A dialog question

[PennLady]

Book recommendation

I'd also suggest "Self-Editing for Fiction Writers" by Rinni Browne and Dave King (well, Browne and King at any rate). They deal with punctuation, grammar, dialog -- together and separately. I found it very helpful. Another book that's fun to read is Stephen King's "On Writing;" excellent anecdotes and some good advice as well.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Writing is one of those things everyone feels competent and confident of doing regardless of no experience and no knowledge, and its a rare student who profits from advice.

 

[sr71plt]

King's On Writing is certainly a good book for writers to read but it doesn't cover a thing on technical issues such as how to write or format dialogue.

 

[_Lynn_]

Writing is one of those things everyone feels competent and confident of doing regardless of no experience and no knowledge, and its a rare student who profits from advice.

I'm rare.

 

[sr71plt]

and its a rare student who profits from advice.

Sounds nice, but, as usual, it's just one of the arrows in the scapegoating quiver. If it were true most the bridges engineers built would fall down and you'd stand a much better than average chance of coming out of an operation to remove your appendix with one less leg instead.

Education is profiting from advice, and the lack of a student taking advice is marginal at best.

The miracle of society is that it works as well as it does as complex and challenging that it is--not that everyone pulling down a responsibility there is incompetent.

It's those unthinking exaggerations that makes someone a useless sideliner.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Sounds nice, but, as usual, it's just one of the arrows in the scapegoating quiver. If it were true most the bridges engineers built would fall down and you'd stand a much better than average chance of coming out of an operation to remove your appendix with one less leg instead.

Education is profiting from advice, and the lack of a student taking advice is marginal at best.

The miracle of society is that it works as well as it does as complex and challenging that it is--not that everyone pulling down a responsibility there is incompetent.

It's those unthinking exaggerations that makes someone a useless sideliner.

I dont cast pearls before swine, if thats what youre getting at. I made a stab at editing 2 people, and what they wanted was a pat on the back and conformation theyre the best that ever was. And my suggestions were pretty basic stuff.

 

[sr71plt]

I dont cast pearls before swine, if thats what youre getting at. I made a stab at editing 2 people, and what they wanted was a pat on the back and conformation theyre the best that ever was. And my suggestions were pretty basic stuff.

Ummm, no, that's not what I was getting at. I was saying the specific statement I cited sounds nice, but it doesn't hold water. It's just curmudgeon fuzzy thinking.

 

[bronzeage]

I dont cast pearls before swine, if thats what youre getting at. I made a stab at editing 2 people, and what they wanted was a pat on the back and conformation theyre the best that ever was. And my suggestions were pretty basic stuff.

Your experience differs greatly from mine.

After editing a couple dozen stories in the past year, I have found the authors to be attentive to all suggestions and gracious for the help.

I have had to tell a few writers to cut their work in half because large parts were unreadable or so irrelevant to the story, no one would read past the first page. After the work was done, they had a well received story.

Two writers is not a representative sample.

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

I dont cast pearls before swine, if thats what youre getting at. I made a stab at editing 2 people, and what they wanted was a pat on the back and conformation theyre the best that ever was. And my suggestions were pretty basic stuff.

As bronzeage implied, you were unlucky. Almost all of my authors have been grateful.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

Unions Are Ruining Our Country!

As bronzeage implied, you were unlucky. Almost all of my authors have been grateful.

There are two types of authors -- thankful and entitled. Those who are thankful demonstrative appreciativeness and are truly thankfuk for an editor taking time out of his/her life to help them. And then there are those who think they are entitled, that they are "owed" our free services.

I can't say "fuck you!" loud enough to those who feel they are "entitled", who feel we volunteers are all at their beck and call. But they are out there.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

You did and I made note of it, but failed to respond. It sounds interesting, both in subject matter and as a writing primer. Thanks.

It's a matter of taste, active or passive voice. I feel strongly that active flows better. This is so for me. Just my thoughts.

 

[_Lynn_]

It's a matter of taste, active or passive voice. I feel strongly that active flows better. This is so for me. Just my thoughts.

Passive/active voice is more than a matter of taste, AS. Along with several examples, CMS 5.112 states . . . passive voice is typically, though not always, inferior to active voice.

 

[sr71plt]

Just good taste/bad taste then(?)

(Excuse me, I'm busy trying to bottle some of the rarefied air on a few of these threads. )

 

[driphoney]

What made the other example not active voice? (And I don't think it's the active voice she's quibbling with, AS).

This is probably a thread best put to bed now.

I looked back and saw this at post #21.

Just good taste/bad taste then(?)

(Excuse me, I'm busy trying to bottle some of the rarefied air on a few of these threads. )

 

[sr71plt]

I looked back and saw this at post #21.

Yeah, and I never got an answer to that question. Instead we get the plight of the editor as either the dying swans from Swan Lake or the Triumphant Entrance in Aida. (or a combination of the two with a twist of extra pathos?) Barf time, I think.

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

... Along with several examples, CMS 5.112 states . . . passive voice is typically, though not always, inferior to active voice.

This is one place where CMS is, to say the very least, misleading.

John hid the van means something totally different from John was hidden by the van and I have known beginner authors use the former when it is clear from the context they mean the latter.

Of course the proper active mood version of John was hidden by the van is the van hid John, but that makes it sound as though the van acted of its own volition, which cannot be true, and the alternative John hid behind the van makes it sound as though John acted deliberately, whereas the passive version makes it clear that it was an happenstance and not a deliberate attempt to hide.

Perhaps those editors who slavishly follow CMS would require an author to use the active mood, but I prefer the meaning of stories to be clear.

 

[_Lynn_]

This is one place where CMS is, to say the very least, misleading.

John hid the van means something totally different from John was hidden by the van and I have known beginner authors use the former when it is clear from the context they mean the latter.

Of course the proper active mood version of John was hidden by the van is the van hid John, but that makes it sound as though the van acted of its own volition, which cannot be true, and the alternative John hid behind the van makes it sound as though John acted deliberately, whereas the passive version makes it clear that it was an happenstance and not a deliberate attempt to hide.

Perhaps those editors who slavishly follow CMS would require an author to use the active mood, but I prefer the meaning of stories to be clear.

Typically does not mean always. Did you read 5.112 and the examples they give?

ETA: Here is one they give: Compare the ox pulls the cart (active voice) with the cart is pulled by the ox (passive voice).

As for . . . slavishly follow? require an author to use? They aren't worthy of an answer.

 

[sr71plt]

This is one place where CMS is, to say the very least, misleading.

John hid the van means something totally different from John was hidden by the van and I have known beginner authors use the former when it is clear from the context they mean the latter.

Of course the proper active mood version of John was hidden by the van is the van hid John, but that makes it sound as though the van acted of its own volition, which cannot be true, and the alternative John hid behind the van makes it sound as though John acted deliberately, whereas the passive version makes it clear that it was an happenstance and not a deliberate attempt to hide.

Perhaps those editors who slavishly follow CMS would require an author to use the active mood, but I prefer the meaning of stories to be clear.

Hey what? That's your misleading example, not Chicago's. That's not what CMS 5.112 says at all.

What is it you think you're trying to say?

What 5.112 says is "As a matter of style, passive voice is typically, but not always, inferior to active voice."

So, it would appear you're the one being slavish about something here, not CMS.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

A Random Example

A snippet of a story I wrote eons ago:

"Dude, you're so lucky," Mitch commented as he approached Neil in the school hallway. "You live in the same house as the hottest chick in town."

"It's not like that with us," Neil tried to explain. "She's going through a very difficult time."

"Mind if I try hitting on her? A little dose of Mitch will have her as happy as can be," the guy confidently boasted.

My thinking now:

"Dude, you're so lucky," Mitch commented while approaching Neil in the hallway. "You live in the same house as the hottest chick in town."

"It's not like that with us," Neil tried explaining. "She's going through a very difficult time."

"Mind if I try hitting on her? A little dose of Mitch will have her as happy as can be," the guy confidently boasted.

Minor changes, maybe not a great example, but it shows the difference. Not sure of the cause of the controversy. I stopped burning witches over a hundred years ago, get over it!

 

[sr71plt]

A snippet of a story I wrote eons ago:

"Dude, you're so lucky," Mitch commented as he approached Neil in the school hallway. "You live in the same house as the hottest chick in town."

"It's not like that with us," Neil tried to explain. "She's going through a very difficult time."

"Mind if I try hitting on her? A little dose of Mitch will have her as happy as can be," the guy confidently boasted.

My thinking now:

"Dude, you're so lucky," Mitch commented while approaching Neil in the hallway. "You live in the same house as the hottest chick in town."

"It's not like that with us," Neil tried explaining. "She's going through a very difficult time."

"Mind if I try hitting on her? A little dose of Mitch will have her as happy as can be," the guy confidently boasted.

Minor changes, maybe not a great example, but it shows the difference. Not sure of the cause of the controversy. I stopped burning witches over a hundred years ago, get over it!

Shows what difference? Minor change, yes. But they are both active. I don't see any passive in either passage.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

Shows what difference? Minor change, yes. But they are both active. I don't see any passive in either passage.

I'm not trying to create any enemies. Thanks SR.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

Wtf

Okay, so the titans match up. SR has been a very close friend and suddenly there is another competitor.

 

[sr71plt]

I just don't know what you are referring to in what you are distinguishing between active and passive voice. Every example I've seen you post to this thread has been active voice.

 

[driphoney]

I thought passive voice was when the direct object basically sits in place of the subject.

Passive:
The man was hit by the car.

Active:
The car hit the man.

The easy way to see it is by catching the auxillary "to be" verb attached to a past particle. [was hit]

And AS, I'm not seeing any war, or animosity, on SR's part. No titans, no competitors.

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

I thought passive voice was when the direct object basically sits in place of the subject.

Passive:
The man was hit by the car.

Active:
The car hit the man. ...

Exactly. Active, as the name implies, is doing something. Passive, as the name implies, is something being done to.