The Basics: Clean Writing

Davinia held the flower in front of her eyes and peered at it closely.  "As I suspected."  Her mouth stretched into a long grin.  "It's been bugged.  Just like every other flower in this place.  They're all bugged!"


Can you tell me what's wrong with the above excerpt?

(Okay, it's not an excerpt.  It's an off-the-cuff example.  But pretend it's an excerpt.)

Basically, the writing isn't tight.  There are too many words, and the result is clunky writing that is in desperate need of pairing down.

Better:

Davinia studied the flower.  "As I suspected."  She grinned.  "It's been bugged.  Just like every other flower here."


Sometimes, when we're trying to be creative--to say things in a different way--we get carried away with prose that should've been shot before it drew breath.  After a while, we learn NOT to be in love with our words (easier said than done), and even our first drafts are cleaner than they used to be.  But it's a skill that doesn't happen on its own; we have to be willing to learn how to discern what stays and what goes.

Example of using too many words:

She took several clumsy steps...  (She stumbled...)
His voice erupted with laughter...  (He laughed...)
He sat down on the chair across the table from... (He sat across from...)
She opened her mouth and produced a barely audible melody... (She sang softly...)

Mind you, there are times when a bit of embellishment will make for a more original or more beautiful turn of phrase.  We don't want our writing to be so stark that it lacks imagination.  But BE CAREFUL.  For the most part, the simple equation is the best choice.  Choose your words carefully, and remember that, most of the time, less is more.  Say what you mean to say without running around it in circles.

Prepositional phrases are often the culprit (as you'll notice in most of my examples above).  Remember that you don't have to detail EVERY SINGLE THING when you're trying to place a character or his action.

Example:

Byron stood beneath the willow at the entrance to the park on the east side, near the place where Janelle had been murdered.  (too many prepositional phrases!)

Byron stood beneath the willow near the place where Janelle had been murdered.  (better!)

Here's your challenge:  Take a look at the first chapter of your WIP or completed draft.  Cross out anything that could be said IN FEWER WORDS and rewrite.  Cross out any prepositional phrase that is UNNECESSARY.  Cross out EVERYTHING that is remotely redundant.  Then see what's left.

Chances are it's a lot tighter and cleaner than when you started!  Use this approach as you edit, and also as you draft.  The more experienced you become, the better you'll be at writing more cleanly SOONER.

Which means less editing later!

(Note:  I didn't say less REVISING.  I said less EDITING.  So don't get too excited.)

Finish the challenge and report back!

The Basics: Authenticity

Recently, I posted about the authenticity of teen sexuality in YA novels on Miss Snark's First Victim.

The idea of authenticity in writing is much broader than that, though, and bears mentioning.  You may have heard the old expression, "Write what you know."  Now, obviously that doesn't apply to things like spaceships and volcanoes erupting and any number of things that you can sit down and research.  But when it comes to CHARACTERS and RELATIONSHIPS, your writing isn't going to be authentic if you can't "get inside" a character's head/motivations because, frankly, you have no way of relating to what you're character is going through or who he is.

Let me explain.

Let's say you have this great idea for a story about an eighteen-year-old girl who just got accepted to the college of her dreams and, at the same time, finds out she is pregnant.  If you are only sixteen, have never applied to a college, and have never even kissed a boy, it's going to be awfully hard for you to create a character who is having experiences beyond your ken.

Yeah, but what if I write about someone getting murdered? I'm not exactly planning on killing someone just to see what it feels like.


Good point!  But that's where you tap into emotions instead of actions.  You may not know what it feels like to kill someone (well, I hope you don't), but you can certainly get in touch with feelings of rage or jealousy or revenge.  And you can research the mechanics of killing someone, to make sure that aspect is believable.

Hence the "write what you know."  If you give legitimate emotion/motives to the words and actions of characters who might actually be experiencing something you have not experienced, it's going to be a lot more believable.  But be careful.  If you're only fifteen and you're writing about someone's wedding day...or if you've never been in an airplane in your life and you're writing a story about someone's first transcontinental flight...or if you're a vegetarian and you're writing a story about someone who specializes in fifty ways to prepare bear meat...well.  You get my point.

Look carefully at your characters in each scene.  Is their EMOTION authentic?  Is their MOTIVATION authentic?  Is their DIALOGUE authentic?  If the answer to all three questions is a resounding YES, then your scene--and your characters--will be believable.  And that's what you want!

The Basics: Chapter Endings

In all honesty, I'm not sure there's actually a way to TEACH the writing of decent chapter endings.  It's something that the sensitive writer will develop over time, as a result of LOTS of reading and LOTS of writing practice.

The most helpful thing, I think, is to give you a few rules of thumb.

1.  Each chapter ending should propel the reader forward.  That DOES NOT mean that every chapter ending is a cliff-hanger.  If you do that, you'll end up sounding like a Hardy Boys knock-off (have you ever read Hardy Boys books? Ugh!).  The trick to a chapter ending is CONFLICT, the same way CONFLICT plays such a vital role in the OPENING of a novel and THROUGHOUT the novel.  It's CONFLICT that will propel the reader to the next chapter.  And that may or may not be a typical cliff-hanger.

2.  Chapter endings should not all follow the same formula. Of course you're going to want some cliff-hangers thrown in there, but if you do that at the end of every chapter, your readers are going to start to roll their collective eyes.  The key is variety--a careful balance of endings that keeps the story moving forward.

3.  Quiet chapter endings can be as compelling as tense ones.  In fact, sometimes the quiet chapter ending hints at more terrible things to come by presenting a false sense of calm.  So don't shy away from quiet endings just because you think every ending has to have a huge BANG.  It doesn't.

In the end, it's all about balance.  Pay attention to the overall rhythm of your story, and craft your chapter endings accordingly.  And be sure to KEEP READING WELL WRITTEN BOOKS.  I can't stress enough how much we learn simply by reading the work of others.  GOOD work, that is.  Be discerning.

Honestly?  I spend a lot of time on my chapter endings.  A LOT.  I craft them very carefully, whether they're heartstopping or calm.  I won't move on to the next chapter, in fact, until I'm completely satisfied with the ending of the chapter before.

To me, it's just that important.

Now take a look at your chapter endings.  Do they carry CONFLICT toward the next chapter?  Are they well balanced, so that they're not cookie cutters of each other?  Or do they sound more like my all-time Favorite Dorky Schlocky Badly Written Hardy Boys chapter ending of all time:

A blunt object connected with the back of his head.  Joe pitched forward and blacked out.


Oh, yeah.  Good stuff there.

The Basics: Verb Tense Consistency

I think we should call this one a Very Basic post.  Which doesn't mean it's not important; on the contrary, it's VERY important.  But it's something that's usually evident in the writing of Very New writers.

Notice I didn't say Very Young.  Because this isn't an age thing.  It's an experience thing.

So, a quick lesson on verb tense:

There are three simple tenses:

PRESENT TENSE (action is happening now)
PAST TENSE (action has already happened)
FUTURE TENSE (action has yet to happen)

Most novels are written in PAST TENSE, with an increasing number showing up in PRESENT TENSE.

There are three perfect tenses:

PRESENT PERFECT TENSE
PAST PERFECT TENSE
FUTURE PERFECT TENSE

The above tenses are used in the context of the three simple tenses, to clarify when certain actions occurred in relationship to other actions.  I'll save the perfect tenses for a separate post.

As a writer, it's IMPERATIVE that you understand all six tenses.

Here's the basic message:  You've got to nail the tense of your story and STICK WITH IT.  I can't tell you how often I've read the work of "newbies" who seem to have no grasp on basic verb tenses.  Just a few weeks ago, I read the opening of a fantasy novel in which the tense flipped back and forth between past and present tense.  Constantly.

I pointed out to the author (ever so gently) that he had a tendency to switch tenses.  I lightly suggested that his writing needed some "basic training."

His response sounded something like this:  "Yeah, some other people said something about the way I switched between past and present tense."

Um, hello?  TENSE IS IMPORTANT!  You can't ground your readers in a story that doesn't have any sense of time.

Try this:

Melodia sank to her knees and wept.  Her village was gone, her sword was broken, her comrades missing.  She didn't know what to do.


A crash sounds in the distance.  Melodia gasps and spits out her chewing gum.


"Who's there?" she called.


No one answers.


Silently, she creeps to the edge of the forest, where she discovers several naked hippos dancing.  She tiptoes through the trees to get a better look.


The hippos screamed in embarrassment and trampled her to death.


Yes, it's a totally dumb example.  But what makes it hard to follow is the constant tense-switching.

Verb tense is one of those things you simply have to grasp.  And use correctly. ALL THE TIME.

More on verbs another day.  (Don't you just love verbs??)

The Basics: The Appositive

Today we're hitting upon one of my biggest-biggest-biggest pet peeves--namely, unnecessary commas around single-word appositives.

But let's start at the beginning.

What's an appositive?


An appositive is a noun or pronoun used with another noun or pronoun to identify or explain it.

Appositives are easy to find because they ALWAYS directly follow the noun or pronoun they're identifying or explaining.  You use them all the time, even if you never knew what they were called.

Examples:

Mrs. Twitch, the tenth grade science teacher, has a blue wart on her chin.

In the above sentence, the tenth grade science teacher identifies Mrs. Twitch.  It's an appositive.  And because it is made up of more than one word, it needs to be set off by commas.  ALWAYS.

My dog Stinkypaw caught a flying raccoon.

Here comes the pet peeve:  NINETY-NINE PERCENT OF WRITERS WILL UNABASHEDLY PUT COMMAS AROUND "Stinkypaw."  And it's WRONG.  The commas are totally unnecessary and serve nothing more than to clutter the sentence.

Look how crowded this is:

My dog, Stinkypaw, caught a flying raccoon.   <------ AAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!

*composes self*

I don't honestly know what the compulsion is among writerkind to put commas around single-word appositives.  And it's everywhere--newspaper articles, blog posts, published novels.

Take note.  After a while, it'll pop out at you.  And, hopefully, annoy you!

More examples:

Ferdinand, my husband, is a bull fighter.  (CORRECT)
My husband, Ferdinand, is a bull fighter.  (INCORRECT! Ferdinand is a single word--no commas needed.)
My husband Ferdinand is a bull fighter.  (CORRECT)

Sheepy, Shiela's pet sheep, is sheepish.  (CORRECT)
Shiela's pet sheep, Sheepy, is sheepish.  (INCORRECT!  Sheepy is a single word--no commas needed.)
Shiela's pet sheep Sheepy is sheepish.  (CORRECT)


Got it? Awesome!

The Basics: Manuscript Formatting

As requested in last week's comment boxes, we're going to chat about formatting.

MECHANICS:

The basics are simple:  Double-spaced, 12-point font, normal margins.  I like to start each new chapter 10 lines down, but you'll hear different schools of thought on that.

As for italics:  Use them.  Old school thought says "convert them to underlines."  But in this age of advanced word processing, that's no longer necessary.

PARAGRAPH RULES:

There are two things that warrant the start of a new paragraph:

CHANGE OF TOPIC, ACTION, SCENE

and

NEW DIALOGUE

Dialogue tends to trip people up sometimes.  The basic rule is that EVERY TIME somebody new speaks, it's a new paragraph.  Period.

Beats go with the person who is speaking, NOT in the paragraph before or after the dialogue.

EXAMPLE:

"I hate you."

Mary fiddled with her top button.  Wouldn't look at Daryll to save her life.  He sighed.

"At least I know where I stand."  Mary looked up as he turned away.

"And don't come back."

The above example is ALL WRONG.  Mary's beats belong with Mary's dialogue, and Daryll's beats belong with HIS dialogue.

CORRECT:

"I hate you."  Mary fiddled with her top button.  Wouldn't look at Daryll to save her life.  

He sighed.  "At least I know where I stand."  

Mary looked up as he turned away.  "And don't come back."

There are also times when, for the sake of cleanliness, it makes sense to start a new paragraph even though the same person is talking.  I'm especially referring to situations where there is a lot of beat action going on after the initial words are spoken.

EXAMPLE:

"My chicken exploded."  Juliet burst into tears, the grisly scene playing itself over and over in her brain.  She felt Greg's pimply arms go round her, tasted the saltiness of her snot as she rubbed trembling palms across her face.  It was hard enough facing life without red beets; the exploding chicken threatened to undo her.  Destroy her.  She buried her face in Greg's AC/DC tee shirt and wished it didn't smell like sauerkraut.  "I'm sorry I wouldn't marry you," she whispered.

In the above example, the final line of dialogue would work just as well in its own paragraph.  It's correct the way it is, but it would be cleaner -- and have more emphasis -- if it were separate.

"My chicken exploded."  Juliet burst into tears, the grisly scene playing itself over and over in her brain.  She felt Greg's pimply arms go round her, tasted the saltiness of her snot as she rubbed trembling palms across her face.  It was hard enough facing life without red beets; the exploding chicken threatened to undo her.  Destroy her.  She buried her face in Greg's AC/DC tee shirt and wished it didn't smell like sauerkraut.  

"I'm sorry I wouldn't marry you," she whispered.

FINALLY, A QUICK NOTE ON PUNCTUATION:

Punctuation goes INSIDE the double quotes of dialogue:

"I love you," Vladimir said.

Not

"I love you", Vladimir said.

Quotes INSIDE quotes should look like this:

"What does 'sort-of girlfriend' mean, exactly?"

If they're at the end of the sentence, they should look like this:

"I'm not in favor of your little 'plan'," Huffy said.

Also? It's okay to have a small desktop reference for this sort of thing, until you don't need it anymore.  I adore Lynn Truss's EATS, SHOOTS, AND LEAVES for basic comma and apostrophe wisdom.  And all writers should own a copy of THE ELEMENTS OF STYLE.

GRAMMAR GIRL is pretty awesome, too.  

And there you have it -- this is as basic as it gets!  Hope it's helpful.

The Basics: Possessive Pronouns With Gerunds

This is a fine-tuning sort of grammar lesson.  As in, this sort of error is easily overlooked, only glaring to those of us who know better.

But writers should MASTER their native language. (I really believe this. I do!) So here's the deal:

GERUND:  A verbal (verb-form-that-is-not-being-used-as-a-verb) that ends in -ING. In short, it's a verb that's been made into a noun by adding -ING.

Writing brings me great joy.  (WRITING = subject, which means it's a noun. But its real name is "gerund.")

So.  What about sentences that have a gerund modified by a pronoun?

INCORRECT:  I was annoyed by him arriving late.
CORRECT:  I was annoyed by his arriving late.

In the above example, ARRIVING is the object of the preposition BY.  Which makes it a NOUN (because objects are always nouns or pronouns.)  But its real name is GERUND -- a verb ending in -ING that is being used as a noun.

Now.  If it's a NOUN, and we're saying to whom it BELONGS, that dictates the use of the POSSESSIVE NOUN OR PRONOUN.

(To whose arriving late are we referring?  To HIS arriving late.)

That's why the second example is correct.  The possessive pronoun HIS tells us WHOSE "arriving late" is annoying me.

HIM, on the other hand, is an OBJECTIVE PRONOUN.  That is, it's a pronoun that's used as an object in a sentence.  NOT to modify a gerund or any other substantive.

CORRECT EXAMPLES OF OBJECTIVE PRONOUN USAGE:

Please give the manuscript to him.
I would like to sit with them.
Beth stood behind me in line.
The audience laughed at us.

Capiche?

Examples are the best way to learn, so here are some more right-and-wrongs for modifying gerunds:

INCORRECT:  Are you angry at me singing off key?
CORRECT:  Are you angry at my singing off key?

INCORRECT:  Lulu was embarrassed by him acting goofy in the restaurant.
CORRECT:  Lulu was embarrassed by his acting goofy in the restaurant.

INCORRECT:  Brutus the Blogger was saddened by them always leaving negative comments.
CORRECT: Brutus the Blogger was saddened by their always leaving negative comments.

INCORRECT:  The petulant writer lamented us hating her terrible novel.
CORRECT:  The petulant writer lamented our hating her terrible novel.

Got it? Good!

Side note:  I learned this in eighth grade as part of the "gifted program."  (Insert eyeroll here.)  Three of us--the Gifted--sat at a round table in the back of English class with a young, balding dude who handed out copies of Edgar Allen Poe and taught us about using possessive pronouns with gerunds.  I'm not sure what the connection between Poe and grammar was, but I do know I've never forgotten the pronoun thing.

I still don't understand why the whole class didn't learn it, though. There's nothing particularly "gifted" about a possessive pronoun.

Ah, well. Consider yourself gifted!

The Basics: Dangling Prepositions

"Who are you going with?"

"Which box did you put it in?"

"Who's the letter addressed to?"

Do the above sound perfectly correct to you?  Well, they're not.  They're certainly accepted in everyday speech, and it's fine if your characters talk that way.  But each of the above is technically incorrect, because each one ends with a preposition devoid of its object.  In short, it "dangles."

(Side note:  If you were never forced to memorize your prepositions, DO IT NOW.  I had to memorize them in seventh grade, and I've never forgotten them.)

When using prepositions, they must always -- ALWAYS -- be followed by their objects.  They may not stand alone.  (Remember, too, that certain prepositions can be used as other parts of speech, so it's important to understand HOW they're being used before assuming they're prepositions.)

Here is the CORRECT way to write the three examples above:

"With whom are you going?"  (Preposition WITH followed by its object WHOM)

"In which box did you put it?"  (Preposition IN followed by its object BOX [which = modifier])

"To whom is the letter addressed?"  (Preposition TO followed by its object WHOM)

My above examples are all interrogative (questions), which doesn't need to be the case for this rule to apply:

"I'll let you know for whom to ask at the front door."  (Preposition FOR followed by its object WHOM)

Got it?

And as an added bonus, here are the prepositions for you to memorize.  *grin*

aboard
about
above
across
after
against
along
among
around
at

before
behind
below
beneath
beside
between
beyond
but
by

down
during

except

for
from

in
into

like

near

of
off
on
onto
over

past

since

through
throughout
to
toward

under
underneath
until
unto
up
upon

with
within
without

The Basics: The Muddy, Meandering Middle

There isn't anything SPECIFIC I'm addressing today.  Really, this is more of a warning about one of the biggest pitfalls in novel writing -- particularly by those with less experience.  It's the dreaded muddy, meandering middle.

Sometimes it's really easy to come up with a SUPER inciting event.  We're all, "Wow, what if THIS happens, and it leads to THIS! I mean, WHOA!!"

Sometimes it's really easy to come up with an amazing, satisfying ending that began with our super inciting event.  "WOW! It'll all explode and come together JUST LIKE THIS!"

Thus, armed with an amazing beginning, an amazing ending, and some ideas in between, we write the novel.  Heck, we might even have an OUTLINE first.  (Well, not if we're ME, we won't.)

But somehow along the jeweled way, the middle of our story loses focus.  It meanders.  Stumbles blindly along. Rambles about nothing. Expounds on minutia.

In short, it's a train wreck.

And honestly? It's more common than you might think.  More often than not, the author is the last one to realize there's a problem. But when crits come back with comments like, "Huh?" Well, you've got a problem.

So here are some important things to think about:

1.  MOTIVATION  Everything your characters say and do needs clear motivation behind it.  If, for instance, your villain is motivated by an insatiable need for revenge against your main character for stealing his girlfriend, then everything this villain does is going to be motivated by that.  Everything he does will MAKE SENSE.  Without clear motivation, characters meander.  And then the whole story does the same.

2.  LOGIC  This has everything to do with story arc.  Event A needs to lead logically to Event B and so on.  When your story devolves into a series of (albeit brilliant) non-related events, your arc is broken.  Logic is also directly related to MOTIVATION, because a character's motivation makes his actions logical.

3.  GOALS  Your characters--good guys and bad guys both--need clear goals.  And especially from the viewpoint of the main character.  If your MC doesn't know EXACTLY what he wants, EXACTLY what he's doing, and EXACTLY why...well, he's not going to propel the story forward.  At worst, he will utterly confuse the reader, or cause the reader to lose interest.  We can't root for a MC if we don't know WHY we're rooting.  Without clear goals, we won't have a clear story trajectory.

4.  PLOT POINTS--CLIMAX--RESOLUTION  The story tension should build via a series of logically placed events, culminating in a climax that is exciting AND believable.  The tension shouldn't let up until the wind-down at the end, where we get our happily-ever-after (or not).  A quick search on line will reveal a wealth of information, including all sorts of cool graphs and pictures, that will help you *see* the basic shape of a story.  It's fairly fail-proof.

I guess this was more specific than I realized it would be!  Bottom line?  GET GOOD CRIT PARTNERS.  A slumping middle-of-the-story is a diagnosis that will come from fresh, unbiased eyes.  And if the diagnosis does come? Don't despair. MUDDY, MEANDERING MIDDLES ARE REPAIRABLE!

There you have it.  Nothing's impossible to fix when you put your mind to it.

The Basics: The Passive Protagonist

It seems obvious--a protagonist should be strong, propelling his or her action forward by decisions and actions born from motives and goals that make sense.

Yet writing a passive protagonist seems to be one of the insidious traps that writers-in-training (and even writers-with-lots-more-experience) fall into.

Recently, I read a YA novel in which the protagonist pretty much waited around for others to tell her what to do.  Mind you, it wasn't that blatant.  She had strong emotions, so she didn't seem passive.  But when it came right down to it, she didn't really do anything, so I never really cheered for her.

She allowed a tough-girl character to lead her around, and didn't demand answers when the girl refused to answer simple questions (such as, "Where are we going?").

She followed her (jerky) boyfriend around and didn't argue when he had questionable behavior (like getting drunk and sort of forgetting about her at a party).

She had hard questions she needed to ask certain people, and she never really came out and ASKED them.

You're probably nodding your head as you're reading this, but you'd be surprised how easy it is to write protagonists this way.  We make things *happen* to them, which makes us think that things are all kinds of exciting.  Except, when things are happening to our protagonist without any definitive action from him, we've got a passive protagonist.

Boring.  Non-cheerable.

So, what to do?

Well, take a hard look at important scenes in your story--major plot points, revelations, twists, etc. What is your protagonist DOING? Following someone else's lead?  Running away?  Waiting for instructions? Asking for help? Engaging in long, mind-numbing internal dialogue?

Or is he DOING something? Is he asking hard questions? Demanding answers? Is he making a hard decision and sticking to it? Running into the thick of the fray? Killing someone? Saving someone's life? Saying "no" when everyone expects him to say "yes"? Or visa versa?

A protagonist doesn't need to be a superhero (unless, yanno, you've written a superhero story), and, in fact, won't be believable if you try to make him into one. But he's got to be bigger than life in the sense that he propels the action--makes the choices--brings on his destiny.  Nobody wants to read the story of a mamby-pamby wallflower.  (And even if your story is about a wallflower who succeeds against all odds, you can still make him ACTIVE instead of PASSIVE--by giving him the actions that propel the story, instead of following the supporting characters and all their shenanigans.)

So revisit your protagonist! Make sure you've written a character for whom we WANT to cheer. Who draws us in and makes us think, "Why don't I think of things like that?"  Not someone who climbs down the fire escape because her best friend told her to.

Got it? Now go make sure your main character is positively kick-butt!

The Basics: Antecedents and Pronoun Placement

You're dying to talk about pronouns some more, right?

Actually, this one's pretty easy to cover.  It has more to do with clarity than with grammar, though there's a bit of grammar involved, too.

Here it is:  A misplaced pronoun causes confusion.  That is, the random use of "he" or "she" or "they" when the reader has no idea who he, she, or they might be.

Pronouns always have what's called an antecedent.  An antecedent is that which comes before.  So the antecedent is the word (usually a proper noun) that comes before the subsequent pronouns that refer to it.

To wit:

Deborah burst through the door.  She realized at once she was in the wrong bathroom.

Deborah is the antecedent for both uses of she above.  Without the "Deborah" in the first sentence, we would not know who "she" was.

Note that the antecedent is not necessarily found in the same sentence as the pronouns that refer to it.

Pretty clear, right?  Things start to get muddy, though, when there are more than one character in a scene, and the hes and shes begin to proliferate.  That's when we have to be especially careful with pronoun placement.

For instance:

Maria stared at the woman on the porch.  She raised her hand to her left nostril in the ancient greeting, hoping she would understand.

In the above, there are two antecedents:  Maria and the woman.  When we get to the second sentence, we don't know if the first "she" refers to Maria or to the woman.  Which one is raising her hand to her left nostril?  And then, of course, we don't know to whom the second "she" is referring, either.  The entire thing is unclear.

In this instance, rewriting is probably your best option, because you don't ever want to start two sentences in a row with the same word:

Maria stared at the woman on the porch.  Maria raised her hand to her....  (You see my point.)

Instead:

Maria stared at the woman on the porch while raising her hand to her left nostril in the ancient greeting. She hoped the woman would understand.

Another tricky business is dialogue tags.  There are times when "he" or "she" can be perfectly clear.  There are other times, however, when we may not know who is actually speaking.  So be careful with that.

It comes down to asking yourself, "Am I being clear?"  It's easy to forget, sometimes, that we know EXACTLY who we're talking about, but the reader does not.  So be extra careful in the placement of your pronouns, and extra picky when you go back to edit your work.  Any time you've got a sentence with only pronouns in it, go back and FIND THE ANTECEDENT.  Does it come DIRECTLY BEFORE the pronoun?  (Note:  That doesn't mean it the word right in front.  It means the NOUN or PROPER NOUN directly before the pronoun.)  If it doesn't, your pronoun reference is most likely unclear.

The Basics: Singular-Ending-In-S and Plural Possessives

Ready for some more apostrophe fun?  Let's talk about possessives some more.

1.  Singular nouns that end in "s"


It tends to confuse people when a singular noun ends in "s" but needs to show possession.  Often, the temptation is to simply stick a dangling apostrophe at the end of the word.  The CORRECT thing to do, however, is to add the apostrophe-s to the end of the word, just as you would if the word did NOT end in an S:

• Rufus's backpack   NOT Rufus' backpack
• the boss's wife  NOT the boss' wife

There are 2 notable exceptions:  It is generally accepted that JESUS' and MOSES' are correct possessive forms, simply because Jesus's and Moses's sound like you've got a speech impediment.

2.  Plural possessives


A plural possessive is a word that shows ownership by more than one person.  Here are the rules:

If the plural noun ends in an "s", simply add the apostrophe at the end.

• girls' (belonging to more than 1 girl)
• teachers' (belonging to more than 1 teacher)
• friends' (belonging to more than 1 friend)
• foxes' (belonging to more than 1 fox)

If the plural noun has its own, special form, add an apostrophe-s the way you would with a single noun.

• children's
• women's
• firemen's
• brothers-in-law's

That about covers it.  I highly recommend Lynne Truss's Eats, Shoots, and Leaves for an entertaining and definitive source of apostrophe (and comma) wisdom.

The Basics: Possessive Pronouns

Time to call out another extremely common mistake:

ITS vs. IT'S

It boils down to a simple rule.  Which is:  POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS NEVER USE APOSTROPHES.

Admittedly, this rule means nothing to you if you don't know what a possessive pronoun is.  So let's spend a minute on this:

POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS are pronouns that show ownership.  As in, something BELONGS to someone or something.

In a sentence, a possessive pronoun acts as an ADJECTIVE, because it will always modify a noun:

HER novel
THEIR team
MY chocolate

So, here they are, in all their glory:

First person:

MY, MINE
OUR, OURS

Second person:

YOUR, YOURS

Third person:

HIS, HERS, ITS, THEIR, THEIRS

There it is, right in the middle of the last list:  ITS.  Meaning, "belonging to it."  NO APOSTROPHE.

NONE of the possessive pronouns have apostrophes.  NOT EVER.

So, what is IT'S all about?

IT'S is a CONTRACTION that stands for IT IS.  The apostrophe in a contraction always takes the place of missing letters.  In this instance, it takes the place of the letter i.

IT'S raining today.  (Meaning:  IT IS raining today.)

IT'S hard writing novels.  (Meaning:  IT IS hard writing novels.)

Clear?

If so, you'll see why it's ridiculous to say:

The baby fell asleep in it's crib.

The meaning of which is:  The baby fell asleep in IT IS crib.

And there's your litmus test.  Since IT'S always means IT IS, check by substituting IT IS for the IT'S in your sentence.  If it doesn't make sense, YOU'RE WRONG.

Because...POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS NEVER GET APOSTROPHES.

I understand why it's confusing.  "Normal" nouns get an apostrophe-S to connote ownership:

Authoress's chocolate
Lizzy's chocolate
Mad's black belt

But if you can remember that POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS NEVER GET APOSTROPHES, you will never use IT'S when you're supposed to use ITS.

Capiche?

The Basics: The Subjunctive Mood

Did you know that verbs have moods?

Yes, they do.  Which makes me feel better about my OWN moods. *grin*

So one of my (many) pet peeves is the misuse of the SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.  In fact, I'll bet you've all made this mistake countless times, both in your writing and in your speaking.  The misuse is so common that most people don't even realize it's a mistake.

But you are all WRITERS.  So you want to do things right.  Right?

So.  I give you THE SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD:

Basically, the subjunctive mood is used when something is being declared with a WISH or a DOUBT.  In other words, if the outcome is uncertain, our verb gets MOODY.  The word "subjunctive", in fact, means DOUBTFUL.

So if the verb in your sentence has "IF" or "WISH" before it, it needs to be in the subjunctive mood.

As always, examples work best:

*WRONG* He would be taller if he was older.
*CORRECT* He would be taller if he were older.

*WRONG* I wish I was a better writer.
*CORRECT* I wish I were a better writer.

*WRONG* If it rains tomorrow, our plans will be ruined.
*CORRECT* If it should rain tomorrow, our plans will be ruined.

*WRONG* He spoke as if he was the only one in the room.
*CORRECT* He spoke as if he were the only one in the room.

*WRONG* If you are quiet, you will hear the baby birds.
*CORRECT* If you be quiet, you will hear the baby birds.

*WRONG* If it is hot, we'll go swimming.
*CORRECT* If it be hot, we'll go swimming.

Okay, I'll admit it.  The last one sounds like pirate speak.  I mean, who TALKS that way?  Yet technically it's correct.  One hundred percent.  (However, if you make your characters talk that way, I'll have to glue your fingers together for a while.)

But really, the most common error is the was/were confusion.  The rule is:  If "if" or "wish" comes before the verb, than it is "were" and NOT "was".

Clear as mud? I wish there were a simpler way to put it!

The Basics: More on Point of View

Last week's Basics focused on avoiding POV errors.  As a response to some of the comments left, I thought it might be a good idea this week to better define the common POVs.  (With the constant thought, however, to never get hung up on terminology.)

FIRST PERSON


First person narrative is written with "I" or "we" and the narrator is a player in the story.  Everything in the novel is filtered through this character's eyes, and there is no way the character can know the thoughts of other characters unless these characters choose to share them.

First person narrative can be written in present (I run through the corridor) or past tense (I ran through the corridor.

THIRD PERSON, LIMITED


Third person narrative is written with "he", "she", and "they."  The narrator, while not a player in the story, remains close inside the main character's head at all times.  We experience the story from "inside" the main character, but he is not actually telling the story.

This is also referred to as "THIRD PERSON, CLOSE" and "THIRD PERSON, SUBJECTIVE."

Third person limited narrative can be written in present (He grabs her by the arm) or past tense (He grabbed her by the arm).

THIRD PERSON, OBJECTIVE


This particular voice is better suited for non-fiction writing (newspaper articles, essays, etc.).  The narrator is uninvolved in the narrative, maintaining a distant and objective view throughout.

THIRD PERSON, OMNISCIENT


In omniscient narrative, the narrator knows everything that's going on, including the thoughts of all the characters.  In recent decades--particularly in YA and MG literature--this viewpoint seems to have fallen out of favor, though historically it was popular, evident in the novels of Jane Austen, Charles Dickens, and other classics.

Classic fairy tales are written omnisciently as well.  Crack one open and you'll see what I mean.

[It's important to remember that the novel, as an art form, isn't static.  In order to be viable in the modern market, our writing needs to reflect what is acceptable and preferred in our own era.  That doesn't mean the omniscient viewpoint should never be used (for instance, the first chapter of each Harry Potter book is written in third person omniscient, but then switches to the inside of Harry's head, which makes it third person, close).  But by and large, today's readers (YA/MG) want to be inside the main character's head.]

One can also write in first person omniscient, but I'd say that's fairly rare, and probably not something you want to try while you're cutting your writing teeth.

Anyway.  We could go into a lot more detail about different voices and voice/tense combination, but I don't really think it's necessary.  In the end, it's probably going to be wise for you to stick with third person limited, whether you choose to write in present or past tense.

While you're writing, ask yourself, "Would my character KNOW this?  Can he SEE this right now?"  If it's not humanly possibly in the current scene, then you probably have a POV error.  And they are usually easily fixed.

That's that!  Next week we'll get back to some good, juicy grammar. *grin*

The Basics: Point of View

Funny, the things you just don't know when you write your first novel.  After I wrote mine, I handed it to my husband, who gave it to a friend of his to read.  (My first official "beta reader" and I didn't know it!)  This guy was an avid fantasy fan and voracious reader, so I was very interested in his opinions on my Masterpiece, which happened to be fantasy.

(I should, like, pay him for the pain of that experience.)

Anyway, he mentioned something in his notes about being in different heads when people were talking, and I really didn't know what he meant.  So, like any intelligent aspiring author, I ignored him.

Then I sent some chapters to a WRITER friend (different animal, that).  Who promptly told me I had point of view (POV) problems, and recommended I get myself a copy of Self Editing for Fiction Writers (I did).

Yeah.  I had no idea what it meant to "stay inside my protagonist's head."  Even tried to defend myself a few times while this guy was pointing out my errors.  (I shudder to remember.)

So what, exactly is POINT OF VIEW?  And why is it so important?

POINT OF VIEW (POV) is the story as viewed (or experienced) by YOUR MAIN CHARACTER(S) or WHOEVER IS TELLING THE STORY. In the modern novel, it's standard practice to give the POV to your protagonist, whether you're writing in first or third person.  (That's "I" or "he/she".)  Any time you write anything outside of this intimate experience, you're violating the point of view, and the writing either is rendered unclear or isn't logical.

Examples are the best way to learn, so here we go:

1.  Junebug is the main character:

"Oh my gosh."  Junebug turned ten shades of red as he stood in the bathroom doorway.  "I didn't know anyone was in here."

Since the story is being told from Junebug's perspective, HE WOULD NOT SEE HIS FACE TURNING TEN SHADES OF RED.  He is INSIDE his face, not looking at it.  It's a POV problem.

Correct:

"Oh my gosh."  Junebug's face grew hot as he stood in the bathroom doorway.  "I didn't know anyone was in here."

2.  Celia is the main character.  Dave is the boy she likes.

"No one's asked me to the dance."  Celia lowered her eyes.


Dave's tee-shirt was sticking to his armpits and his breath was coming too fast.  It was like he fell to pieces every time Celia talked to him.  But he couldn't tell her that.  He cleared his throat.


"Will you go with me?" he asked.


In the above example, we jump right out of Celia's head and into Dave's, where we should never be.  First of all, Celia has lowered her eyes, which means she's not looking at Dave.  So even if his sticky armpits were visible, she wouldn't be looking at them right now.  The paragraph also talks about what he's feeling on the inside, and Celia wouldn't have any idea about that, either, unless she's some sort of creepy mind-reader.  So the entire paragraph is a POV error.

Correct:

"No one's asked me to the dance."  Celia lowered her eyes, listening to Dave's too-fast breathing.  She wished she hadn't mentioned the dance.


Dave cleared his throat.  "Will you go with me?"


3.  Teresa ("I") is the main character.

"Here ya go, Teresa."


Roland handed me the keys and stuck his hand back into his pocket.  Satisfied, he flashed a smile I'd grown to hate.  My eyes reflected the annoyance that never seemed to go away.


"It'd be nice if you'd check with me next time," I said.


The middle paragraph has two egregious POV errors.  First of all, Teresa would not know that Roland is satisfied.  She might observe satisfaction on his face, or perceive it in his voice, but to simply say that Roland is "satisfied" is a POV error.  Secondly, Teresa cannot know what her eyes are reflecting.  She can FEEL the annoyance, but she can't know how it's being translated on her face.

Correct:

"Here ya go, Teresa."

Roland handed me the keys and stuck his hand back into his pocket.  Smug satisfaction laced the smile he flashed.  So annoying.

"It'd be nice if you'd check with me next time," I said.


And there you have it.  It's a matter of being careful as you write.  Ask yourself:  Can my main character KNOW this?  Can he SEE this?  Can he HEAR this?  Everything your main character responds to has to be something he CAN respond to.  And if it's his own facial expression or something that only another character could know, then it's a POV error.

Interestingly, novels from earlier eras tend to use a more OMNISCIENT point of view, instead of sticking inside the protagonist's head.  Jane Austen, my favorite novelist, doesn't tell Pride and Prejudice, for instance, solely from Lizzy Bennett's viewpoint.  She pretty much jumps into the heads of whomever is in the current scene.  In the hands of a skilled writer, this can work just fine.  But I would caution against attempting this for two reasons:  One, it's a difficult thing to pull off, and can end up confusing your readers.  Two, modern readers are used to the modern POV, which is limited to the protagonist (as in the above examples).

So as you write, remember that the story is unfolding AS YOUR MAIN CHARACTERS LIVES AND PERCEIVES it.  Make sure everything you say is coming from inside his head.

And don't ever ask to see my first novel.  Just sayin'.

The Basics: Too Many Modifiers

Last week, we talked about misplaced modifiers.

Okay.  Last week, I totally forgot to post The Basics. So two weeks ago we talked about misplaced modifiers.

Modifiers are a double-edged sword:  We need them.  And too many of them will weaken our writing.

For those of you who need more clarification on what, exactly, a modifier is:

Modifiers are words that BELONG TO other words.  They fall into several categories:

ARTICLES:  the, a, an  These are the only modifiers you can never do without.  (They fall under the umbrella of "adjective," but it makes more sense to list them separately.)

ADJECTIVES: They modify nouns and pronouns.

ADVERBS:  They modify verbs, adverbs, and adjectives.

Adjectives and adverbs can present as single words, phrases, or clauses:

The red bird fell off the perch. (single-word adjective)
The bird on the end fell off the perch. (adjective phrase)
The bird, which seemed a bit drunk, fell off the perch. (adjective clause)

The man ate hastily. (single-word adverb)
The man ate with gusto. (adverb phrase)
The man ate while his wife danced the cha-cha. (adverb clause)

So, how can too many modifiers, which clearly add spice to our writing, be dangerous?

The long and short of it is this:

When it comes to ADVERBS, there is almost always a STRONG VERB that would better serve your sentence than a VERB+ADVERB combination.

To wit:

She ate hungrily. (weak)
She devoured. (strong)

He cried noisily. (weak)
He wailed. (strong)

Devin placed the box firmly on the table.  (weak)
Devin slammed the box on the table. (strong)

Also, I think it's a common failing (at least I find this in my own early drafts) to use adverb phrases when we really don't need anything at all:

Sheila noticed an empty place beside Treela, so she hurried over and sat down at the table. 


The prepositional phrase at the table isn't necessary because we already know she's sitting down at a table.  The context of the story (and most likely the sentence or two that would precede this one) would let us know that.

(I encourage you to check your own work for extraneous adverb phrases! I tend to delete a lot of these when I am editing.)

Adverbs of degree, such as very, quite, extremely, etc., are particularly to be avoided.  These adverbs modify adjectives or other adverbs, and it's a better idea to use a stronger adjective or verb to get your idea across:

The princess was extremely pretty. (weak)
The princess was beautiful. (strong)

He laughed very obnoxiously. (weak)
He guffawed. (strong)

As for adjectives?  Of course we need to know when something is cold or frightening or blue or delicious or creepy or fascinating or dead.  But we need to choose our adjectives carefully, or we'll end up with prose that is six shades of purple:

Lorenda reached her long, slender fingers toward the ethereal, undulating, purple, silken strands that draped from the dark, rough-hewn, Romanesque archway.

*grin*

I won't insult your intelligence by correcting the above.

She stroked his cheek with tentative, shaking fingers. (weak)
She stroked his cheek with tremulous fingers. (strong)

Oh, and a word about your friendly neighborhood thesaurus: DON'T USE IT UNLESS YOU ARE SERIOUSLY STUCK ON FINDING A PARTICULAR WORD.  It's way too tempting to replace a common, easily understood adjective or adverb with something that ends up sounding ridiculous.

A faint blush tinged her cheeks.

Not:

A faint polychromasia tinged her cheeks.

And there you have it.  Choose your words carefully.  A STRONG VERB over a verb+adverb combination whenever you can.  A STRONG ADJECTIVE over an adverb+adjective combination almost always.

Now dive into your manuscripts and see what you can kill.

The Basics: Misplaced Modifiers

I know you're REALLY excited to know that this week's Basics is a grammar lesson!

Know what? Grammar is important.  You may hate it, but if you don't have it mastered, it's going to water down your writing.  Absolutely.

Good grammar, when all is said and done, is about CLARITY.  In other words, you want the reader to understand exactly what you are saying. Poor grammar mucks things up.

So, let's jump right in!  See if you can determine what's wrong with the following sentence:

Running down the palace hallway, the orb leaped from my hands and exploded in a shower of sparks.

*Tick. Tock. Tick. Tock*

Time's up!  Here's the answer:

RUNNING DOWN THE HALLWAY is an ADJECTIVE PHRASE that is supposed to be modifying the subject of the sentence.  (The subject is always a noun or pronoun, which is why it will always be modified by an adjective.)  In the above sentence, the subject is ORB.

As in, ORB LEAPED.  (That's the simple subject and simple predicate of the sentence.  Noun plus verb. Are you with me so far?)

Now, the orb was NOT running down the palace hallway.  However, that's EXACTLY what you've got happening in the above sentence!

Here is the correct construction:

Running down the palace hallway, I dropped the orb, which exploded in a shower of sparks.

In the above sentence, the subject is I, which is now correctly modified by the adjective phrase.

Seems obvious, doesn't it? But this is a VERY COMMON ERROR that I see time and time again in the writing of teens AND adults.

Here's another example:

Having told everyone to leave her alone, the ringing phone caught Marlene by surprise.


PHONE is the subject in the above sentence, and I'm fairly certain it didn't tell everyone to leave her alone.

Correct construction:

Having told everyone to leave her alone, Marlene was surprised by the ringing phone.


MARLENE is the subject in the above sentence, and it is correctly modified by the ADJECTIVE PHRASE.

There are all sorts of other ways to misplace modifiers, of course.  But for some reason, this one seems most common.

It also annoys the gajonkies out of me.  A total Writing Pet Peeve, if you will.

And after all is said and done, this particular sentence construction--one that begins with a gerund phrase modifying the subject--SHOULD BE USED SPARINGLY.

In fact, lots of starts-with-gerund sentences in a manuscript is one of the hallmarks of an inexperienced writer.  No, really.  So check your work and make sure it's not proliferated with this sentence construction.

And when you do use it? MAKE SURE IT'S MODIFYING THE CORRECT WORD.

Here is the actual GRAMMAR RULE to follow:

Place an adjective phrase or clause immediately before or after the word that it modifies.


Remember, it's all about clarity.  Nail this rule, and you'll immediately strengthen your sentences.

Unless, of course, you're using TOO MANY modifiers.  But that's a whole separate post...

The Basics: Dorky Dialogue

Last week we talked about the Invisible Said.

Learning to use "said" instead of ridiculous, sometimes-ostentatious alternatives is an important step in crafting clean dialogue.  But if the dialogue itself is stilted, unbelievable, or, well, dorky, it's going to throw us out of the story.

Think about it.  If a character in a novel sounds like he's reading cue cards published by a local chapter of Thesaurus R Us, nobody's going to BELIEVE that character.  They might even laugh.  Or at least roll their eyes.

If we want our characters to be REAL, they need to talk like real people.

Wanna know the best way to figure out whether your characters sound dorky? READ YOUR DIALOGUE OUT LOUD. I am utterly and absolutely serious.  I don't care how weird you feel doing it.  Your ears are your friend when it comes to dialogue.

Wanna know the even BETTER best way to figure out whether your characters sound dorky? HAVE SOMEONE ELSE READ YOUR DIALOGUE OUT LOUD TO YOU.

Painful? Yes. Embarrassing?  Most decidedly.  Helpful? Beyond measure.

My dear, darling (longsuffering, glutton-for-punishment...) husband is my number one Picker-Outer of Dorky Dialogue.  Fortunately, as my writing has seasoned, there are fewer and fewer instances where he needs to ridicule something I've written.

Yes.  Ridicule.

Way back in the first draft of a middle grade novel I wrote several years ago, there was a line of dialogue that was so stilted and incomprehensible that Mr. A scribbled it on a piece of paper and STILL QUOTES IT TO THIS DAY.

You're dying to read it:

"Strange, for silence so long unbroken to be disturbed twice in succession."

*pause for effect*

Go ahead.  Read it out loud. Let it roll off your tongue.  And then try to figure out what it means.

Yeah.  It's REALLY BAD.

Of course I defended it at first.  The line was uttered by a merman, after all.  He was supposed to be, yanno, mysterious.

Um.  Mysterious DOES NOT EQUAL unclear.  And you should hear my husband's dramatic renditions of the line.  Belly-laugh inducing.

In fact, I can't tell you how many times I've ended up belly-laughing at my husband's reading of my dorky dialogue.  Feels SO GOOD to laugh.  And then it feels just as good to get rid of the bad dialogue.

So here are some anti-dorky dialogue tips:

1.  PEOPLE OFTEN SPEAK IN SENTENCE FRAGMENTS.

Think about it.  How often do we speak in fully formed, grammatically correct sentences?  Our speech is peppered with phrases, half-thoughts, and single word responses.  Your characters' should do the same.

DORKY:

"Where are we going to go this afternoon?" Marie asked.

"We are going to go to the mall as soon as we have finished lunch," Mother said.  "After the mall, we are going to drive to Aunt Myrtle's house so that we can return the silverware we had borrowed."

NON-DORKY:

"Where are we going?" Marie asked.

"To the mall, right after lunch," Mother said.  "Then we're going to Aunt Myrtle's to return the silverware."

2.  PEOPLE USE CONTRACTIONS.

Unless you're writing a historical novel in which contractions would be inappropriate, it's important to remember that modern people use contractions as a matter of course.

DORKY:

"I do not know what you mean," Sibelius said.  "I was not anywhere near the parking lot, and I would not be surprised if you have imagined the whole thing."

NON-DORKY:

"I don't know what you mean," Sibelius said.  "I wasn't anywhere near the parking lot, and I wouldn't be surprised if you've imagined the whole thing."

3. PEOPLE DON'T GENERALLY TALK IN HUGE CHUNKS OF TEXT.

This is tricky when you've got a lot of information you need to pass on to the reader.  But I think it's important to avoid huge paragraphs spoken by one character, which screams INFODUMP.  Break it up, make the info-sharing happen naturally in the course of conversation.

DORKY:

"As you know," Felixia said, "the fairies and horned bucktooths have coexisted for centuries.  It wasn't until the reign of Fairyqueen Molustinchi'nasa that things turned sour.  The Fairyqueen had decided she wanted to marry Prince Ux, but he ran off with a bucktooth maiden, which didn't sit well with the majority of the fairies, who really loved their queen.  After Prince Ux's mysterious death, which some say was an accident but others say was more nefarious, his half-horned fairytooth son decided he would vie for the Fairyqueen's throne.  His arrogance led to years of strife between the races, which lasts to this day.  And that is why I cannot go with you to Broodshead.  When they see my half-horn, they will know  that I am the blood-spawn of Prince Ux's son."

NON-DORKY:

"I thought the fairies and horned bucktooths used to get along," Samsam said.

"They did," Felixia said.  "But things turned sour during the reign of Fairyqueen Molustinchi'nasa."

"What happened?"

Felixia sighed.  "She fell in love with Prince Ux, but he ran off with a bucktooth maiden.  It didn't sit well with most of the fairies.  And of course, when he turned up dead a few years later, most people believed it wasn't an accident."

"So the fairies and bucktooths blamed each other?"

"Yes," Felixia said.  "But things got really bad when Ux's half-horned fairytooth son showed up, claiming the Fairyqueen's throne.  The fighting went on for years, until he was finally captured and put to death.  But the races have never gotten along since."

Samsam rubbed his thumb along his jawline.  "And that's why you won't come with me to Broodshead."

"I'm sorry.  As soon as they saw my half-horn, they'd know I was the blood-spawn of Prince Ux's son."

4. PEOPLE GENERALLY USE THE SIMPLEST WORDS POSSIBLE

DORKY:

"Can you verify that he was telling the truth?"

NON-DORKY:

"Can you prove that he was telling the truth?"

DORKY:

"Of course I will assist you."

NON-DORKY:

"Of course I'll help."

DORKY:

"I cannot fathom what you are talking about."

NON-DORKY:

"Huh?"

And there you have it.  Bear in mind, too, that each of your characters needs to have his own "voice."  If, when you are reading your dialogue aloud, you can't tell the different between who is talking, then you're going to have to spend some time individualizing each character's speech patterns.

To check yourself:  Cover the dialogue tags, or retype the section on which you're working without any tags or beats.  Can you tell who is speaking with just the bare dialogue?  If not, you might need to revisit the way your characters talk.

Remember this, too:  Dialogue is FUN!  Good dialogue propels the story, engages us in the characters' interactions, and makes the characters REAL.  As you un-dorkify your dialogue, your story will come to life.

Go to it!  Grab a friend, feed her some chocolate, and ask her to read for you.  Get ready to laugh.  Then, get ready to write some really sparkling dialogue!

The Basics: The Invisible "Said"

My husband is not a big reader. (Gasp!) So when his mom handed him a book written by a friend of hers, he was not inclined to read it.  Not even to be polite.

So, naturally, he handed it to me.

Admittedly, I wrinkled my nose.  The book was published by PublishAmerica.  (This is something you never want to do.  Never.)  For the uninitiated, PublishAmerica is a vanity press.  You pay them a lot of money and they print your book.

So I knew immediately that the book had not been professionally edited and would probably...well, stink.

(Disclaimer:  Self publishing is a viable option for authors.  I self-published a non-fiction book before I started writing fiction.  But PublishAmerica is BAD NEWS.  'Nuff said.)

Anyway, I didn't exactly read the book.  I sort of skimmed through.  And, yeah.  It sucked.  I can't comment on the plot, since the skim was just that.  A thin, quick, oh-my-stars-is-this-bad skim.  So I can only comment on the writing.

You know what stuck out the most?  The author's nearly complete avoidance of the word SAID.  As though it were a bad word.

What did I see instead?

She exclaimed.
He retorted.
She shouted.
He declared.
She screamed.
He demanded.

You know.  All the ridiculously over-descriptive words that want to be, simply, "said."

Want to know something else interesting?  The author was a retired English teacher.

I shudder to think of the HUNDREDS of writing students she trained, over the years, to avoid the word "said" in their creative writing.

Here's the thing about the tiny word "said":  It's invisible.  We know the characters in a novel are SPEAKING when we see quotation marks.  We don't need a lot of reminders that that's what they're doing.  "Said", when used sparingly, melts into the background, reminding us gently that, yes, the characters are having a conversation.

That's what it's meant to do.  That's how we need to use it.

TOO MANY SAIDS

Of course, one can overdo.  We don't need to see this:

"I'm so embarrassed," Dee said.
"You should be," Mary said.
"I mean, what was I thinking?" Dee said.
"Exactly," Mary said.
"And he'll probably never talk to me again," Dee said.
"Probably," Mary said.

Yeah.  That's ridiculous, right?  We don't need a "said" after every line of dialogue.  What we DO need is a beat or two.  You know; those little bits that add some action to the exchange, let us know a little more about our characters' state of mind:

Dee pressed her palm against her forehead.  "I'm so embarrassed."
"You should be," Mary said.
"I mean, what was I thinking?"
"Exactly." Mary started toward the exit.
"And he'll probably never talk to me again," Dee said, following.
"Probably."

THE OCCASIONAL USE OF OTHER WORDS

Of course, there are always occasions when a word other than said is called for.  Naturally, you don't want to do this very often.  As in, almost never.  The one exception to "almost never" is the word ASK.  Because when your character needs to ask a question, he is, technically, ASKING and not SAYING.  So you're allowed to write,

"What's bothering you?" he asked.

Other "occasional use" words include:

WHISPER  (When there's absolutely no other way to describe it.)
YELL or SHOUT (When there's absolutely no other way to describe it.)

You get the idea.

In short, be judicious about your use of words-other-than-said.  Sometimes a delicious synonym will be JUST RIGHT for the moment.

"Sleep now," she murmured.

And sometimes a synonym will NOT be delicious.  It will be ridiculous.

"I'm leaving now," she verbalized.

WORDS THAT SHOULD NEVER BE USED BECAUSE THEY ARE HUMANLY IMPOSSIBLE

Another mistake new-ish writers tend to make is to attribute impossible actions to characters in what is yet another avoidance of the beautiful, invisible "said."  For example:

"I don't believe you," he laughed.

One cannot "laugh" the words, "I don't believe you."  Go ahead. Try.

"You're not serious!" she gasped.

Nope.  Gasping an entire sentence isn't something most normal people can do.

"It really hurts," he groaned.

Um, no.  A groan is a low, guttural sound.  He might groan first and THEN speak. But not both at once.

"You're such an idiot!" he guffawed.

Okay.  I'm having too much fun here.

IN SHORT

"Said" is your friend.  Use it without trepidation.  Do not over-use it.  And don't let your English teacher talk you into using six hundred synonyms in order to avoid "said".  With all due respect, that is the worst possible advice on dialogue that she could give you.

Or he.  Not to be sexist or anything.

And now you're ready to write some sparkling dialogue!

Oh, wait.  We'll have to talk about Dorky Dialogue next...