Using artistic licence in writing

I agree with Boneman. If you use "fire", you will at least have made the day of a few people who otherwise would have had nothing to complain about. Notwithstanding any collateral damage you may cause from the breakage of property or injury of small pets who happen to be in the way of the book-flinging.

I am trying to work out whether or not I would ever have noticed that "fire" was an incorrect usage, and I'm coming up short. I do tend to notice things, but I'm not at all sure that would have been one of them, prior to reading this thread. I would notice if you claimed that your wiped-out forces had been decimated, or if you stated with authority that the winning side was five times less likely to be killed by flaming arrows. And in the future, I will certainly notice incorrect usages of "fire" and fling the book accordingly, thank you very much.

However, if another word is required, would there be anything wrong with "fly"? It's what the arrows are going to do, and it's nice to shout and easily heard, like "fire". Or, and it seems as likely as not, some non-word military shout such as "hai!" or "hyah!" which armies have always used. The point, after all, is to convey the information, "now is the time to release the weapons at your disposal", in such a fashion as to be easily and quickly understood all up and down the line.
 
I actually find this sort of thing pretty worrying - that is, the thought that you could write a perfectly good novel and yet render it unprintable because the dialogue wasn't ye olde enough. At least you don't have these hazards writing SF.
 
It wouldn't be unprintable. A lot of readers (perhaps most) would like it more because of the modern language. The question is whether or not it will bother the readers you want to reach: the ones who will love everything else about your book, recommend it to their friends, and eagerly await the next one. Of course the ones who want all the language to be absolutely modern might be the readers who will like everything else in your book.

And then there is that very important reader whose tastes you want to take into consideration: yourself.
 
Boneman said:
Do you know the story about the Island monkeys? Although the debunkers went to great lengths to try and prove it didn't happen, it's become folklore apocryphal now, which has got to be worth something ;):eek: and often quoted by people who claim to have been ripped off of ideas by other writers (did on every scriptwriting course I ever did, anyway!). Goes like this: on one particular Island some monkeys used to wash the potatoes (although I heard it as coconuts!) in the sea, but not others. When a transformation figure was reached, apparently ALL the monkeys started doing it. And not only, that but monkeys on other islands started doing it - a kind of universal consciousness...
Click to expand...

The hundredth monkey effect is an excellent example of a case where the idea is more interesting than the truth, and so it propagates, even though everyone knows the idea is untrue, or at least the truth never proved the idea. ;)
 
Toby Frost said:
At least you don't have these hazards writing SF.
Click to expand...

I get to use ZAP and RAY GUNS! :D

And the monkies are mine, I've chained them up, and I feed 'em. They are useless, they keep knocking out rubbish plays in old english - I want a space opera, not old rubbish! ;)

No more nana's! Bad monkies!
 
Fascinating point. And we all, I guess, write with the slant of our own version of modern English (or another language). The moment we have an American actor playing a Roman general on the big screen, we are asking the viewer to suspend disbelief, which they do easily. I think for written material, the ask is easier for lack of accent, and so long as the character doesn't fall into slang "loose, jerks!" then it's right! You have me wondering now, though!
 
Wouldn't want to loose readers...

I'd go with loose over fire. Fire in that situation just looks out of place, and would likely take me out of the book. To steal from Chris's post a bit, I'd also suggest, 'Let fly!'
 
oddhero said:
The moment we have an American actor playing a Roman general on the big screen, we are asking the viewer to suspend disbelief, which they do easily.
Click to expand...

That's interesting, because for a lot of Americans an American accent would make it very hard to suspend disbelief. They accept English accents, though, as being more authentic for Roman generals, Renaissance Italians, Russian aristocrats, etc. An RP English accent pretty much works as a general purpose foreign accent.
 
You mean to say that everyone outside of modern America doesn't have a British accent?
 
The old-but-good film Battle of Britain got the accent issue right. Before that film, most Hollywood films involving foreign soldiers (particularly Germans) had them speaking English in a German accent. Which makes no sense at all, if you are trying to portray people speaking in their own language.

What that film had was two things; German with subtitles and English-speaking actors portraying Germans speaking English in their natural voices. Worked quite well, IMHO.
 
I'm reminded of a moment in that art-house masterpiece Where Eagles Dare, when an RAF pilot is about to land a German plane full of disguised commandos, who are going to launch a surprise attack on - well, everything in sight, really. He leans over to Richard Burton and says "Righto! We're coming in to land - I'll just let German control know." Then he toggles the radio and shouts "Attention control! Ve are comink into ze landink area!"
 
Gosh, you guys think a lot.

"Fire" wouldn't have bothered me -- I wouldn't even have noticed it (and if I had, then the story would have other problems far far more serious than not-quite-the-right-word).

And this thread has reminded me, yet again, that I'm glad I write stuff set in (various versions of) the 20th/21stC.
 
Toby Frost said:
I'm reminded of a moment in that art-house masterpiece Where Eagles Dare, when an RAF pilot is about to land a German plane full of disguised commandos, who are going to launch a surprise attack on - well, everything in sight, really. He leans over to Richard Burton and says "Righto! We're coming in to land - I'll just let German control know." Then he toggles the radio and shouts "Attention control! Ve are comink into ze landink area!"
Click to expand...


"Danny Boy calling Broadsword! Danny Boy calling Broadsword!"
 
If any readers of my stuff would stop reading because of a use of 'fire', they'd probably have stopped much sooner when the characters talk in such phrases as 'you guys'.
 
I tend to use modern sounding dialogue for my more laid back/casual characters and more formal speech for people like nobles or military officers... so usually the MCs sound like your everyday guy or gal you might meet on the street.
 
I'm pretty sure quite a few movies use phrases like "loose" instead of fire - doesnt Gladiator, henry V, Kingdom of Heaven, Robin Hood (a lot of Ridley Scott here actually) have scenes with massed archers.. and I think they dont say "fire" but something like "loose".. could be wrong, but if hollywood gets away with it, i dont see why you shouldn't.

Likely if you are doing this for effect, the person saying "fire" or "loose" will have had to say something else already.. "draw" ... "ready"...." hold" "make ready" etc. so whatever the word is.. it's expected and whether it comes as "fire" or loose" it will have the same impact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Serendipity Making Mars Warmer Using Nano-rods Science & Nature 2
M Bing Outage Causing Search Problems Technology 5
Biskit Wounded orangutan seen using plant as medicine Science & Nature 7
chongjasmine What movie tracking app are you using? General Film Discussion 1
Robert Zwilling Neutron Stars Creating Heavy Elements Using Fission Science & Nature 9

Similar threads


Back
Top