Quick Fire Questions (A Place to Ask and Answer)

[Pyan]

I wouldn't personally have the second ellipsis after the emphasised word, though - the pause is before, and not after:

“I don’t normally take time to allocate new recruits myself, but given your … history, I thought I would afford you the courtesy,” Eevan said.

And I'd probably add an "um" as well, but that's just personal taste:

“I don’t normally take time to allocate new recruits myself, but given your um … history, I thought I would afford you the courtesy,” Eevan said.

 

[allmywires]

Thanks for your responses guys. I guess I just want to be a bit smart and want people to care I've taken time to think about it

I like the idea of the Reasonably Intelligent Person test Though sadly I'd imagine not too much of the populace would pass such a test...

 

[Warren_Paul]

I like the idea of the Reasonably Intelligent Person test Though sadly I'd imagine not too much of the populace would pass such a test...

Oh yes, you definitely want it to be believable, especially for the case of when somebody who knows better comes along to read your book.

I struggle with the above myself, but slightly different; understanding just how much to say to readers. Some people can look at my writing and think I've led them to the point way before I got there, or that they 'saw that coming', treating them like they aren't intelligent. But on the otherhand, when I don't have those details in there I get people who read it and don't have a clue what is going on because I didn't spell it out to them. It's hard to get the right balance.

 

[allmywires]

It's a difficult balance to strike, I agree. When I'm reading, I like the payoff of being able to see something's coming - but not to the point where I'm being flooded with clues and nudged from all directions to that conclusion.

I think the best way is to plant clues that work in restrospect - ones that you might not notice to begin with, but make the reader go 'Ah! So that's why so-and-so did such-and-such.' But doing so (and doing so well) is another matter, of course.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

After being brought up - lots of times! - on critiques here, and elsewhere, I'm assuming I'm writing a book for adults and they can join the dots. But it is a difficult one, how far to go.

Allmywires, there is a thread somewhere in General writing discussion about how often to fire a chekhov's gun which covers exactly what you're talking about; how often do we place it, how much to lead, and when to fire the blinking thing!

 

[Vertigo]

A difficult balance for sure, but when done well it can be execptional. The film The Usual Suspect springs to mind as an excellent example. It can make re-reading a book or watching a film for a seoncd time a necessary and incredibly rewarding experience.

 

[allmywires]

I do like piecing together a puzzle, so I love leading a trail in my writing. Readers be damned, they're getting a puzzle And, of course, I do it if only to save my works from the dreaded deus ex machina...

 

[Warren_Paul]

I'm not sure the Chekov's gun principle is the same thing that I was talking about. Chekov's gun is dropping clues that mean something later. Like an item described in passing that will become the centre of attention several chapters down the line. -which I agree are great.

I was talking about stating the obvious a bit too much. Where the reader goes 'No S*** Sherlock'

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I think the best way is to plant clues that work in restrospect - ones that you might not notice to begin with, but make the reader go 'Ah! So that's why so-and-so did such-and-such.' But doing so (and doing so well) is another matter, of course.

I'm not sure the Chekov's gun principle is the same thing that I was talking about. Chekov's gun is dropping clues that mean something later. Like an item described in passing that will become the centre of attention several chapters down the line. -which I agree are great.

No, but it is touching onto what allmywires is describing: planting clues that work in retrospect. A chekhov's gun is generally a one plot line that is lined up to go off once, to great effect.

Plot lines are slightly different, they build up over time and take the reader with them as they do, to a greater or lesser degree depending how much the writer needs/want to lead the reader.

 

[Ursa major]

(Oops! I posted this before I realised that there were more responses on this. In defence of the following, I must point out that I've removed the space before the ellipsis, a most important change. )


I think Mouse has the correct version: there's a pause before the word, history (which is emphasised**), but none after. However, I think there's a comma missing:

“I don’t normally take time to allocate new recruits myself, but given your… history, I thought I would afford you the courtesy,” Eevan said.

On a personal note, I'm not keen on speech tags after a lot of dialogue, so I'd write it thus:

“I don’t normally take time to allocate new recruits myself,” Eevan said, “but given your… history, I thought I would afford you the courtesy.”

** - Though you might leave this to the reader to work out and omit the italics. (I'd probably use italics, as it happens.)

 

[Warren_Paul]

“I don’t normally take time to allocate new recruits myself,” Eevan said, “but given your… history, I thought I would afford you the courtesy.”

This version of Ursa's looks good to me. It gives that pause between "myself" and "but", making it sound even more natural. We also confirm who is speaking earlier, which is a good thing considering its a reasonably long bit of dialogue. -and yes, I know dialogue can get much longer

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I went with Mouse's but without the italics; the speaker is probably being a little subtle, a little mean, so I thought the ... emphasis was enough. I quite like breaking the dialogue up in the middle, so there's another scroll back up! Ty.

 

[Venusian Broon]

Right, this is a silly question, but I had a sudden panic attack when I wrote something so I just want to find out that what I'm writing does make sense, as I don't have any experience of using knifes in a nasty way, ritual sacrifice or killing anyone -

If you cut someone's throat (someone who's living and breathing) with a big sharp knife with a broad blade, then the blade is going to get covered in blood, yes? (Well I'd imagine quite a lot of other places will get some too and some quite far off) And if you held the blade aloft immediately afterwards, assuming the blade has no guard, then you'd probably quite readily get riverulets of blood coming down your arm?

It's a ritual killing atop a pyramid, so perhaps the person doing the killing would be able to maximise the blades exposure to the severed arteries, and I thought they'd have some sort of container at the top as well to collect some of the spillage incase the first part is actually quite difficult - so that if you wanted to wash the blade in blood you could do that.

I suppose I could have just copied the Aztecs and ripped out hearts, which surely would provide a good flow when held aloft, but I writing about the future and we've moved on a bit! Plus my base culture isn't really Aztec, so I don't want to imply it, although I nicked a couple of their ideas.

 

[Abernovo]

Just to clarify, my knowledge is from visits to slaughter houses and also from working with injured animals.

Cut an artery and you get a lot of blood. A neck artery can spray, just watch a couple of CSI episodes. The knife, the hand and quite possibly the arm of the cutter would get liberally covered. With practice, the cutter would know exactly how to stand and cut for desired coverage and results. So, good slaughterers know how to cut and where to stand to make it as quick, painless as, and with the least mess, possible.

 

[Venusian Broon]

Cheers Abernovo,

My image of a clean arm slowly getting dripped with blood now looks a bit stupid , it should be reasonable gory with some blood already there, although the sacrifices I have in the story are a little on the small side...

 

[Arthur_Connelly]

Can the idiom 'as the crow flies' be used in another tense? 'As the crow flew', maybe.

 

[Interference]

If your Universe includes topographical wormholes through your planet, then I suspect "yes"

 

[Abernovo]

Cheers Abernovo,

My image of a clean arm slowly getting dripped with blood now looks a bit stupid , it should be reasonable gory with some blood already there, although the sacrifices I have in the story are a little on the small side...

I don't think it's stupid, VB. After all, if he was experienced, he would probably know how to get as little as possible on him to begin with. Perhaps by standing behind the victim/sacrifice. Maybe it could drip down onto his upper arm.

 

[Mouse]

Can you use the term 'hoover' even though that's a brand name and what you really mean is vacuum?

 

[Warren_Paul]

I think so. Lot's of real world based books use brand names -especially with drinks and food, and cars.

Apparently it's encouraged, because it adds colour to your characters. And I don't think the companies in question would mind, its a bit of freebie advertising for them in a way. As long as your making it clear it's their product, and not another that uses the same name -and don't talk down about the product.


EDIT: here is a blog on the topic.