Page 17
Fig. 1.
The ABC's of Writing &The Art of Appropriate Prose
A Brief Overview on the Basics of Writing Better Fiction
Part 1
First and foremost, what follows is not intended as a guide to using good grammar. I am neither qualified nor inclined to delve into the near endless nuances of the precise and proper usage and application of English grammar. My intention is simply to share some of what I've picked up along a personal journey through both the world of literature and the process of writing several novels. I do, however, strongly suggest that you keep at least two separate grammar books handy and consult each of them on a regular basis. Which for me meant looking stuff up whenever I had a question or ran into problem. After a while, you'll learn and remember pretty much everything you need to know to keep going -- and keep writing. The reason you want two grammar books available is because correct usage is not an exact science. It's been my experience that rarely are even two such volumes in complete agreement when it comes to explaining the fine points of writing, and a second opinion can be very helpful. When it doubt, use the book you seem to like more than the other. However, avoid using three or more resources; you're just asking for trouble if you do.
This now concludes the grammar section of my writing guide. Hooray! Not really, but almost. Just as a musician develops a good ear for music, writers need to train their eyes to see good writing, whether it's that of someone else or their own. In a very real sense, seeing well written prose is also a matter of hearing the words inside your head -- as if someone were reading them aloud. Good writing possesses its own melody and rhythm; it feels right and sounds right, moves at its own stylized pace, and doesn't stumble or get bogged down amid a slurry mess of its own making. No amount of grammar correction can save poor writing from itself. While for strong, solid prose, grammar just tidies things up for the purists. Okay, so it's a bit more important than that, and the basics can make all the difference between mediocrity and greatness. Learn to write well, though, and you'll assimilate by rote (if nothing else) most of the grammar rules your personal writing manner will require.
A word of friendly advice that all newer writers might do well to consider: Unless your work is so compelling that even bad grammar can't ruin it, professional editing is pretty much mandatory by today's standards. Grammar is only part of an editing process which also includes little items such as content and continuity. Because few authors are capable of putting a final polish on their own work, comprehensive editing is considered essential for nearly all writers. Needless to say, the less experienced the writer, the more indispensable the editing process.
Since most adroit writers are self-publishing nowadays, finding a real pro when it comes to an editor is much less important (and costly) than it used to be. In some cases the expenses associated with professional editing are prohibitive regardless. That was certainly my situation. Which gave me an incentive to learn the science of writing, the theories behind it, and subsequently the ability to get-by without my work being professionally edited. No doubt it shows, but if one can at least master the idea of writing, what works for you and what doesn't -- and learn how to tell the difference -- then the following guidelines may prove helpful and informative. If nothing else, I've provided a substantial amount of material with which you can compare your own knowledge and experience. Or just maybe, add to what you already know or might wish to learn.
One final point about learning the rules: Although it's true that rules were made to be broken, don't break them unless you first know them. By the same token, don't be a slave to them either. Which means the examples and samples I encourage you to learn and follow should be considered as general guidelines in the broadest possible sense. Again, however, what cannot be repeated enough is that while the basics of grammar often don't make sense or follow predictable patterns, the basics of good writing are just the opposite; the reason why the rules of writing differ from those of grammar is precisely because those for writing tend to be completely logical. The most stringent rules behind good writing demand both clarity and consistency. If you take away nothing else from the material I've presented here, burn into the very heart of your writing these twin elements of clarity and consistency.
This now concludes the grammar section of my writing guide. Hooray! Not really, but almost. Just as a musician develops a good ear for music, writers need to train their eyes to see good writing, whether it's that of someone else or their own. In a very real sense, seeing well written prose is also a matter of hearing the words inside your head -- as if someone were reading them aloud. Good writing possesses its own melody and rhythm; it feels right and sounds right, moves at its own stylized pace, and doesn't stumble or get bogged down amid a slurry mess of its own making. No amount of grammar correction can save poor writing from itself. While for strong, solid prose, grammar just tidies things up for the purists. Okay, so it's a bit more important than that, and the basics can make all the difference between mediocrity and greatness. Learn to write well, though, and you'll assimilate by rote (if nothing else) most of the grammar rules your personal writing manner will require.
A word of friendly advice that all newer writers might do well to consider: Unless your work is so compelling that even bad grammar can't ruin it, professional editing is pretty much mandatory by today's standards. Grammar is only part of an editing process which also includes little items such as content and continuity. Because few authors are capable of putting a final polish on their own work, comprehensive editing is considered essential for nearly all writers. Needless to say, the less experienced the writer, the more indispensable the editing process.
Since most adroit writers are self-publishing nowadays, finding a real pro when it comes to an editor is much less important (and costly) than it used to be. In some cases the expenses associated with professional editing are prohibitive regardless. That was certainly my situation. Which gave me an incentive to learn the science of writing, the theories behind it, and subsequently the ability to get-by without my work being professionally edited. No doubt it shows, but if one can at least master the idea of writing, what works for you and what doesn't -- and learn how to tell the difference -- then the following guidelines may prove helpful and informative. If nothing else, I've provided a substantial amount of material with which you can compare your own knowledge and experience. Or just maybe, add to what you already know or might wish to learn.
One final point about learning the rules: Although it's true that rules were made to be broken, don't break them unless you first know them. By the same token, don't be a slave to them either. Which means the examples and samples I encourage you to learn and follow should be considered as general guidelines in the broadest possible sense. Again, however, what cannot be repeated enough is that while the basics of grammar often don't make sense or follow predictable patterns, the basics of good writing are just the opposite; the reason why the rules of writing differ from those of grammar is precisely because those for writing tend to be completely logical. The most stringent rules behind good writing demand both clarity and consistency. If you take away nothing else from the material I've presented here, burn into the very heart of your writing these twin elements of clarity and consistency.
In No Particular Order
Find your Voice, be in Tense, and convert many Passive sentences to the Active Voice.
Introducing Adverbs, Gerunds, and Participles.
Introducing Adverbs, Gerunds, and Participles.
Almost all fiction writing contains two distinct parts: the narrative voice and the real voices of people speaking (dialogue) or thinking to themselves. The two kinds of voices are either passive or active which by their very names, indicate how they're used. The narrative voice is usually that of the author -- you -- telling and showing readers what's happening. Worth repeating is how there are only these twin companions of narration and dialogue, in one form or another. Likewise there are typically only two kinds of narration: either the voice of the author (usually referred to as the omnipotent voice), and secondly that which we either hear from one of our story's characters themselves, or are told about them by the author. What I call dependent narrative, because it's dependent on (derived from) one or more characters in our story. It is always one or the other narrative, sometimes both, but never more than the two described. Anything (or anyone) more would be too confusing or too difficult to write. Thus the three: dialogue, dependent narrative (character focused), and independent narrative (non-character story descriptions).
The narrative we might hear from one of the characters is usually in the form of silent thoughts -- them thinking to themselves -- while readers eavesdrop on them doing so. The narrative that describes who is talking (he or she said) or tells us what a character looks like or what they're wearing, is also part of the dependent voice I referred to earlier. This form of narration involves POV (point-of-view) which I'll cover later in more detail. Before going further, it is also important at this point, to point out the three kinds of storytelling from which an author might choose to tell their tale. For the purposes of this guide, we won't get involved with nonfiction writing, which carries its own bag-of-tricks, so to speak.
The three types of fiction stories to which I alluded are: First Person, Second Person, and Third Person. This in turn refers to the conjugation of the word, I. As in, I write, you write, and he, she, or it writes (present tense) or I wrote, you wrote, and he, she, or it wrote (past tense) -- in that order. Writing in the First Person is where we see and experience everything through the eyes (and ears) of a story's main character. There is no author narration; the protagonist is the author. Writing in the Second Person is more of a "you-are-there" kind of thing. Rarely, if ever, is this style used for fiction writing and we see it chiefly as a tool of nonfiction. This brings us to the last and most common form of fiction writing: that of the Third Person. This is likely how you'll write your story and how I wrote all of mine. Relatively few authors write in the First Person because it is the most difficult of the three options. In this guide, we will only be working with writing in the Third Person -- the so-called, past tense version. It's what I know best and what I recommend for any new author. Then again it would be silly, of course, to recommend what I know relatively very little about. Although I do try to get away with it sometimes.
As you can see, a writer needs to decide exactly how they're going to tell their story. In this guide, it is assumed that we are writing a fiction story in the Third Person. The narrative voices which can be either that of the author or a main character (or both) are strictly in the form of added descriptions supplied solely by the author. The main character might have unspoken thoughts that are shared with a reader, but these are never expressed as anything other than innermost ideas and feelings. Consequently the character can never know or understand anything that is beyond their personal experience. Such is the realm of the omniscient author narrative. By this it is meant that the narrative is not a narration offered by a character in or out of the story; such narratives are used primarily for First Person works. Rather all descriptions of events, people, and places, are that of a storyteller who is understood to be the (uninvolved) author. Further, it is the responsibility of an author to ensure that they remain detached and unobtrusive. Since the writer in these kinds of stories is presumed to not exist as a character, but as an anonymous storyteller only, what's known as author intrusion can and will divert a reader's focus, resulting in suspension-of-believability and a disruption of the story itself. Examples of intrusion involve the author expressing emotions, opinions, or extraneous thoughts within the omniscient narrative itself. Always let the characters handle such things. In other words don't let readers in on stuff only you, the author, would know.
As concerns our original topic of passive versus active, the idea is to be aware that dialogue will almost always be in the passive voice. Laced with slang and contractions, good dialogue expresses the informal manner by which people speak naturally -- because it’s quicker and easier to do so. Thus if you use a lot of passive voice in the narrative as well, then the text becomes too heavily weighted with passive everything. Which tends to make the reading dull and repetitive. Good (interesting) writing is constantly mixing things up, like a rotating cement mixer filled with passive and active ingredients. Even dialogue can be juiced up by blending active with passive versions of character discourse:
"Which way did the the killer go?"
"I think he was headed for the hotel." (passive response)
"I bet he went straight for the hotel!" (active, aggressive reply)
Passive voice (author narrative): He was (they were) going to the door when it unexpectedly opened.
Active voice (author narrative): He went to the door (They went to the door) when it opened unexpectedly. Note the reversal of the adverb, unexpectedly.
Passive narrative or dialogue: She was (looked/looking) pretty in her new dress.
Active narrative or dialogue: She appeared very pretty in her new dress.
He was captured by the cops. (passive dialogue or narrative)
The cops captured him. (active dialogue or narrative).
Adverbs are like adjectives except they modify verbs instead of nouns. They usually end in “ly”. She gently held him (gently is the adverb). She gently held him. She held him gently. Where held is the modified verb.
Use adverbs sparingly. Only when important, or to avoid awkward sentences. Any adverb can be replaced by a short but more complex, explanatory clause or sentence fragment. She held him in a gentle embrace. "...in a gentle embrace" replaces the adverb gently. See how the temptation is great to use adverbs because they let us avoid thinking of ways not to overuse them. Again the idea is to mix and match. If it appears obvious that the author is not using enough adverbs, for whatever reason, the narrative will feel heavy and thick. When it involves pure dialogue, however, you should already have a sense for the best use of adverbs. Which is to say: use them to your heart's content; everyone else does when they talk.
Special note: Since adverbs demonstrate how we can say the same thing in more than one way (almost always the case), we can use this to our advantage when we want our story characters to "sound" differently from one another. One character might use a ton of adverbs in their speech, while another talks in a more drawn out, more formal manner.
Gerunds are verbs that are used as nouns, and always end in "ing".
He enjoyed swimming as a sport. Hunting as a sport never interested him. Shooting-the rapids was more his thing.
Use gerunds any time, any place, wherever applicable. They are relatively unimportant grammatically and simply reflect your personal style of writing.
Participles are verbs that are used as adjectives and almost always end in “ing”.
Past and present tense are often used together. The boiling water (present tense). The boiled water (past tense).
Despite his expert swimming, he still drowned. He drowned while swimming. Struggling to swim, the injured man never saw the approaching shark which had been following his blood trail.
Use participles as powerful action words. They're bullets instead of thrown rocks, and you want to save them mainly for active events that require a reader to pay closer attention. Keeping in mind that you don't want to overdo or overuse a good thing, avoid wasting participles on passive situations such as thinking, sitting, lying, sleeping and so forth. Use them more for motions and movements like grabbing, falling, shooting, hitting, etcetera. In other words, use them sparingly. This is good advice in general, by the way, when it comes to crafting our sentences and paragraphs with care and finesse.
Lastly, mix together different kinds and styles of sentences in much the same way as we blend adverbs, gerunds, and participles into a quilted fabric of sparse and random usage. Avoid a bunch of adverbs clustered together, the same for participles. Create occasional long sentences and put them between numerous others that are of short and medium length. Also understand that these principles apply equally to both narrative and dialogue content. Choose phrases and words that differ from the adjacent phrases and words above and below, before and after. Try not to say things the same way on the same page, or use the same descriptive words repetitively, over and over again.
Finally, from time to time, place the speaker first: She said, “I like you.” Likewise, switch back to a tag at the end of the sentence: “I like you,” she said. Then throw the speaker into the middle here and there: "I like you," she said, "but only because you like me." Don't do the following: "I like you, but only because you like me," she said. Sticking the speaker at the tail end of a long sentence is poor form and should be avoided. If you don't place the speaker at the very beginning, insert them into the sentence at the earliest opportunity, which refers to a natural break in the sentence itself. Even shorter sentences can be broken if it fits the mood or tone of the conversation. "I like," she said, flirtatiously, "...you." Those three periods are an ellipsis which we'll talk about later.
Make things appear random, without pattern or order. The reason for this is that we tend to spot patterns wherever they occur. If your writing structure itself appears to have a pattern, readers will be distracted, bored, their mood broken, and you risk losing them altogether. Fiction stories have to unfold like real life, which means in a logical but haphazard, unpredictable manner.
The narrative we might hear from one of the characters is usually in the form of silent thoughts -- them thinking to themselves -- while readers eavesdrop on them doing so. The narrative that describes who is talking (he or she said) or tells us what a character looks like or what they're wearing, is also part of the dependent voice I referred to earlier. This form of narration involves POV (point-of-view) which I'll cover later in more detail. Before going further, it is also important at this point, to point out the three kinds of storytelling from which an author might choose to tell their tale. For the purposes of this guide, we won't get involved with nonfiction writing, which carries its own bag-of-tricks, so to speak.
The three types of fiction stories to which I alluded are: First Person, Second Person, and Third Person. This in turn refers to the conjugation of the word, I. As in, I write, you write, and he, she, or it writes (present tense) or I wrote, you wrote, and he, she, or it wrote (past tense) -- in that order. Writing in the First Person is where we see and experience everything through the eyes (and ears) of a story's main character. There is no author narration; the protagonist is the author. Writing in the Second Person is more of a "you-are-there" kind of thing. Rarely, if ever, is this style used for fiction writing and we see it chiefly as a tool of nonfiction. This brings us to the last and most common form of fiction writing: that of the Third Person. This is likely how you'll write your story and how I wrote all of mine. Relatively few authors write in the First Person because it is the most difficult of the three options. In this guide, we will only be working with writing in the Third Person -- the so-called, past tense version. It's what I know best and what I recommend for any new author. Then again it would be silly, of course, to recommend what I know relatively very little about. Although I do try to get away with it sometimes.
As you can see, a writer needs to decide exactly how they're going to tell their story. In this guide, it is assumed that we are writing a fiction story in the Third Person. The narrative voices which can be either that of the author or a main character (or both) are strictly in the form of added descriptions supplied solely by the author. The main character might have unspoken thoughts that are shared with a reader, but these are never expressed as anything other than innermost ideas and feelings. Consequently the character can never know or understand anything that is beyond their personal experience. Such is the realm of the omniscient author narrative. By this it is meant that the narrative is not a narration offered by a character in or out of the story; such narratives are used primarily for First Person works. Rather all descriptions of events, people, and places, are that of a storyteller who is understood to be the (uninvolved) author. Further, it is the responsibility of an author to ensure that they remain detached and unobtrusive. Since the writer in these kinds of stories is presumed to not exist as a character, but as an anonymous storyteller only, what's known as author intrusion can and will divert a reader's focus, resulting in suspension-of-believability and a disruption of the story itself. Examples of intrusion involve the author expressing emotions, opinions, or extraneous thoughts within the omniscient narrative itself. Always let the characters handle such things. In other words don't let readers in on stuff only you, the author, would know.
As concerns our original topic of passive versus active, the idea is to be aware that dialogue will almost always be in the passive voice. Laced with slang and contractions, good dialogue expresses the informal manner by which people speak naturally -- because it’s quicker and easier to do so. Thus if you use a lot of passive voice in the narrative as well, then the text becomes too heavily weighted with passive everything. Which tends to make the reading dull and repetitive. Good (interesting) writing is constantly mixing things up, like a rotating cement mixer filled with passive and active ingredients. Even dialogue can be juiced up by blending active with passive versions of character discourse:
"Which way did the the killer go?"
"I think he was headed for the hotel." (passive response)
"I bet he went straight for the hotel!" (active, aggressive reply)
Passive voice (author narrative): He was (they were) going to the door when it unexpectedly opened.
Active voice (author narrative): He went to the door (They went to the door) when it opened unexpectedly. Note the reversal of the adverb, unexpectedly.
Passive narrative or dialogue: She was (looked/looking) pretty in her new dress.
Active narrative or dialogue: She appeared very pretty in her new dress.
He was captured by the cops. (passive dialogue or narrative)
The cops captured him. (active dialogue or narrative).
Adverbs are like adjectives except they modify verbs instead of nouns. They usually end in “ly”. She gently held him (gently is the adverb). She gently held him. She held him gently. Where held is the modified verb.
Use adverbs sparingly. Only when important, or to avoid awkward sentences. Any adverb can be replaced by a short but more complex, explanatory clause or sentence fragment. She held him in a gentle embrace. "...in a gentle embrace" replaces the adverb gently. See how the temptation is great to use adverbs because they let us avoid thinking of ways not to overuse them. Again the idea is to mix and match. If it appears obvious that the author is not using enough adverbs, for whatever reason, the narrative will feel heavy and thick. When it involves pure dialogue, however, you should already have a sense for the best use of adverbs. Which is to say: use them to your heart's content; everyone else does when they talk.
Special note: Since adverbs demonstrate how we can say the same thing in more than one way (almost always the case), we can use this to our advantage when we want our story characters to "sound" differently from one another. One character might use a ton of adverbs in their speech, while another talks in a more drawn out, more formal manner.
Gerunds are verbs that are used as nouns, and always end in "ing".
He enjoyed swimming as a sport. Hunting as a sport never interested him. Shooting-the rapids was more his thing.
Use gerunds any time, any place, wherever applicable. They are relatively unimportant grammatically and simply reflect your personal style of writing.
Participles are verbs that are used as adjectives and almost always end in “ing”.
Past and present tense are often used together. The boiling water (present tense). The boiled water (past tense).
Despite his expert swimming, he still drowned. He drowned while swimming. Struggling to swim, the injured man never saw the approaching shark which had been following his blood trail.
Use participles as powerful action words. They're bullets instead of thrown rocks, and you want to save them mainly for active events that require a reader to pay closer attention. Keeping in mind that you don't want to overdo or overuse a good thing, avoid wasting participles on passive situations such as thinking, sitting, lying, sleeping and so forth. Use them more for motions and movements like grabbing, falling, shooting, hitting, etcetera. In other words, use them sparingly. This is good advice in general, by the way, when it comes to crafting our sentences and paragraphs with care and finesse.
Lastly, mix together different kinds and styles of sentences in much the same way as we blend adverbs, gerunds, and participles into a quilted fabric of sparse and random usage. Avoid a bunch of adverbs clustered together, the same for participles. Create occasional long sentences and put them between numerous others that are of short and medium length. Also understand that these principles apply equally to both narrative and dialogue content. Choose phrases and words that differ from the adjacent phrases and words above and below, before and after. Try not to say things the same way on the same page, or use the same descriptive words repetitively, over and over again.
Finally, from time to time, place the speaker first: She said, “I like you.” Likewise, switch back to a tag at the end of the sentence: “I like you,” she said. Then throw the speaker into the middle here and there: "I like you," she said, "but only because you like me." Don't do the following: "I like you, but only because you like me," she said. Sticking the speaker at the tail end of a long sentence is poor form and should be avoided. If you don't place the speaker at the very beginning, insert them into the sentence at the earliest opportunity, which refers to a natural break in the sentence itself. Even shorter sentences can be broken if it fits the mood or tone of the conversation. "I like," she said, flirtatiously, "...you." Those three periods are an ellipsis which we'll talk about later.
Make things appear random, without pattern or order. The reason for this is that we tend to spot patterns wherever they occur. If your writing structure itself appears to have a pattern, readers will be distracted, bored, their mood broken, and you risk losing them altogether. Fiction stories have to unfold like real life, which means in a logical but haphazard, unpredictable manner.
Points of View
The Narrative Voice. The many Voices of Dialogue.
Points Of View (P.O.V.) apply to both the narrative content of your story, plus the dialogue elements as well.
The narrative voice(s) is used in two forms: One is independent of all your characters and describes scenes, situations, settings, times-of-day and so forth. It creates a stage and background against which the characters perform. The morning sun burned brightly as it rose above the hills of the valley.
The second form of the narrative voice is character-driven and character-dependent. It interacts with or without dialogue, but is directly involved with your cast of characters. “I love you,” he said, sighing deeply.
All narrative is for the benefit of the reader. Opinions or inappropriate qualities (similar to editorial comments) should never be included in the narrative voice. The new digital clock, superior in every way to the old clock, dutifully chimed the hour. This type of narrative (author intrusion) includes the author’s personal viewpoint and should be avoided. To all concerned, the new digital clock represented a vast improvement over the inaccurate old one. As though a dutiful guardian, the timepiece chimed the hour. Note how the descriptions are now associated with the characters, and not separate from them.
Dialogue is arguably the most important part of your story. It is the main way we come to know the characters. How we show instead of tell who they are, what they feel, and how they think. Almost all stories are character-driven, meaning that the dialogue alone could almost stand on its own without the narrative. Dialogue that sounds real and authentic either makes or breaks a story. While good narrative is always important, it is nothing without a lot of great dialogue. Pick up any novel and read only the first bits of dialogue you find. If they're good, chances are, so is the rest of the book.
Most changes in P.O.V. should have their own paragraph. Independent narrative usually gets a separate paragraph. Dependent (character) narrative, with or without dialogue, may or may not get a separate paragraph.
John entered the room. (character dependent / new paragraph)
The clock chimed. (independent / new paragraph) As John entered the room, the clock chimed. As the clock chimed, John entered the room.
“Noon already?” the young man asked. (character dependent / new paragraph)
Variations on a theme: phrasing sentences that combine points-of-view. As John entered the room, the clock chimed. “Noon already?” he asked. Note how this sentence is acceptable because it flows as one, continuous scene. The main action is John entering the room and not necessarily the clock chiming.
John entered the room.
The clock chimed.
“Noon already?” he said.
In the group of sentences above, the action is choppy and disruptive. Our attention is pulled to the clock, then back to the character. Good writing both separates points of view and combines them smoothly. The chapter paragraphs “dance” between both styles. Learn these two forms well and use them. They are at the heart of a writer’s biggest problem. Namely, when to end one paragraph and begin another. Understanding P.O.V. will easily allow the author’s writing to create its own paragraphs. Their starting points and endings will become automatic and obvious. That said, a writer might choose to purposely format the narrative and dialogue so it's intentionally jarring and choppy. Which is okay if you know you're doing so, and it suits the situation, the mood and so forth.
Multiple characters and multiple points-of-view: Other than the independent narrative an author uses, stories can be told from one or more points-of-view, as seen through the eyes and experiences of the story’s characters. Independent narrative relates things to the reader that may or may not be evident to any of the characters themselves. While he pointed the gun at Tom, John failed to see the man coming up behind him. All other narrative describes things as they could only be experienced by the characters themselves; the reader sees through the personal thoughts and feelings of a given person. Tom knew that John did not see the man coming up behind him. (strictly Tom's point-of-view) John then realized that Tom saw someone approaching them from the rear. (focus only on one point-of-view or the other, not both at the same time, like I've shown here) While John pointed the gun at Tom, another man approached unseen from the rear. This last sentence is an example of narrative where the point-of-view is independent of the characters and reflects the author's omniscient description of the action.
Too many character points-of view run the risk of confusing the reader, and the author. If more than one is used, limit them to very few main characters only. In general, three, maybe four at most. Complex stories may utilize the most. Shorter, less complicated stories less. It used to be that most novels contained only two points-of-view. The independent narrative, and that of the story's main character. That is, unless the story was literally narrated by one of the novel's characters, who uses both the independent and dependent narrative to tell the tale. Nowadays things have changed somewhat, and point-of-view is not as formulaically critical as it once was. Depending on the type of novel, a good story is one that uses different points-of-view sparingly, and never leaves a reader wondering who said what to whom, when they said it, or where they were at the time they spoke.
The narrative voice(s) is used in two forms: One is independent of all your characters and describes scenes, situations, settings, times-of-day and so forth. It creates a stage and background against which the characters perform. The morning sun burned brightly as it rose above the hills of the valley.
The second form of the narrative voice is character-driven and character-dependent. It interacts with or without dialogue, but is directly involved with your cast of characters. “I love you,” he said, sighing deeply.
All narrative is for the benefit of the reader. Opinions or inappropriate qualities (similar to editorial comments) should never be included in the narrative voice. The new digital clock, superior in every way to the old clock, dutifully chimed the hour. This type of narrative (author intrusion) includes the author’s personal viewpoint and should be avoided. To all concerned, the new digital clock represented a vast improvement over the inaccurate old one. As though a dutiful guardian, the timepiece chimed the hour. Note how the descriptions are now associated with the characters, and not separate from them.
Dialogue is arguably the most important part of your story. It is the main way we come to know the characters. How we show instead of tell who they are, what they feel, and how they think. Almost all stories are character-driven, meaning that the dialogue alone could almost stand on its own without the narrative. Dialogue that sounds real and authentic either makes or breaks a story. While good narrative is always important, it is nothing without a lot of great dialogue. Pick up any novel and read only the first bits of dialogue you find. If they're good, chances are, so is the rest of the book.
Most changes in P.O.V. should have their own paragraph. Independent narrative usually gets a separate paragraph. Dependent (character) narrative, with or without dialogue, may or may not get a separate paragraph.
John entered the room. (character dependent / new paragraph)
The clock chimed. (independent / new paragraph) As John entered the room, the clock chimed. As the clock chimed, John entered the room.
“Noon already?” the young man asked. (character dependent / new paragraph)
Variations on a theme: phrasing sentences that combine points-of-view. As John entered the room, the clock chimed. “Noon already?” he asked. Note how this sentence is acceptable because it flows as one, continuous scene. The main action is John entering the room and not necessarily the clock chiming.
John entered the room.
The clock chimed.
“Noon already?” he said.
In the group of sentences above, the action is choppy and disruptive. Our attention is pulled to the clock, then back to the character. Good writing both separates points of view and combines them smoothly. The chapter paragraphs “dance” between both styles. Learn these two forms well and use them. They are at the heart of a writer’s biggest problem. Namely, when to end one paragraph and begin another. Understanding P.O.V. will easily allow the author’s writing to create its own paragraphs. Their starting points and endings will become automatic and obvious. That said, a writer might choose to purposely format the narrative and dialogue so it's intentionally jarring and choppy. Which is okay if you know you're doing so, and it suits the situation, the mood and so forth.
Multiple characters and multiple points-of-view: Other than the independent narrative an author uses, stories can be told from one or more points-of-view, as seen through the eyes and experiences of the story’s characters. Independent narrative relates things to the reader that may or may not be evident to any of the characters themselves. While he pointed the gun at Tom, John failed to see the man coming up behind him. All other narrative describes things as they could only be experienced by the characters themselves; the reader sees through the personal thoughts and feelings of a given person. Tom knew that John did not see the man coming up behind him. (strictly Tom's point-of-view) John then realized that Tom saw someone approaching them from the rear. (focus only on one point-of-view or the other, not both at the same time, like I've shown here) While John pointed the gun at Tom, another man approached unseen from the rear. This last sentence is an example of narrative where the point-of-view is independent of the characters and reflects the author's omniscient description of the action.
Too many character points-of view run the risk of confusing the reader, and the author. If more than one is used, limit them to very few main characters only. In general, three, maybe four at most. Complex stories may utilize the most. Shorter, less complicated stories less. It used to be that most novels contained only two points-of-view. The independent narrative, and that of the story's main character. That is, unless the story was literally narrated by one of the novel's characters, who uses both the independent and dependent narrative to tell the tale. Nowadays things have changed somewhat, and point-of-view is not as formulaically critical as it once was. Depending on the type of novel, a good story is one that uses different points-of-view sparingly, and never leaves a reader wondering who said what to whom, when they said it, or where they were at the time they spoke.
Adjectives
Dependent and Independent Clauses / Dashes / Semi-Colons / Italics / Ellipses / Commas
The indispensable Thesaurus
The indispensable Thesaurus
Adjectives are probably the most often used words. As they should be. Think visually -- but don’t confuse adjectives with adverbs. Like the word, visually, which is an adverb and not an adjective. Well, it's sort of an adjective but it uses a verb to get the job done. It's actually not as confusing as it may sound. As opposed to the general rules-of-grammar, the application and rationale behind the use of adjectives are often logical and sensible.
Sentence clauses, like narrative, are both independent and dependent. Independent clauses can stand alone as a complete thought or idea. He went shopping.
Dependent clauses are not complete in and of themselves. They often require commas to separate them from the independent clause they are attached to. Though short of money, he went shopping. He went shopping despite being short of money. Mix and match these kinds of complex sentences. Be inventive. Watch out for commas, either too many or not enough. How's that for advice? That's commas for you; I'll discuss them later on. They tend to give me a headache.
Sentence fragments are their own separate animals. Some people like them, others view them as incomplete sentences and don't get it. Oh, well. Can't please everybody. Go figure. You can often find sentence fragments as the afterthoughts inserted after a dash at the end of sentences. Which I discuss next.
Dashes, semi-colons, italics, and ellipses: The usage of these are generally infrequent (a handful or less per page). In other words, don't overuse them. It's hard to define what the word, overuse, means, but if readers overly notice them, they're probably overused. Dashes signify an afterthought, or added thought, used for extra punch or impact. He liked sleeping with the window open -- the colder the better. (a sentence fragment)
Semi-colons join together two independent clauses that are related. John went shopping; he liked to buy things. Think how many different ways there are to say this same thing. John went shopping because he liked to buy things. A shopaholic who liked to buy things, John went shopping a lot. (did a lot of shopping). No particular "compound" (two clauses together) sentence requires a semi-colon; it is strictly the author's choice as to when they're used. It's something you get a feel for and as always, avoid overusing them. When you do, just do so correctly. Don't join two unrelated thoughts together as follows: John went shopping; his new shoes felt great. John's new shoes felt great; he decided to test them out while shopping. And don't use them to join an independent clause with a dependent clause: John's new shoes felt great; while he tested them by shopping. (wrong)
Italics are used to emphasize special words or terms. They help the reader to properly understand the real meaning intended by the author. This is especially critical when a written piece can be interpreted more than one way. And the reader doesn't know which is intended by the author. The killer looked at his accusers and grinned. Without the italics, many readers would likely be confused as to whether the killer smiled pleasantly, or grinned menacingly. If we know that this particular killer is guilty and vile, then italics tell us that when he or she grins, it's not because they're being cheerful or friendly. Look at the following change in the previous example: The killer looked at his accusers...and grinned. Notice how the ellipsis (three periods) sets its own, more dramatic mood. A dash could have also worked, but seems like overkill -- if you catch my drift. You could also italicize grinned after the ellipsis, but I don't think it's necessary. We get the meaning without using both italics and ellipsis. Here again, don't over-punctuate. I can't repeat that too often. Even if it's technically acceptable to use both italics and the ellipsis in the previous sample (or in any other sample), it's probably overkill. Always use the bare minimum that gets your point across. Don't hit readers over the head with your knowledge of how to use all the tools at your disposal.
Parenthetically, a quick word about parentheses: I don't like them in novels, speaking personally. They can be used, and are, but I recommend not using them. The reason is because once you start using them, when do you stop? There's no consistent rule in writing novels that tells you when to use parentheses. So don't. Nonfiction writing is another story (literally speaking).
The ellipsis (. . .) is just plain cool, and my all-time favorite form of punctuation. It has gobs of uses -- maybe more than any other single tool from which you can choose. Plus you can use them more often and no one will object. It is only found in dependent narrative and dialogue. Unfortunately for many writers, they never understand how to make ellipses work for them, for whatever reason. Worse yet, they use ellipses incorrectly which can cause all kinds of problems.
Essentially an ellipsis (singular) is used to indicate a short pause taken by a speaker. It indicates missing, unspoken words, hesitation, or the taking of a breath. Context is everything in understanding why we find it (or use it) when we do. Assuming the author knows what he or she is doing. It is rarely, if ever, used as part of the independent narrative. "I don't know what to say...it's just too overwhelming." Nearly speechless, he took a breath. "...it's just too overwhelming," he finally said. Notice how you can begin a sentence with an ellipsis. Doing so indicates how the speaker hesitated, or was caught up in the emotion of the moment.
Here's some other examples of how the ellipsis is used the same way, but for different reasons. Namely when a speaker is interrupted by another talker. Common interruptions, interjections, speaking over another, can be difficult for an author to do well in dialogue. It took me a while to get the hang of it. But once you do, you'll love how your characters can sound like real, typically inattentive listeners who constantly interrupt, disrupt, or otherwise insert themselves into a conversation. It literally is a dance where knowing the steps is hard at first, but once learned, you can have a Ball.
Before giving you all the examples I can think of, the ellipsis is also used when speakers interrupts themselves, and leave a thought or statement incomplete and dangling. "If I had to go on without you, I'd don't know what I'd do. Probably go to the nearest cliff and...." He then shrugged his shoulders and walked away. Note how a fourth period is added to the three in order to finish the unfinished sentence.
John said, "Tom, you just don't get what I'm..." A typical example of the ellipsis used to signal a forthcoming interruption. Before we read another word, it is immediately obvious that someone (or something) is about to intercede in John's dialogue. "Yes, I do," Tom said. (Tom argued) (Tom interrupted) Some authors use only the word, "said" when indicating who's talking. Other writers use a combination of said and other, so-called "descriptors" such as argued or interrupted. Still other writers use colorful descriptors almost exclusively and rarely, if ever, "said". Editors vary in their preferences of one form over another. There is no one method that is more correct than another. I like to use "said" most of the time, and then insert other descriptors here and there, sometimes more, sometimes less. Some critics would argue that once the ellipsis is used to show an upcoming interruption, that to then say, Tom interrupted, is redundant and unnecessary. Again, not to sound like a broken record, I think it's okay to use interrupted or argued, or cut-in, cut-off, cut-short, or interjected, inserted, or interceded -- just do it sparingly and not always in the same way.
"Tom, you just don't get what I'm...." John paused, waiting for Tom to jump in and protest. Another example of the four-period ellipsis which tells the reader that the speaker has stopped talking completely. Some writers might use three periods and a comma, but as you know, I don't like to over-punctuate. Since four periods always denote a stop, a comma just confuses things. "Yes, I do," Tom said. "I'm...I'm just a slow learner, but..." Here the ellipsis is used to show a slight stutter, hesitation, or a minor pause inside a statement. The line then ends with three periods once more showing us that Tom's dialogue has been cut-short by yet another interruption, that must follow immediately. "Yes, I do," Tom said. "I'm...I'm just a slow learner, but..." A loud crash sounded (came) from the street outside and, like an uninvited intruder, inserted itself into the conversation. Notice how the forthcoming interruption can come from any source and not always from another speaker.
"But nothing," John cut in. "I think you're being...lazy -- if I was being honest." Use the ellipsis to show the emotion that might accompany what a person says. Here we see how John hesitates before using the word, lazy. This is different (not better) from John simply saying, "I think you're (just) being lazy." This latter form, minus the ellipsis, conveys an entirely different (not better) mood or manner on the part of John. Whether he is actually accusing Tom of being lazy, or just playfully poking fun at him, then becomes more dependent on other descriptions or how it's said in context with the conversation as a whole.
"Lazy?!" Tom's face turned flushed as he tried to stay calm. "...you're the one, John, who doesn't get it." We again see how the ellipsis is used to express emotion -- in this case where Tom chokes, balks, hesitates, or takes a breath while in the act of already speaking.
Finally but not lastly, the ellipsis can be used to enter a discussion already in progress. How cool is that? If a chapter or paragraph starts off with dialogue, for example, you can do thusly: "...and furthermore, gentlemen, I approve of John's plan to start the project immediately, if not sooner." This is simply a nice way to get things going with the idea that things are already going. Another example might be where a character enters a room with people already talking. While he conversed with Fred and Wilma, Tom looked over his shoulder and caught a glimpse of John, who had just come into the room. "...uh, let's finish this later," Tom apologized, as he turned and rushed to greet his newly arrived friend. There's a lot going on in this last paragraph. We don't want to repeat characters' names more often than necessary. Notice how I substituted newly arrived friend for the name John. Typical pronouns like he or she, him or her, are sometimes impractical or unusable in which case try using what I call pronoun phrases in order to describe a character. Think of pronoun phrases as rescue tools that free you from having to use the person's name monotonously, or their personal pronoun over and over again. Don't write in such a way that you're forced to constantly rescue yourself, however. Too many pronoun phrases can come across as equally tedious or tiresome.
One of the most important things to remember about using ellipses or most other punctuation marks, for that matter, is consistency. I've rarely found two novels by different writers and publishers where punctuation was used exactly the same way in both. This is especially true for ellipses. However you use them, based upon the grammar book you've glommed onto, use them the same way each and every time -- under identical circumstances -- according to how you've used them elsewhere. The importance of this rule cannot be overemphasized and you should take it to heart. This from a guy who dislikes rules.
Commas are great, but the tendency to use too many -- or not enough -- can drive one to distraction as they say. Or crazy, which more accurately describes my situation. John paid Tom to stick around on Monday and Tuesday after the job was completed. John paid Tom to stick around on Monday and Tuesday, after the job was completed. John paid Tom to stick around on Monday, and Tuesday after the job was completed.
Although not the best of examples, the three sentences above, demonstrate how a single comma can change or clarify the meaning of compound sentences. Which if you'll recall, are either a combination of independent and dependent clauses, or two independent clauses joined by a conjunction or semi-color. In the first example, we have just one long independent clause which could, in theory, be interpreted in at least three different ways. In the second sentence, the word after is used to join the dependent clause, after the job was completed, with the rest of the sentence (an independent clause). Finally in the third sample of the same sentence, the conjunction and connects the dependent clause, and Tuesday after the job was completed, with the main independent clause.
I'll leave it to you to decipher the separate meanings each version conveys, but that's not what's important. The crucial part is that a writer needs to be constantly aware and vigilant as to how his or her writing might be read differently by different readers. The idea is for all readers to derive the same meaning and to do this, an author must be certain that sentences are not ambiguous or vague, thus leaving readers scratching their heads -- and putting your book down (literally and figuratively).
We will get into conjunctions more in Part Two of this guide, but the foregoing examples are precisely the kind of thing worth paying attention to. Where a missing (or added) comma changes everything. Too many commas are generally just a pain, but usually don't change the entire meaning of what's being said. For my part, I'd rather have a few too many commas than not enough. That's a few. Not hundreds.
To this day, commas still throw me. I think part of the problem lies in the differences between the voice of a real narrator, and the narrative voice in literature. I hear a narrator speaking my narrative voice and therefore my tendency is to use too many commas, which is how real narrators talk. That brings us to dialogue and how best to use commas in dialogue. All bets are off in dialogue. It's a free-for-all and you can use as many or as few commas as your characters require (or demand). Just keep in mind that the same characters must speak the same way whenever they talk. While this sounds obvious, it isn't in terms of making sure a character's speech is punctuated the same way every time. If that sounds like a familiar rule, that's because it's an important one to remember. That and the fact that commas change what a character says and how they say it. So make sure your characters "sound" the same way on paper as they do inside your head. Which means punctuation in dialogue is absolutely critical. And to repeat (I do that a lot, I know) there's virtually no such thing as incorrect punctuation in dialogue, aside from the basics of structure -- the use of quotation marks and such. Just be true to each character and above all, be consistent.
Question marks and exclamation points. "Where you going?" she asked. "Where you going?" she said. "Where you going?!" she exclaimed. "Where you going?!" she said. Yes, you can put an exclamation point after a question mark (never before). How else could you emphasize the question? That said, do you see the differences among the sentences above? Some editors think it's redundant to say, "she asked" when it follows a question mark. Either way is okay with me. The same for, "she exclaimed" used after an exclamatory remark. Again it's more a matter of consistency. If you like, "she asked" and "she exclaimed", then don't just use them once or twice in your whole story. By the same token, you don't have to use them every time, either. I jostle them around, mix and match, and try not to let the reader know that I know they're watching.
Some writers use "said" all the time and never deviate. While I can accept it from other writers, just plain "he said" and "she said" is just too dull for me. I prefer mixing a lot said's with a whole lot of those descriptor things as well. Once you go down that road, however, there's no turning back. Readers will notice if too many said's are only occasionally replaced by too few other descriptors such as "he complained", or "she yelled". And there is a real redundancy problem to be wary of. "I hate onions," he complained. Well, duhhh. Do we really need to tell the reader he's complaining when his dialogue says it already? Not so cut and dry, though, when it comes to certain other situations. If the dialogue doesn't make it clear, writers should (in my opinion) use a descriptor to drive home the author's intent. "Where you going?" she yelled. Or if it's really heated, "Where you going?!" she screamed. See how all these subtle nuances work together? It's all little more than saying clearly (and precisely) what's happening. Or not happening. It's both easy and maddening simultaneously. Thus it helps if you're a bit crazy to begin with.
A thesaurus is a writer's best friend. Keep one nearby and close to your heart (like that beat-up grammar book). Word processing programs usually offer a decent thesaurus at the click of a mouse button. If you get stuck, desperate, or want a particularly strong synonym or antonym, the internet can be very helpful. A word of caution, though. Gee, what else is new, right? Later on in this guide, I cover the topic of using big words versus little words when it comes to adjectives, synonyms and such. The subject deserves its own little essay and I magnanimously provided one over which you might cogitate, deliberate, and scrutinate. I made-up that last word. Which brings us to one other book, program, or internet site that comes under the heading: must-have absolutely.
That's right -- ye old, El Dictionario! Or dictionary for short. I can't tell you how many words I thought (assumed) I knew the meaning of, only to find out I was totally wrong. When in doubt -- the slightest doubt -- look it up. Seriously. One of the fringe benefits of constantly accessing the definition of the more colorful words that are always so tempting to use, is the discovery of new synonyms and antonyms in the process. Adopting the habit of mining the definitions of even some of the more common words you're used to using, pays off big-time, all the time. Not only will you expand your vocabulary and knowledge of how words work, but the more you do it, the less often you'll have to. Does that make sense? I think it does. And so will you. Oh, and never assume you know the meaning of an interesting word. You'll be surprised how often you're mistaken.
This now concludes Part One of my guide. Hooray!
Sentence clauses, like narrative, are both independent and dependent. Independent clauses can stand alone as a complete thought or idea. He went shopping.
Dependent clauses are not complete in and of themselves. They often require commas to separate them from the independent clause they are attached to. Though short of money, he went shopping. He went shopping despite being short of money. Mix and match these kinds of complex sentences. Be inventive. Watch out for commas, either too many or not enough. How's that for advice? That's commas for you; I'll discuss them later on. They tend to give me a headache.
Sentence fragments are their own separate animals. Some people like them, others view them as incomplete sentences and don't get it. Oh, well. Can't please everybody. Go figure. You can often find sentence fragments as the afterthoughts inserted after a dash at the end of sentences. Which I discuss next.
Dashes, semi-colons, italics, and ellipses: The usage of these are generally infrequent (a handful or less per page). In other words, don't overuse them. It's hard to define what the word, overuse, means, but if readers overly notice them, they're probably overused. Dashes signify an afterthought, or added thought, used for extra punch or impact. He liked sleeping with the window open -- the colder the better. (a sentence fragment)
Semi-colons join together two independent clauses that are related. John went shopping; he liked to buy things. Think how many different ways there are to say this same thing. John went shopping because he liked to buy things. A shopaholic who liked to buy things, John went shopping a lot. (did a lot of shopping). No particular "compound" (two clauses together) sentence requires a semi-colon; it is strictly the author's choice as to when they're used. It's something you get a feel for and as always, avoid overusing them. When you do, just do so correctly. Don't join two unrelated thoughts together as follows: John went shopping; his new shoes felt great. John's new shoes felt great; he decided to test them out while shopping. And don't use them to join an independent clause with a dependent clause: John's new shoes felt great; while he tested them by shopping. (wrong)
Italics are used to emphasize special words or terms. They help the reader to properly understand the real meaning intended by the author. This is especially critical when a written piece can be interpreted more than one way. And the reader doesn't know which is intended by the author. The killer looked at his accusers and grinned. Without the italics, many readers would likely be confused as to whether the killer smiled pleasantly, or grinned menacingly. If we know that this particular killer is guilty and vile, then italics tell us that when he or she grins, it's not because they're being cheerful or friendly. Look at the following change in the previous example: The killer looked at his accusers...and grinned. Notice how the ellipsis (three periods) sets its own, more dramatic mood. A dash could have also worked, but seems like overkill -- if you catch my drift. You could also italicize grinned after the ellipsis, but I don't think it's necessary. We get the meaning without using both italics and ellipsis. Here again, don't over-punctuate. I can't repeat that too often. Even if it's technically acceptable to use both italics and the ellipsis in the previous sample (or in any other sample), it's probably overkill. Always use the bare minimum that gets your point across. Don't hit readers over the head with your knowledge of how to use all the tools at your disposal.
Parenthetically, a quick word about parentheses: I don't like them in novels, speaking personally. They can be used, and are, but I recommend not using them. The reason is because once you start using them, when do you stop? There's no consistent rule in writing novels that tells you when to use parentheses. So don't. Nonfiction writing is another story (literally speaking).
The ellipsis (. . .) is just plain cool, and my all-time favorite form of punctuation. It has gobs of uses -- maybe more than any other single tool from which you can choose. Plus you can use them more often and no one will object. It is only found in dependent narrative and dialogue. Unfortunately for many writers, they never understand how to make ellipses work for them, for whatever reason. Worse yet, they use ellipses incorrectly which can cause all kinds of problems.
Essentially an ellipsis (singular) is used to indicate a short pause taken by a speaker. It indicates missing, unspoken words, hesitation, or the taking of a breath. Context is everything in understanding why we find it (or use it) when we do. Assuming the author knows what he or she is doing. It is rarely, if ever, used as part of the independent narrative. "I don't know what to say...it's just too overwhelming." Nearly speechless, he took a breath. "...it's just too overwhelming," he finally said. Notice how you can begin a sentence with an ellipsis. Doing so indicates how the speaker hesitated, or was caught up in the emotion of the moment.
Here's some other examples of how the ellipsis is used the same way, but for different reasons. Namely when a speaker is interrupted by another talker. Common interruptions, interjections, speaking over another, can be difficult for an author to do well in dialogue. It took me a while to get the hang of it. But once you do, you'll love how your characters can sound like real, typically inattentive listeners who constantly interrupt, disrupt, or otherwise insert themselves into a conversation. It literally is a dance where knowing the steps is hard at first, but once learned, you can have a Ball.
Before giving you all the examples I can think of, the ellipsis is also used when speakers interrupts themselves, and leave a thought or statement incomplete and dangling. "If I had to go on without you, I'd don't know what I'd do. Probably go to the nearest cliff and...." He then shrugged his shoulders and walked away. Note how a fourth period is added to the three in order to finish the unfinished sentence.
John said, "Tom, you just don't get what I'm..." A typical example of the ellipsis used to signal a forthcoming interruption. Before we read another word, it is immediately obvious that someone (or something) is about to intercede in John's dialogue. "Yes, I do," Tom said. (Tom argued) (Tom interrupted) Some authors use only the word, "said" when indicating who's talking. Other writers use a combination of said and other, so-called "descriptors" such as argued or interrupted. Still other writers use colorful descriptors almost exclusively and rarely, if ever, "said". Editors vary in their preferences of one form over another. There is no one method that is more correct than another. I like to use "said" most of the time, and then insert other descriptors here and there, sometimes more, sometimes less. Some critics would argue that once the ellipsis is used to show an upcoming interruption, that to then say, Tom interrupted, is redundant and unnecessary. Again, not to sound like a broken record, I think it's okay to use interrupted or argued, or cut-in, cut-off, cut-short, or interjected, inserted, or interceded -- just do it sparingly and not always in the same way.
"Tom, you just don't get what I'm...." John paused, waiting for Tom to jump in and protest. Another example of the four-period ellipsis which tells the reader that the speaker has stopped talking completely. Some writers might use three periods and a comma, but as you know, I don't like to over-punctuate. Since four periods always denote a stop, a comma just confuses things. "Yes, I do," Tom said. "I'm...I'm just a slow learner, but..." Here the ellipsis is used to show a slight stutter, hesitation, or a minor pause inside a statement. The line then ends with three periods once more showing us that Tom's dialogue has been cut-short by yet another interruption, that must follow immediately. "Yes, I do," Tom said. "I'm...I'm just a slow learner, but..." A loud crash sounded (came) from the street outside and, like an uninvited intruder, inserted itself into the conversation. Notice how the forthcoming interruption can come from any source and not always from another speaker.
"But nothing," John cut in. "I think you're being...lazy -- if I was being honest." Use the ellipsis to show the emotion that might accompany what a person says. Here we see how John hesitates before using the word, lazy. This is different (not better) from John simply saying, "I think you're (just) being lazy." This latter form, minus the ellipsis, conveys an entirely different (not better) mood or manner on the part of John. Whether he is actually accusing Tom of being lazy, or just playfully poking fun at him, then becomes more dependent on other descriptions or how it's said in context with the conversation as a whole.
"Lazy?!" Tom's face turned flushed as he tried to stay calm. "...you're the one, John, who doesn't get it." We again see how the ellipsis is used to express emotion -- in this case where Tom chokes, balks, hesitates, or takes a breath while in the act of already speaking.
Finally but not lastly, the ellipsis can be used to enter a discussion already in progress. How cool is that? If a chapter or paragraph starts off with dialogue, for example, you can do thusly: "...and furthermore, gentlemen, I approve of John's plan to start the project immediately, if not sooner." This is simply a nice way to get things going with the idea that things are already going. Another example might be where a character enters a room with people already talking. While he conversed with Fred and Wilma, Tom looked over his shoulder and caught a glimpse of John, who had just come into the room. "...uh, let's finish this later," Tom apologized, as he turned and rushed to greet his newly arrived friend. There's a lot going on in this last paragraph. We don't want to repeat characters' names more often than necessary. Notice how I substituted newly arrived friend for the name John. Typical pronouns like he or she, him or her, are sometimes impractical or unusable in which case try using what I call pronoun phrases in order to describe a character. Think of pronoun phrases as rescue tools that free you from having to use the person's name monotonously, or their personal pronoun over and over again. Don't write in such a way that you're forced to constantly rescue yourself, however. Too many pronoun phrases can come across as equally tedious or tiresome.
One of the most important things to remember about using ellipses or most other punctuation marks, for that matter, is consistency. I've rarely found two novels by different writers and publishers where punctuation was used exactly the same way in both. This is especially true for ellipses. However you use them, based upon the grammar book you've glommed onto, use them the same way each and every time -- under identical circumstances -- according to how you've used them elsewhere. The importance of this rule cannot be overemphasized and you should take it to heart. This from a guy who dislikes rules.
Commas are great, but the tendency to use too many -- or not enough -- can drive one to distraction as they say. Or crazy, which more accurately describes my situation. John paid Tom to stick around on Monday and Tuesday after the job was completed. John paid Tom to stick around on Monday and Tuesday, after the job was completed. John paid Tom to stick around on Monday, and Tuesday after the job was completed.
Although not the best of examples, the three sentences above, demonstrate how a single comma can change or clarify the meaning of compound sentences. Which if you'll recall, are either a combination of independent and dependent clauses, or two independent clauses joined by a conjunction or semi-color. In the first example, we have just one long independent clause which could, in theory, be interpreted in at least three different ways. In the second sentence, the word after is used to join the dependent clause, after the job was completed, with the rest of the sentence (an independent clause). Finally in the third sample of the same sentence, the conjunction and connects the dependent clause, and Tuesday after the job was completed, with the main independent clause.
I'll leave it to you to decipher the separate meanings each version conveys, but that's not what's important. The crucial part is that a writer needs to be constantly aware and vigilant as to how his or her writing might be read differently by different readers. The idea is for all readers to derive the same meaning and to do this, an author must be certain that sentences are not ambiguous or vague, thus leaving readers scratching their heads -- and putting your book down (literally and figuratively).
We will get into conjunctions more in Part Two of this guide, but the foregoing examples are precisely the kind of thing worth paying attention to. Where a missing (or added) comma changes everything. Too many commas are generally just a pain, but usually don't change the entire meaning of what's being said. For my part, I'd rather have a few too many commas than not enough. That's a few. Not hundreds.
To this day, commas still throw me. I think part of the problem lies in the differences between the voice of a real narrator, and the narrative voice in literature. I hear a narrator speaking my narrative voice and therefore my tendency is to use too many commas, which is how real narrators talk. That brings us to dialogue and how best to use commas in dialogue. All bets are off in dialogue. It's a free-for-all and you can use as many or as few commas as your characters require (or demand). Just keep in mind that the same characters must speak the same way whenever they talk. While this sounds obvious, it isn't in terms of making sure a character's speech is punctuated the same way every time. If that sounds like a familiar rule, that's because it's an important one to remember. That and the fact that commas change what a character says and how they say it. So make sure your characters "sound" the same way on paper as they do inside your head. Which means punctuation in dialogue is absolutely critical. And to repeat (I do that a lot, I know) there's virtually no such thing as incorrect punctuation in dialogue, aside from the basics of structure -- the use of quotation marks and such. Just be true to each character and above all, be consistent.
Question marks and exclamation points. "Where you going?" she asked. "Where you going?" she said. "Where you going?!" she exclaimed. "Where you going?!" she said. Yes, you can put an exclamation point after a question mark (never before). How else could you emphasize the question? That said, do you see the differences among the sentences above? Some editors think it's redundant to say, "she asked" when it follows a question mark. Either way is okay with me. The same for, "she exclaimed" used after an exclamatory remark. Again it's more a matter of consistency. If you like, "she asked" and "she exclaimed", then don't just use them once or twice in your whole story. By the same token, you don't have to use them every time, either. I jostle them around, mix and match, and try not to let the reader know that I know they're watching.
Some writers use "said" all the time and never deviate. While I can accept it from other writers, just plain "he said" and "she said" is just too dull for me. I prefer mixing a lot said's with a whole lot of those descriptor things as well. Once you go down that road, however, there's no turning back. Readers will notice if too many said's are only occasionally replaced by too few other descriptors such as "he complained", or "she yelled". And there is a real redundancy problem to be wary of. "I hate onions," he complained. Well, duhhh. Do we really need to tell the reader he's complaining when his dialogue says it already? Not so cut and dry, though, when it comes to certain other situations. If the dialogue doesn't make it clear, writers should (in my opinion) use a descriptor to drive home the author's intent. "Where you going?" she yelled. Or if it's really heated, "Where you going?!" she screamed. See how all these subtle nuances work together? It's all little more than saying clearly (and precisely) what's happening. Or not happening. It's both easy and maddening simultaneously. Thus it helps if you're a bit crazy to begin with.
A thesaurus is a writer's best friend. Keep one nearby and close to your heart (like that beat-up grammar book). Word processing programs usually offer a decent thesaurus at the click of a mouse button. If you get stuck, desperate, or want a particularly strong synonym or antonym, the internet can be very helpful. A word of caution, though. Gee, what else is new, right? Later on in this guide, I cover the topic of using big words versus little words when it comes to adjectives, synonyms and such. The subject deserves its own little essay and I magnanimously provided one over which you might cogitate, deliberate, and scrutinate. I made-up that last word. Which brings us to one other book, program, or internet site that comes under the heading: must-have absolutely.
That's right -- ye old, El Dictionario! Or dictionary for short. I can't tell you how many words I thought (assumed) I knew the meaning of, only to find out I was totally wrong. When in doubt -- the slightest doubt -- look it up. Seriously. One of the fringe benefits of constantly accessing the definition of the more colorful words that are always so tempting to use, is the discovery of new synonyms and antonyms in the process. Adopting the habit of mining the definitions of even some of the more common words you're used to using, pays off big-time, all the time. Not only will you expand your vocabulary and knowledge of how words work, but the more you do it, the less often you'll have to. Does that make sense? I think it does. And so will you. Oh, and never assume you know the meaning of an interesting word. You'll be surprised how often you're mistaken.
This now concludes Part One of my guide. Hooray!
You're currently on page NOU17
listed under NOUMENOMICON.
