|
Stabbey_The_Clown posted:I could have something like ""Brass, take point." Sergeant Sanchez nodded and clicked the safety off her submachine gun." Yup, that works for me. To make sure my reader quickly learns who's who, I would also tend to introduce "nicknamed characters" in tighter, smaller scenes with fewer characters, and I definitely wouldn't introduce more than two or three nicknamed characters at a time. (Hell, I think this even applies to non-nicknamed characters, since I tend to feel overwhelmed when an author tries to introduce me to ten people off the bat, nicknames or no.) Certainly, the connection between a character's handle, and their real name, should probably be made at least three times, because that's typically the magic number for alerting readers to details.
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2012 14:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 01:54 |
|
|
For me, the purpose of constructive criticism--genuine, actual constructive criticism--is to equip someone with tools and knowledge they can apply towards making their work the best it can be. This means, yes, using a scalpel, rather than a feather, or a battle axe. This means, being tactful, supportive, and kind, while also being honest, and giving someone something they can actually use. This means, not giving a novice the same type of advice or criticism I'd give a seasoned professional, because the novice would just end up feeling overwhelmed and demoralized. This means, for me, only being overtly harsh, firm, hard, or snippy with someone who is an insufferable rear end in a top hat, or a complete lunatic, on top of being a poo poo writer. This means, doing my best to help someone to create the product they want to create, rather than trying to steer them towards the one I'd like them to create. So, I think those are my main critique rules-of-thumb.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2012 21:00
|
|
|
PlatinumJukebox posted:So, uh, are there any good resources/advice/lists of tips for writing sex scenes? Especially those that lean towards the rougher side of things (but not in an S&M way). Naturally, this is just my take on the matter: First, I think your sex scenes shouldn't be all that much different from other kinds of scenes, in that a successful sex scene will do something to advance the plot, reveal or deepen characterization, or both. Second, you have to decide what you want to convey or accomplish with your sex scene, so that you can adjust your tone and focus accordingly. Are you going for sexy? Gross? Romantic? Funny? Fun? Scary? Unsettling? Some combination thereof? What you decide here will shape your word and phrasing choices, and inform what you choose to describe, and how, and what you choose to leave up to the imagination. Por ejemplo, I personally think the proper clinical terms for a lot of body parts are decidedly unsexy, so if you're trying to make readers feel uneasy or uncomfortable, or if you want to send the message that your characters are cold, clinical, robotic, lacking warmth, or lacking in empathy or compassion, keeping your terms and your phrases clean, direct, technical, and free of all frills and flowers may help you to accomplish just that. Or, if you want to create a harsh, sleazy, or greasy scene, you'll want to use sleazy, crass, greasy-sounding language to describe it all--pussies and cocks and all that jazz, doncha know. When it comes to romance, I'm an odd duck, in that I find roses and lace and people falling slowly into into the pillows more hilarious than arousing. For me, a truly romantic scene is where characters demonstrate their consideration and caring for one another through word and deed. In such a scene, I'd tend to have the characters discuss personal or intimate matters outside of the sex, and I'd show them consciously accommodating or adjusting for one another throughout the scene, for one another's comfort. Unless I'm trying to create a tense or scary scene, I'd also tend to insert some light humor here and there, because my sense is that sex is often inherently funny. You'll often notice (or rather, I do) that the most hysterically funny sex scenes are the ones which are trying very hard to be All Business. Third, this is just personal preference, but, I think the words "penis" and "vagina" are pretty drat unsexy, all things considered, and I have yet to discover or invent a word for either part that isn't goofy or icky (or both goofy and icky). I roll my eyes when other authors wax poetic about the woman's "delicate flower" or her "sex," or about the man's "manhood" or "rod" or "luncheon-meat truncheon" or what have you. So, if my goal was to be sexy, romantic, and arousing, my tendency would generally be to avoid mentioning those parts by name under most circumstances, and focus more on the characters' movements, emotions, facial expressions, and physical sensations in the moment. But, your mileage may certainly differ. Actually, I'd prefer it if sex scenes focused more on the characters' physical sensations and experiences, rather than their particular movements, or physical appearance. I also notice that some authors either go overboard-melodramatic when describing characters' feelings during sex, or completely forget to mention them. Tartarus Sauce fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Aug 29, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2012 06:13
|
|
|
If you're going for satirical or funny, I say, with words like "turgid" and "thwacked," and with Kermit the Frog S&M, mission accomplished! This scene has great potential. I can only imagine the accompanying dialogue  .'"Ribbit, ribbit," she growled seductively.' Those of you who write sexy satire ought to check out an oldie-but-goodie entitled "Naked Came A Stranger." As I recall, "Atlanta Nights" by Travis Tea also had some funny sex.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2012 23:21
|
|
|
Molly Bloom posted:Currently, I'm working on a Native American character (it fits the area, I've had some contact with the area and the culture but not enough to be an expert). So I went exploring and started looking for NA opinions on white people writing Native characters after reading about 'RaceFail09'. On one hand, there's the fact that minority characters are vastly under-represented. On the other hand, what I've been finding suggests that creating a character that will meet with any approval is extremely difficult. Something else you could try: look at how other authors have done Native American characters, and then ask other people how those characters came across. I was thinking Tony Hillerman, and lo, others already beat me to the punch! To my mind, you can't go too far astray, if you endeavor to simply write a person as a person, and make it your mission to do right *by your characters.* I also find that writers sometimes go astray when they aren't able or willing to acknowledge their possible reasons for wanting to have a minority character in the first place, because it's those unconscious and conscious wishes, values, and intentions which can ultimately drive plot and characterization, for good or ill. So, when a writer introduces a character solely to prove a point, to be "cool," or to try to make themselves look or feel like "better" people through the character's inclusion, these token minority characters often end up being too implausibly saintly and perfect, too stereotypical, or too fuzzy and inconsistent. If the writer has some "baggage" around that minority group, then that may show up in the character or the plot, too. But, if you see and write your character as a person, and remain mindful of what intentions, hopes, biases, and beliefs you might have about that character, or that character's various traits and affiliations, your feet will be pointed towards the right path, at least. So! I hope that's helpful. As for the 'stereotypical' statue and suchlike, be aware that some people will want--understandably---to turn your story into a tract, and that this will tend to negatively affect the story itself, and turn readers off, rather than educate or enlighten them. I believe that your readers should learn to understand and empathize with your character--and, by extension, real people like your character, if that's your hope--primarily through your character's own thoughts, reactions, and interactions. So, if the statue is stereotypical, and your character knows it, your character might snort and roll her eyes, or crack a joke, or gripe to a friend, depending on his or her personality. Or, your character might have ambivalent or mixed feelings about his or her Native American heritage, and therefore have mixed, ambivalent, "inappropriate," or "politically incorrect" reactions to stereotypes and bigotry, and other characters might then react in various ways to that. That has the potential to become VERY interesting indeed, because there, our expectations and assumptions have probably been violated, and this will grab our attention, and drive us to learn more about that character. (Indeed, your character NEEDS to do some things wrong, and needs to have some flaws, or else he or she won't be believable! Believably flawed people are more interesting.) quote:I know women are 50% of the population and plenty writers are women, but as a woman there is nothing that makes me roll my eyes harder than a story written by a man where the female character thinks about or examines her breasts. "Today was looking up for Jim and his penis. Today's sure looking up for me and my penis, thought Jim, as he slid on his favorite pair of silk boxers--the Harley Davidson ones, with the red flames--and sighed as the fabric gently cradled the head of his penis. Yes, today was going to be a great day, for a regular guy and his regular--but still undeniably charming--penis." Tartarus Sauce fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Oct 21, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2012 19:26
|
|
|
Hey, maybe you guys can help me with some plot humps. Suppose you work for an organization which is currently involved in unethical and illegal activities. Previously, you've aided and abetted these activities out of fear and obedience, but recent events have inspired you to finally take a stand. Most recently, you've smuggled a USB filled with information about the illegal activities to an outsider (let's call them the Mole) whom you believe is trustworthy. NOW, the problems are as follows: 1) At a later beat in the story, I need two separate groups of characters to have a reason for seeking one another out, in order to join forces later. Now, that reason will likely have something to do with the aforementioned organization's dirty deeds (among other things), but what, specifically, should that reason be? 2)I want to conceal some of the information about this organization for the time being, in order to save a particular character twist for the sequel. Right now, I'm thinking that the whistleblower gives that Mole an encrypted USB, and hides the encryption key in a separate location. One group of characters could have the USB, and the other group, the key. PROBLEM IS, I'm not sure this even makes sense, from a character motivation standpoint--or, if it does, I haven't come up with a decent rationale for doing this. Why would you give someone data, and then not equip them with the means to access it? If you wanted to ensure that your top-secret info was safe with someone, how would you go about doing that? Bonus question: Suppose you're a third party who's become involved in all this. The Mole--whom you care about deeply--has since become sick with a severe, disabling illness. What would be your reason for choosing to take the Mole to their potentially-sketchy spouse, who has a friendship with your mortal enemy, and NOT to the two people who originally took the fall for assisting the Mole? Is there any logical reason you'd ever make this kind of decision? The details don't matter much, because I'm just interested in whatever ideas pop up.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2012 06:29
|
|
|
The main problem is the one I've identified---not sure if the motivation (encrypting data, but not including the key to the encryption) makes solid logical sense, or if I'm just having characters act mysterious and vaguely dumb so that I can stall for tension purposes. It may also be technologically cumbersome or silly, as well. Mostly, this is a "logic check." If you read about characters that were acting in this way, would you buy it? Under what circumstances would you buy it? I'm attempting to avoid the common problem of characters inexplicably doing whatever will either build or release tension for the author's convenience, without proper regard for whether a normal, sane human being would ever behave similarly. If that helps at all. And, I keep not being satisfied with my own ideas, which may be a sign that I need to switch tasks, and let things simmer a while.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2012 07:37
|
|
|
Runcible Cat posted:It's technologically doable, but why would anyone do it except as a stupid plot point and artificial tension creator? EXACTLY. That's my thought. Thank you for that validation. Well, and the reason is that this is actually better than where things were headed before. Before, I was noticing that my characters were generally being more reactive than proactive, and were often waiting around to react to something when it affected them directly. So, we had to put the kabosh on that. The Mole character was basically a glorified MacGuffin who just stood around to be acted on by others. The previous iteration of this idea was sans-encryption ballyhoo, but then I had to figure out how to create an incentive for Character Group A (The Mole and Her Lover) to want to interact or join forces with Character Group B (The Quartet of Skilled, Intelligent Regular Folks Who Normally Wouldn't Get Involved With Things Like This). Having Mole take the USB to the Quartet/Group B for help in making sense of the data gets those characters involved, but, realistically, the members of the Quartet/Group B would be smart enough to immediately copy the contents of the USB, at the very least. So, there go the "oops we lost it" or "oops it got confiscated by the cops" dilemmas. The Quartet would probably even tend to take the thing to the cops right away, once they realized it was important. Also, because Character Group A has ties to the whistleblower, and Group B is smart enough to copy the data, what's their incentive for joining forces in the future? Indeed, why does Group B even give a poo poo, since giving a poo poo is dangerous? The risk of not giving a poo poo has to become greater than the risk of giving one. (I'm thinking Group B first gets into trouble when helping the Mole with the USB gets them charged with hacking and industrial espionage, but you'd think turning over the copied data to the cops would theoretically put the blame ball in Evil Corp's court, resulting in a premature "game over.") I also want my characters to continue to have to work for what they have, so I don't want the whistleblower to be a Basil Exposition whose info-dumps and inside connections allow everybody to rest on their laurels. There still need to be mysteries that the characters need to work out on their own, AND the threat needs to be large enough to inspire action, since some of my characters are not the type to get involved with anything that doesn't directly affect them. Certainly, I think one way to hobble my whistleblower is to have what he can say or provide be limited by his position and his security clearance. And, yes, there's a point at which my whistleblower is "killed," but maybe it would be better if he were "killed" earlier? Currently, I have him swoop in at a tense moment, and surprise Group A (Mole and Her Lover) and the reader by rescuing them from Evil Corp's security, instead of turning them in as expected. (The whistleblower previously handed off the USB anonymously, you see, to avoid detection.) Naturally, this opens up into an exposition dump, because now the whistleblower has a chance (and a need) to explain everything he knows. So, again, this raises the question of, Why Don't You Just Tip Off the Police, Morons? Runcible Cat posted:"He put the data in a zip archive and we don't have the password!" Yeah, and I didn't want the idiot plot of the Mole misplacing the key, or the whistleblower being bad with technology. I actually want people to act at the top of their intelligence, more or less. I also have thrown out ideas involving magical viruses and Trojan Horses that conveniently do what the plot demands, whether it's pinging an IP address or corrupting data. Such ideas could potentially work if used sparingly, but they also create potential problems down the line. So, ehh, don't really like that, either. I also realize that I'm kind of teetering on the edge of an idiot plot where people who would normally go to the police, inexplicably don't, because plot. I'd need to make a solid, early case for all of the Feds being corrupt. Part of my issue may be that I'm overly wedded to certain scenes, character interactions, or plot beats along the way, so things may not be flowing organically at this juncture due to that. But, the validation that what I thought sounded stupid, was actually stupid, has been really helpful so far. Thanks, Runcible Cat and company for that. revolther posted:For some reason, it could be 90's movies, I can't help but think that a lot of the time it plays out like this: I'll mull over this. There may be a useful seed in here! Hmmm! Tartarus Sauce fucked around with this message at 15:56 on Nov 8, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2012 15:33
|
|
|
Runcible Cat posted:Or, if they don't know how high the corruption goes, Why Don't You Put All The Data Up On Wikileaks? Ahh, gently caress me. Back to the drawing board.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2012 06:22
|
|
|
This is a helpful conversation for me, because I often feel like I'm obligated to narrate every bloody thing that happens between Point A and Point B, especially when I begin to get tired or distracted. (When I'm energized and focused, my judgment on what to include and how to include it is much better, and transitions are much more fluid.) I have to remind myself that if I'm bored writing it, readers will likely be bored reading it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2012 18:49
|
|
|
The rules are meant to provide scaffolding and guidance; the minute they prevent you from doing something that would actually enhance or improve your story, you need to alter or discard them. Oh, and I have a broad topic suggestion: *Characters, scene types, or subjects that are hardest for you to write about, and why.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2012 07:38
|
|
|
I can understand why people would want to write fanfiction, but for the most part, it just doesn't resonate with me. I'd rather create my own characters and settings, and continue to let myself be surprised by the things my favorite fictional characters do, say, or experience within their own stories. I think I've only been tempted to write fanfiction when a show, movie, or book has seriously screwed the pooch somewhere, and I find myself wishing they would've just given the reins to me, if only as a consultant. Ah, here's a question: For you as a reader, which is more suspenseful and compelling: knowing something that the character doesn't know yet, and waiting in anticipation for them to learn it, or being as equally in the dark as the character, and journeying alongside them as they work to uncover the truth? Are there certain ingredients that allow one or the other to really work? Are there certain things that cause one or the other to fail, in your eyes?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2013 17:33
|
|
|
DivisionPost posted:I confess: I've written fanfiction before, mostly for the game EarthBound. Thanks for sharing. It sounds like EarthBound provides you with a "blank slate," from which you can construct characters (if I understood you right). It provides the setting and the events, but you fill in the character details. That sounds reasonable to me--and, to be fair, many of the stories I wrote as a kid also used frames, settings, and story arcs from some of my favorite stories, only with my own plots and characters spliced in. It's also great that this provided you with an early opportunity to hone your skills and experiment with tropes and styles. We all have to start somewhere, after all, and you have to crawl before you can run. Starting out on fanfiction.net--especially as a kid--is totally appropriate; what's shameful is if you post there exclusively for fifteen years. quote:I've got an interesting case study here: Tell No One by Harlan Coben. This has a HELL of a hook: This guy's wife was abducted and murdered by a serial killer 8 years ago. He's never gotten over it, never cleaned out the closets, never left the house, always refuses to let his friends hook him up. He's outwardly functional but completely broken emotionally. Close to the anniversary of the wife's death, he gets an e-mail that contains a link to a webcam, and a piece of information that only his wife would know. When he clicks the link at a designated time, a live traffic cam feed pops up, and his wife walks into the frame, mouthing the words "I'm sorry" before disappearing again. Nice hook indeed. I'll have to check that out. quote:Now, if we're talking about personal preference -- and something tells me we probably are -- I clearly prefer to be taken on a ride, though I'm open to knowing the answers ahead of the protagonist(s). Taking readers on a ride is definitely how I prefer to go as a writer, possibly because dramatic irony is a weak point of mine; I have very little idea about the best way to use it. I think that's what I tend to prefer as well--though, I have enjoyed the other kind of story, where the suspense is built around us hoping the character doesn't fall into the traps we can see on the path ahead, or cursing the character when they miss the clues we know to be important. Echio Cian--I find that reading good books, watching great movies, and even, having exciting adventures out in the real world tend to whet my appetite to write. I also get the urge to write, when I hear other people discuss the writing process, or when I read manuals on the writing process. I also typically need to sleep well, and eat well, before I even have the energy to write.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2013 00:33
|
|
|
JAssassin posted:The most jarring to me is my variety, or lack there of. This is most apparent when I'm describing what a character is doing. I have a ton of trouble starting a sentence without starting it with their name, he or she. I'm not really sure how to go about fixing this, beyond just reading more. Are there any suggestions you guys can give me? So, just to be clear, you're talking about something like, "He drew his bow," or "John sat by the fire?" Well, you could do something like, "Crossing the room, he drew his bow," or "As the sun was setting, John lit the fire." You could introduce some variety by alternating between scene description, descriptions of characters' actions, descriptions of characters thoughts or feelings, other events, and dialogue, so that readers get a full sense of a given scene, and everything that is occurring within it. You could also introduce more variety, of course, by employing different sentence rhythms and lengths, as appropriate. Short sentences prompt focus. Longer sentences tend to create a feeling of movement, of flow, of complexity. Too much of one or the other tends to result in a kind of droning monotony. Punctuation, too, helps to convey tone, and create a sense of mood--it can snap us to attention, or calm us down; used well, it can provide a sense of timing and flow and movement. This help at all?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2013 04:49
|
|
|
Crisco Kid posted:Firstly, they're very easy to overdo if you're a new writer, and secondly, they're easy to do wrong. For instance, the example I just used is impossible because there is no way a person can be leaping up stairs and fetching their revolver WHILE putting a key in the door. Don't let your phrasing muddy the sequence of events. Exactly right, on both counts.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2013 23:38
|
|
|
Have any novels, short stories, biographies, or autobiographies been written about your topic, or some analogous topic, Uber? You might begin there.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2013 15:58
|
|
|
Martello posted:Don't do this. Definitely don't do this. The other guys already made it pretty clear why, but I just want to echo them. I see "Xiang" and I immediately thing "shang" or "zhang." And I'd pronounce it more like "Shee-ang." Some Mandarin speakers also have an accent called an erhua, where they add an "er" sound to certain words, so that "shi" sounds like "shir." Four out of five posters agree: if you're going to be using spellings that are reminiscent of or derived from a particular language, it's best to use the pronunciation, as well. Otherwise, you'll have to endure linguist nerd rage. Tartarus Sauce fucked around with this message at 15:01 on Jan 7, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2013 14:59
|
|
|
I mostly hate the guy's internal running commentary. It violates my "show, don't tell" sensibilities. Without it, the scene would just be melodramatic and boring, but not criminally so. My main problem with it, I think, is that it comes across as a tempest in a teacup, and maybe that's because I'm not invested in these characters, because I don't know who they are. They take a long time to get to their point, but I'm not feeling any building emotional turmoil or anxiety that would allow me to sympathize with them as they struggle to get there. Instead, my eyes glaze over as I see the characters engage in some vague burbling about Texas. But, it's not the worst dialogue I've seen. Unlike other books I've come across, at least these people sound like they could be real people (and that may be part of the problem, because real people say a lot of boring, irrelevant, tangential, and circumstantial stuff that would never make for good book or movie dialogue).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2013 16:31
|
|
|
squeegee posted:I don't think I've ever read good, satisfying dialogue that sounded 100% literally like the way real people talk. At the other end of the spectrum is stiff, awkward, unrealistic dialogue, but there's a good middle ground to play around in. I agree with you about subtext-- that's essential-- but in as much as the actual words and sentence structure that people use, good dialogue should be the distillation of all the things that real people say and the ways that they say them, not a literal transcript of reality. Right. You're creating the appearance of authenticity, without the "authentic" conversational fat and gristle that doesn't actually serve your story or characters. Subtext, meanwhile, is vitally important, because it adds another layer to dialogue to make it genuinely interesting. The most interesting exchanges, I think, tend to be ones which convey meanings or messages on two or more levels. Dialogue where everyone says and conveys precisely what they mean, and receives and interprets messages exactly as sent, just isn't that interesting or engaging after a while, because there's no conflict. I'll continue to think about who writes good dialogue. As for who writes bad dialogue, I've always thought everyone in L.E. Modesitt's books sound like robots who are trying to pass the Turing test. Tartarus Sauce fucked around with this message at 00:18 on Jan 11, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2013 00:15
|
|
|
Chillmatic posted:
This is true. Mind you, PTSD is Very Real, and people who have experienced a trauma will often have a powerful involuntary response to smells, words, sights, sensations, event sequences, and sounds which they have come to associate with that trauma. A veteran friend of mine once narrowly resisted the urge to snap the neck of a nurse who had sidled up behind him and took him by surprise. Luckily, he was able to resist his initial instinct to react to what his body interpreted as an enemy combatant sneaking up behind him. But, I tend to be extremely suspicious of people who make a grand or dramatic production about either providing or requiring trigger warnings. Truth be told, I find trigger warnings to be stupid, condescending, and mostly unhelpful or non-essential, especially now that people have started to major-time misuse and abuse them. (I've seen trigger warnings for the words "stupid" and "dumb," for instance.) But, I see absolutely no problem with just telling your readers that a story may contain descriptions of or references to rape, murder, war, torture, graphic sex, graphic sex between supreme court justices, or what have you, as a courtesy to them. That lets people what they're in for, and provides them with the option of bailing out early, if it's not their cup of tea. Granted, this is much trickier (and probably not as helpful or as essential) if you're writing 200-page novel for a large general audience. Often, the "blurb" or plot synopsis, if well-written, can help readers to decide whether a book will be too gritty for their taste. I concur with others here that you should just write the best story you can write. Haters gonna hate, and bitches gonna bitch. Tartarus Sauce fucked around with this message at 05:46 on Jan 16, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2013 05:33
|
|
People who claim to need "trigger warnings" are usually insane.
|
I'd say, an opening scene should raise questions in the reader's mind, which he will then attempt to satisfy by reading more. So, if I were to begin with an inciting incident, my tendency would be to include elements in that incident that will strike the reader as unusual, surprising, or unexpected, because it is curiosity which will drive the reader forward, until empathy for the characters takes root.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2013 19:03
|
|
|
Chillmatic posted:My main issue with this dialogue is that it's boring, mainly because nothing really happens and you're spelling out too much for me-- which means you're not letting me, the reader, do any work. Right. It's often said that effective dialogue typically conveys messages on two or more levels. There's the text, and then there's the subtext; what the characters are saying, and what they mean. When the text is exactly the same as the subtext, there's no tension and no intrigue. On the topic of dialogue being "real," The trick, I think, is that dialogue needs to feel plausible or realistic, without necessarily being plausible or realistic. It's an illusion of sorts. When your reader can "hear" the various characters in their head as those characters are talking, you're on the road to the Promised Land! Here is an an interesting podcast on dialogue. And here's one on avoiding stilted dialogue. These people often have a lot of very good insights.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
Real world conversations CAN be helpful, because it really helps to have a basic sense of the rhythm and flow of conversation, and the sorts of words people (especially various TYPES of people) do and don't use, and how those choices serve to reveal how they think, and how they see the world. Charles de Lint's a solid writer, but reading The Blue Girl, you can tell he's never encountered a real teenage girl before. Lots of science fiction suffers from stiff, robotic dialogue, because the authors themselves are hardcore scientists or techies who don't know their way around non-technical conversations whose primary purpose is not simply to convey information. Oh, and a good rule of thumb is, if it's boring to write, it's boring to read. By all means, don't feel obligated to march us through every little chat with every single waiter, ticket-taker, or cashier, unless those conversations actually tell us something about the character, and how they relate to others. If your character is just ordering a latte, just say they ordered a latte. If everyone in Starbucks groans when your character walks in, THAT conversation is worth tracking! Tartarus Sauce fucked around with this message at 22:16 on May 19, 2013 |
|
#
¿
May 19, 2013 22:11
|
|
|
I think there's a misconception here that dialogue has to be "either-or" when it comes to realism. I'm saying it's neither all here, nor all there. You need to have encountered people before, in order to know how humans talk, how they convey ideas, and how they choose their words. You need to have some experience with how various types of people talk and behave when angry, sad, satisfied, fearful, or in love. You need to appreciate the cultural, behavioral, and linguistic differences that exist between types of people, and know how to apply these insights to your own characters. This is level one. At the next level, you study the elements of good storytelling and snappy, enjoyable dialogue, like we've discussed, and you bridge these two experiences for best results. I think as long as your tags aren't distracting, and as long as your dialogue generally adheres to the "two levels" rule-of-thumb, you can actually get away with a fair amount, where dialogue's concerned. And, of course: rewrite, rewrite, rewrite. My characters tend to be too long-winded in the first draft, and they tend to wander before getting to the point. As I rewrite, the focus becomes tighter, and the characters get to the point, and don't belabor it.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2013 03:54
|
|
|
Overwined posted:The best line was from the woman when she answered the question about why exactly she objected to the quesadilla (you could tell he thought she was just being obstructionist), she answered, "Because a sausage quesadilla is the type of thing someone orders when they don't give a drat about what happens to them tomorrow." Oh, that's beautiful. That's one for the record books. I once eavesdropped on a much-less-interesting conversation between two people (who appeared to be a couple?) about mattresses. Just mattresses. Mattresses they had slept on; mattresses they'd loved and lost; mattresses that had brought them pain. There wasn't a juicy subtext as near as I could tell, but it did cause me to reflect on the type of person who would willing have an hour-long conversation about mattresses. Call it a character exercise, if you will.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2013 05:47
|
|
|
Bradbury is by far my favorite writer, but yes, his dialogue did tend to be his weakness, and I think it was meant to sound more poetic than realistic. Anyway, it occurs to me that eavesdropping and real conversation actually informs my approach to side characters much more than it does my main characters. Chillmatic's correct that styling the dialogue of my main characters off of real conversations would result in a real doozy of a snoozefest. Key dialogue between key characters needs to be and do more. But, real people do say the darndest things, and I have been known to sprinkle my dialogue involving side characters and minor characters with actual quotable quotes, because the things people had actually said were funnier, stupider, or more ludicrous than anything I'd managed to come up with myself.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2013 15:23
|
|
|
Yeah, continuing to write in a vacuum just means you end up repeating the same mistakes and bad habits, which only serves to strengthen them.Chillmatic posted:Telling someone that 'they loving suck and their writing is horrible' may feel really good for a writer to say; I'm sure it scratches that itch to feel better about oneself by tearing others down, but it's disingenuous to suggest that this actually helps anyone improve. Correct. People, in general, react in predictable ways to certain phrasings and forms of feedback. Therapists have to teach couples communication techniques because "gently caress you, you loving fucker," usually isn't a great vehicle for inspiring transformation and deepening intimacy in a relationship. If you sincerely want someone to hear and heed your critique or advice, you need to package it in a form that the other person is likely to at least find palatable, if not necessarily agreeable. There are tried-and-true methods for providing feedback, critiques, and criticisms to people. If you get off more on lording over or unloading onto your inferiors, or if you're so disgusted with a particular person that you honestly hope they never pick up a pen again, you at least need to be honest with yourself about that, instead of pretending that you're doing the world a much-needed service by being "brutally honest" (read: brutal).
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2013 16:59
|
|
|
Now, a sound like a wet towel hitting something is an interesting simile for me.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2013 00:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 01:54 |
|
|
For me, bottom line, a person's writing typically starts to go downhill once they become too enamored of their own world view, and utterly isolate themselves from anyone or anything that might challenge or contradict them. If you keep learning, keep exploring, and keep asking questions without necessarily needing to answer them all, there'll be less of a risk of your stories becoming stale and preachy. Tartarus Sauce fucked around with this message at 16:16 on Sep 15, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2013 16:14
|
|