need to decide is whether that extra bit of characterization is worth the risk of the reader ragequitting because they hate reading redneck-ese.

 

[BWFoster78]

The characters don't understand him either. It'd break immersion far more if he was speaking perfect RP queen's English and the other characters can't understand him. I don't know, I think we always make conscious decisions whilst reading and they do little to break immersion. I wouldn't turn from page to page if I wasn't consciously longing to discover what happens next in the plot...

Am I reading your argument correctly? Here's my interpretation of it:

The author can't accurately describe the situation without breaking immersion. Therefore, the author should go ahead and break immersion.

My view is that, if an author makes a choice that leads to an undesirable consequence, he should probably reexamine his decision.

 

[BWFoster78]

I don't think using the conscious mind breaks immersion in and of itself. Some genres (mystery and thriller) rely on it to great extent, as the reader tries to figure things out along with the characters. Some of the most engrossing books I've read are in those genres. I don't agree with the idea that you don't want to give the reader something to think about consciously, or that if you have you've somehow broken the spell that the story casts over them.

At least, for my way of reading that's simply not the case at all, and I suspect it is likewise true of a great number of readers.

Perhaps you can use your conscious mind and not break immersion in those genres. I don't know.

I do know that having to stop to try to figure out what a character just said is my definition of breaking immersion. At that point, I'm no longer reading. I'm not in the story. I'm at a full stop and going back over the sentence trying to figure out what the heck is happening.

As far as my enjoyment of a book goes, that's pretty horrible.

 

[Steerpike]

Perhaps you can use your conscious mind and not break immersion in those genres. I don't know.

I do know that having to stop to try to figure out what a character just said is my definition of breaking immersion. At that point, I'm no longer reading. I'm not in the story. I'm at a full stop and going back over the sentence trying to figure out what the heck is happening.

As far as my enjoyment of a book goes, that's pretty horrible.

I agree that displays ineffective writing. It shouldn't be confusing. But I have no problems with a story that causes me to stop in my reading to try to figure something out, or to piece together bits of a puzzle that an author has set forth. So maybe it's more the reason why you're having to stop and think, rather than the fact you are doing so.

 

[BWFoster78]

I agree that displays ineffective writing. It shouldn't be confusing. But I have no problems with a story that causes me to stop in my reading to try to figure something out, or to piece together bits of a puzzle that an author has set forth. So maybe it's more the reason why you're having to stop and think, rather than the fact you are doing so.

Agreed.

I think, as I stated in another thread, it's all about your goal.

If your purpose as the author is to get your audience to think, it's great that they're thinking. If your purpose is for them to lose themselves in the story, the reader thinking isn't such a good thing.

 

[OGone]

Am I reading your argument correctly? Here's my interpretation of it:

The author can't accurately describe the situation without breaking immersion. Therefore, the author should go ahead and break immersion.

My view is that, if an author makes a choice that leads to an undesirable consequence, he should probably reexamine his decision.

Nooo I was saying that, in my opinion, hard to decipher dialects don't break immersion but add to it with deeper characterization. One of the biggest pieces of advice I've had drilled into me is show > tell. Surely it's better to write the speech of the character as difficult to understand rather than just describing them as having a confusing way of speaking?