Writing Is Hard.
Sep. 6th, 2009 02:09 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
misslj_authorNo, really, it is. And I say this as someone who can churn out 500-1500 words a day without any problem if I put my mind to it.
But churning it out isn't the issue. Making it good is what makes it hard. You write and then reread to fix up errors and find yourself thinking, 'Hm, how many times have I used this word in this sentence... and I've run out of similies!' Or my other personal favourite, which runs along the lines of 'Holy run-on sentence, Batman!'
I admit I'm the queen of the run-on sentence. I love my sentences and I love words, but I really need to learn to use the full-stop more. I should make an inspirational poster saying 'Be not afraid of the full-stop! The full-stop is your friend.' And for every full-stop I don't use, oh, I abuse the comma. The comma and I have a love/hate relationship, as Rian commented to me a little while ago, it's either a feast or a famine.
I've been to university, I went to one of the top three high schools in my state. I have had an excellent (and varied) education. But part of the education system in Australia in the 70s and 80s was that grammar and basic English were taught specifically in primary school as a framework for further learning. (Primary school, for non-Aussies, is for children between ages 5 and 12.)
Because my primary education was in years pre-internet there was no way that parents could research options for schooling. They had to place their trust in the school their children were going to and hope that the education was satisfactory. Luckily, I got into an excellent high school - by pure accident, I sometimes think - and so I have no doubt that eased my parents minds quite a bit. However, the education I recieved prior to that was sub-par by anyone's standards.
Never have I felt so out of my depth as I did in year 8, the first year of high school. Because what we were taught in primary school was woefully inadequate to any high school education system, I did appallingly in the maths and sciences because I'd had absolutely no prior education in those fields at all - except for multiplication tables, basic adding and subtracting. Science was based on watching a show made for children once a week, which was boring because we didn't understand it. English wasn't much better - spelling and reading comprehension were taught but that was about it. Grammar? Touched on lightly, perhaps once. An old friend from primary school once remarked that "It was more of a glorified daycare center than a school," and he's right.
What saved me from failing English forever was no doubt my love of reading and of writing. I might not be able to tell you what, exactly, an adverb is, but I do know how to form a sentence!
Which brings me back to the original statement: writing is hard.
I'm still in research mode for Broken Wings, a novel with the Archangel Gabriel as the main character. Research mode is lasting longer in this case because of who he is - I don't want to be defending lack of knowledge of a certain point of obscure Orthodoxy theory, for example. Not that this material would go into the story, but I want to be able to have Gabriel sound like an Archangel and not just like a bad tempered, egomaniacal, immortal brat with wings.
My main problem at this point, in preliminary writings, has been his dialogue. Should I write his accent phonetically? Should I just mention that yes, he does sound like a dockworker from London in the 60s living in the present day? Should I do a combination of both? And when I do use certain phonetics, such as 'y' know' or 'an'' or 'this is that and there, right,' etc, should I use the full word or the slang spelling?
Writing is hard. And Gabe's dialogue structure is going to confound me for weeks.
But churning it out isn't the issue. Making it good is what makes it hard. You write and then reread to fix up errors and find yourself thinking, 'Hm, how many times have I used this word in this sentence... and I've run out of similies!' Or my other personal favourite, which runs along the lines of 'Holy run-on sentence, Batman!'
I admit I'm the queen of the run-on sentence. I love my sentences and I love words, but I really need to learn to use the full-stop more. I should make an inspirational poster saying 'Be not afraid of the full-stop! The full-stop is your friend.' And for every full-stop I don't use, oh, I abuse the comma. The comma and I have a love/hate relationship, as Rian commented to me a little while ago, it's either a feast or a famine.
I've been to university, I went to one of the top three high schools in my state. I have had an excellent (and varied) education. But part of the education system in Australia in the 70s and 80s was that grammar and basic English were taught specifically in primary school as a framework for further learning. (Primary school, for non-Aussies, is for children between ages 5 and 12.)
Because my primary education was in years pre-internet there was no way that parents could research options for schooling. They had to place their trust in the school their children were going to and hope that the education was satisfactory. Luckily, I got into an excellent high school - by pure accident, I sometimes think - and so I have no doubt that eased my parents minds quite a bit. However, the education I recieved prior to that was sub-par by anyone's standards.
Never have I felt so out of my depth as I did in year 8, the first year of high school. Because what we were taught in primary school was woefully inadequate to any high school education system, I did appallingly in the maths and sciences because I'd had absolutely no prior education in those fields at all - except for multiplication tables, basic adding and subtracting. Science was based on watching a show made for children once a week, which was boring because we didn't understand it. English wasn't much better - spelling and reading comprehension were taught but that was about it. Grammar? Touched on lightly, perhaps once. An old friend from primary school once remarked that "It was more of a glorified daycare center than a school," and he's right.
What saved me from failing English forever was no doubt my love of reading and of writing. I might not be able to tell you what, exactly, an adverb is, but I do know how to form a sentence!
Which brings me back to the original statement: writing is hard.
I'm still in research mode for Broken Wings, a novel with the Archangel Gabriel as the main character. Research mode is lasting longer in this case because of who he is - I don't want to be defending lack of knowledge of a certain point of obscure Orthodoxy theory, for example. Not that this material would go into the story, but I want to be able to have Gabriel sound like an Archangel and not just like a bad tempered, egomaniacal, immortal brat with wings.
My main problem at this point, in preliminary writings, has been his dialogue. Should I write his accent phonetically? Should I just mention that yes, he does sound like a dockworker from London in the 60s living in the present day? Should I do a combination of both? And when I do use certain phonetics, such as 'y' know' or 'an'' or 'this is that and there, right,' etc, should I use the full word or the slang spelling?
Writing is hard. And Gabe's dialogue structure is going to confound me for weeks.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: Sun, Sep. 6th, 2009 06:58 am (UTC)Rian had lovely suggestions for Gabriel's voice and dialogue structure. I would have given the same advice.
Personally, I can't wait to read this book. Because I know you're going to rock it hardcore.
no subject
Date: Sun, Sep. 6th, 2009 07:16 am (UTC)I think YouTube will be my next port of call in the research gig. I can listen to the vids while doing other things, so that'll work.
Heh, I hope so. I'm getting awfully fond of Gabriel. He's taking over my brain meats!
no subject
Date: Sun, Sep. 6th, 2009 07:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: Sun, Sep. 6th, 2009 07:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: Sun, Sep. 6th, 2009 10:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: Sun, Sep. 6th, 2009 11:53 am (UTC)Using the full stop too much. It leads to sentences that are easily read. The problem with that is the sound of each sentence. The staccato rhythm doesn't suit elegant prose.
Your readers have long attention spans and can cope with a sentence that, because of the elegance of the words and because of the subject that's being discussed in the course of the sentence, by which I mean those things that arevealed not only by what is being discussed but also by how the emotional and psychological strength of the sentence is affected by the choice and order of the words, can coney what you're trying to say.
I will say that if you can't read back what yoy're writing as you write it, these run on sentences become a dangerous thing to mess with :(
Lastly, dialogue is reported speech and so if it's between the quote marks, represent it with slang and contractions all the way. It's not so badly removed from English (sytandard Egnlish) that it would sound some of the phoneticattempts of the 19th century to reproduce dialects.
There's also a good book called The Atlast of English Dialects which might be helpful.
And really lastly, o you still have my Office 2007? :)
no subject
Date: Sun, Sep. 6th, 2009 12:40 pm (UTC)Ah yes, good point. I'll check out that book too, thanks!
I do, yus. I'm hip-deep in bills atm, I'll post it back when they're paid is that okay? Thanks heaps for that, muchly appreciated.
no subject
Date: Sun, Sep. 6th, 2009 12:51 pm (UTC)No hurry for the Office. I just wanted to keep an eye on where it was.