#literary devices

[physalian]

How To Make Your Writing Less Stiff 5

Movement

Dredging this back up from way back.

Make sure your characters move, but not too much during heavy dialogue scenes. E.g. two characters sitting and talking—do humans just stare at each other with their arms lifeless and bodies utterly motionless during conversation? No? Then neither should your characters. Make them…

Gesture

Wave

Frown

Laugh

Cross their legs/their arms

Shift around to get comfortable

Pound the table

Roll their eyes

Point

Shrug

Touch their face/their hair

Wring their hands

Pick at their nails

Yawn

Stretch

Sniff/sniffle

Tap their fingers/drum

Bounce their feet

Doodle

Fiddle with buttons or jewelry

Scratch an itch

Touch their weapons/gadgets/phones

Check the time

Get up and sit back down

Move from chair to tabletop

The list goes on.

Bonus points if these are tics that serve to develop your character, like a nervous fiddler, or if one moves a lot and the other doesn’t—what does that say about the both of them? This is where “show don’t tell” really comes into play.

As in, you could say “he’s nervous” or you could show, “He fidgets, constantly glancing at the clock as sweat beads at his temples.”

This site is full of discourse on telling vs showing so I’ll leave it at that.

Epithets

In the Sci-fi WIP that shall never see the light of day, I had a flashback arc for one male character and his relationship with another male character. On top of that, the flashback character was a nameless narrator for Reasons.

Enter the problem: How would you keep track of two male characters, one who you can't name, and the other who does have a name, but you can’t oversaturate the narrative with it? I did a few things.

Nameless Narrator (written in 3rd person limited POV) was the only narrator for the flashback arc. I never switched to the boyfriend’s POV.

Boyfriend had only a couple epithets that could only apply to him, and halfway through their relationship, NN went from describing him as “the other prisoner” to “his cellmate” to “his partner” (which was also a double entendre). NN also switched from using BF’s full name to a nickname both in narration and dialogue.

BF had a title for NN that he used exclusively in dialogue, since BF couldn’t use his given name and NN hadn’t picked a new one for himself.

Every time the subject of the narrative switched, I started a new paragraph so “he” never described either character ambiguously mid-paragraph.

Is this an extreme example? Absolutely, but I pulled it off according to my betas.

The point of all this is this: Epithets shouldn’t just exist to substitute an overused name. Epithets de-personalize the subject if you use them incorrectly. If your narrator is thinking of their lover and describing that person without their name, then the trait they pick to focus on should be something equally important to them. In contrast, if you want to drive home how little a narrator thinks of somebody, using depersonalizing epithets helps sell that disrespect.

Fanfic tends to be the most egregious with soulless epithets like "the black-haired boy" that tell the reader absolutely nothing about how the narrator feels about that black-haired boy, espeically if they're doing so during a highly-emotional moment.

As in, NN and BF had one implied sex scene. Had I said “the other prisoner” that would have completely ruined the mood. He’s so much more than “the other prisoner” at that point in the story. “His partner,” since they were both a combat team and romantically involved, encompassed their entire relationship.

The epithet also changed depending on what mood or how hopeless NN saw their situation. He’d wax and wane over how close he believed them to be for Reasons. NN was a very reserved character who kept BF at a distance, afraid to go “all in” because he knew there was a high chance of BF not surviving this campaign. So NN never used “his lover”.

All to say, epithets carried the subtext of that flashback arc, when I had a character who would not talk about his feelings. I could show you the progression of their relationship through how the epithets changed.

I could show you whenever NN was being a big fat liar about his feelings when he said he's not in love, but his narration gave him away. I could show you the exact moment their relationship shifted from comrades to something more when NN switched mid-paragraph from "his cellmate" to "his partner" and when he took up BF's nickame exclusively in the same scene.

I do the same thing in Eternal Night when Elias, my protagonist, stops referring to Dorian as "it" and "the vampire" instead of his name the moment they collide with a much more dangerous vampire, so jarringly that Elias notices in his own narration—the point of it being so explicit is that this degredation isn't automatic, it's something he has to conciously do, when everyone else in his clan wouldn't think twice about dehumanizing them.

—

Any literary device should be used with intent if you want those layers in your work. The curtains are rarely just blue. Whether it’s a simile with a deliberate comparison or an epithet with deliberate connotations, your readers will pick up on the subtext, I promise.

[novlr]

[coffeetank]

7 Simple Literary Devices That Elevate your Writing

1. Mood:

The mood of your story is the ambience you're trying to create around your setting and characters in a book. For example, in a horror story, the mood of the book will dark and ominous. In a romantic comedy, the mood of the book will be light-hearted, funny and swoon-worthy.

The mood of your story needs to be maintained throughout your book as it is the direct emotional environment of the themes you're using. It does not change at any point of the story.

2. Metaphor:

Metaphor is a literary device where you compare two things without using the words "as" or "like". It is an indirect comparison that convinces you of the similarities between two things.

For example: "You knowledge is your weapon." This sentence is indirectly comparing knowledge to a weapon to imply that both can be used to protect/defend/fight.

3. Simile:

Simile is a figure of speech that directly compares two things and insists on their similarities. You use "as" and "like".

For example: "slept like a baby" or "as light as a cloud".

4. Colloquialism:

Colloquialism is the device used to fit a more informal environment. Imagine the way you talk to your friends or family. You are a lot more relaxed with them than you are in a professional setting, say work or university.

Colloquialism is especially important for dialogues as your characters are not going to be speaking formally with each other all the time.

For example: Words like "wanna", "gonna" are used in dialogue to show how a character talks. Moreover, a lot of time, people don't pronounce the 'g' in '—ing' words which is another easy way of showing how your characters talk; talkin', goin', etc.

5. Imagery:

Easy, effective, engaging — imagery is a common and useful tool that can help you with descriptions.

Imagery is a device used for descriptive writing as it triggers your reader's senses. We have five senses — touch, smell, hearing, seeing and taste. Using imagery will invoke these senses in your readers and they will be able to put themselves into the world you're creating for them.

For example: "The house reeked of alcohol, the windows deeply ingrained with dirt. The wooded floor creaked with every step he took. When he came across the plate of cake left unattended on the dining table, he almost retched at the thought of how it would've tasted."

6. Amplification:

Amplification is a literary device used to emphasise on the importance of something being conveyed. Amplification uses a detailed extension of an already understandable sentence/word/phrase to add more to it's value.

Amplification can be used in both descriptions and dialogue based on it's requirement. If you're writing a character that's dramatic, they may resort to using amplification to focus on their POV. If you're writing a serious scene, they you may use amplification to describe the essence of it.

For example: "You could be the richest man alive, have a closet full of designer brands, line up a hundred lambos, wear the most expensive shoes ever made, eat Michelin star meals, sleep in the finest of silks, date the most beautiful of women, but you still won't be happy unless you've actually worked on yourself."

Designer brands, expensive shoes, lavish cars are all self-given details that we'd understand once we read the phrase "richest man alive", but those details are still written to add importance to the point being made about working on oneself.

7. Tone:

Tone is a tool you use when writing about the subject in question. Tone involves a particular incident/scene/circumstance on your work where there is a shift in the general ambience only until the subject matter is resolved.

For example, if you're writing a romantic comedy and your two main leads have fought recently, then instead of your general liveliness, you will write a bit dully to show that your characters are going through some problems. This will go on until your characters make up.

**NOTE: Tone and Mood are not the same thing. I will make a post soon about the difference between tone and mood too.

Hope this helps!

-ashlee

[the960writers]

Gothic Literature vs Horror: A Tale of Terror and Romance

[eri-pl]

I need a name. But not for a character.

So, you know how in LotR there is that one charge where Thoeden charges and "his eyes shone like a Vala's" and stuff.

Let us ignore for a moment the fact that comparision to a Vala (or to Orome by name) is a huge compliment by itself. But. This is the same description that Fingolfin gets in his death scene. And Fingolfin is insanely powerful first age king of the Eldar. So, basically, Theoden gets complimented by comparision to Fingolfin, but not directly, but by getting the same poetic description.

Does this literary device have a name?

I don't mean things like Elrond-Luthien parallel description because they look similar, because he is her great-grandson. I mean things that are more behavioral or psychological than just physical looks. (Yes, in the Legendarious "shining eyes" is a psychological trait).

Thank you.

[maspers]

Weather Update: The First Danganronpa Game secretly had TWO rivals the entire time.

Lemme explain (spoilers, obviously, and this is gonna be a bit a rant whoops):

Usual Danganronpa Format as the fandom usually sees it: Students trapped in an unfamiliar location with no idea what's going on, plot driven partially by the mystery but mostly by the character interactions.

Trigger Happy Havoc: Students trapped in an altered but still familiar location with no idea what's going on, plot driven partially by the character interactions but mostly by the mystery.

In a setting like DR2, V3, or a vast majority of fangans, the participants in the killing game are given very little information about their circumstances aside from what Monokuma gives them, which is deliberately vague and designed to direct them towards killing each other. Additionally, the students are given very little ability to react to and retaliate against the Killing Game system in ways Monokuma won't expect. Weirdness aside DR2 basically went all according to plan until the final trial due to Monokuma's nigh-omniscience, and V3 was similar with the only debatable exception being Kokichi's elaborate scheme in Chapter 5. Since the students are dealing with such restricted conditions, the plot can't be fully driven by the students figuring out the setting, so instead the plot focuses on the conflict that derives from the various characters reacting to the game. In a story like this, it makes sense that the most antagonistic characters aside from the mastermind would be the ones with EXTREME personalities that shake things up a lot. Nagito, Kokichi and that character archetype that everyone expects to be in a fangan are necessary to make the plot more INTERESTING.

But THH is different. The students KNOW where they are (or at least they think they do, and turn out to be right). While they don't have any recollection of the Academy itself, they at least know what to EXPECT from Hope's Peak, and can from there point out nooks and crannies for delicious little clues that reveal more about the situation, putting together a narrative without Monokuma's handholding. Additionally, despite his blustering Monokuma is explicitly NOT omniscient here, or even practically omniscient, as methods to hide things from him are figured out early on. The students are able to DO something about their situation as the story progresses, and have figured out some aspects of the overarching mystery as it pertains to them long before the final trial (and NOT because the Mastermind deliberately put the info in their path). This greater information access and greater character agency in general means that while the character conflicts are still very much a part of the plot, the overarching theme is solving the mystery while adapting to the circumstances to avoid dying.

In a setting like this, extreme/bizarre personalities aren't really a boon to the plot. While the character reveals add layers and information in other settings, here it's a distraction. The students HAVE resources, and at least SOME of the tools they need. Engaging in over-the-top schemes and traps is a DETRIMENT to their current course of action even more than in later games, which is probably why Monokuma tries to encourage them to do such. Other characters in THH fit the bill of "stereotypical DR Rival" probably better than the supposed-rival Byakuya and THH's other Rival character actually do. Celestia Ludenberg comes to mind, in another DR setting she could be exactly the sort of mysterious and interesting rival the series is known for (and that she clearly wants to be), but in THH she's just another annoyance. Toko Fukawa and Genocider have the extreme personality down, but they only advance the plot in the students' favor when they approach things logically and in a less crazy manner. If Rivals in this game are supposed to fit the bill of "causes unexpected occurrences and advances the plot but still clashes with the rest of the cast in intense ways while doing so" like the other Rival characters in the series do, they have to play the role under a different ruleset. Rather than representing a philosophical extreme through their personality, these rivals have to represent a different extreme: their methods and rationale when it comes to SOLVING THE MYSTERY / ESCAPING THE GAME.

And in this regard, Byakuya Togami plays the role wonderfully. The vast majority of the students in the game are very passive when it comes to solving the mystery. Sure, they get very active when trying to escape by killing someone, but that's just dancing to Monokuma's tune. Rather than wondering what to do, Byakuya makes his actions clear from the start, and everything he does in the game that's antagonistic fits that same M.O., while not doing anything that would put him in an uncertain position. He learns how the trial system functions, then during Chapter 2 he performs an experiment to analyze the other students further. His antagonism largely stems from viewing the other students as opponents, so his pragmatic approach makes sense, but he doesn't JUST analyze the players. He also analyzes the metaphorical board, and it's clear he's trying to get every scrap of info he can on his situation before fully committing to action (exhibit A: him spending so much freaking time in the library). The only stereotypically "nuts" thing he really does is down that bottle of poison/protein in Chapter 4. He's proving a point. He'll do anything it takes to win, and knowledge is power. Hence his active role in acquiring info about the game, the setting, and the other students' behaviors.

But Byakuya can't be the only Rival here. While he might be solving some mysteries in the background, we don't get to see much of it because the whole point of his character early on is conflict: his active versus the other's passive. He won't share his findings or really work with others, which is not good when our precious baby protag Makoto is trying to solve the mystery himself. Byakuya can't move the plot forward like that until after Chapter 4. Chapter 5 onward, Byakuya's method to his madness is revealed, and he contributes a lot to solving the mystery and directing the other students to getting more of the info he needs (exhibit A, dismantling Monokuma). And... that doesn't really fit with the formula later games set. Chapter 5 is when conflicts with the rival comes to head, and shenanigans abound. Nagito does it. Kokichi does it. But Byakuya isn't particularly inclined. Shenanigans with his own life at stake aren't his methods, they're just complications. But... the stuff still comes to a head with THH's other rival. The other character that's been progressing the plot in active ways that contrast with the other students, and clashing with the rest of the cast AND the player. The character whose life IS on the line in Chapter 5.

You've probably guessed by now that I'm talking about Kyoko Kirigiri.

When we look at her in retrospect, Kyoko doesn't raise any alarms compared to the craziness of the rest of the franchise. She helps with the investigations and moves the trials forward, she's nowhere near the craziness brought by Nagito and Kokichi, and generally just really competent. We categorize her in the "Assistant" role, similar to Chiaki and Shuichi/Kaede/Kaito/Maki/whoever (hey wait a second where did we even come up with this archetype anyway, if V3 doesn't even really seem to have one character who properly fits it?) She definitely fits the Assistant bill in DR3, but this ain't DR3. She doesn't fit the bill for stereotypical Danganronpa Trial Rival... but as previously established, Byakuya doesn't either. So let's go deeper and look at things in context. Because from the start of the game, Kyoko is weird. Really weird.

We're introduced not knowing anything about her, and she keeps it that way for a LONG time. "Ultimate ???" just screams she's going to be important later but you just don't know how (remember, this was BEFORE Rantaro). She's really helpful during the trials and is three steps ahead of everyone, but... aside from that a lot of her actions are really, REALLY conflict inducing. She is happy to get info from other students, but it's clear there's a lot she isn't sharing. She says ominous things to Monokuma that make no sense ("What did you do to my body?" anyone?) and seems VERY focused on the mystery. Just like Byakuya, she's taking an active role in analyzing every detail about the circumstances. And interestingly enough, she's just as paranoid as he is, just in different ways. As Makoto spends more time around her she manipulates him (and others) in some really unnerving ways, and her dynamics with other characters outside of trials are always either generically placating to keep things calm or downright low-key hostile when things don't go according to plan. Just like with Byakuya, for the vast majority of the game she doesn't trust anybody. And in chapter 5, these aspects of her character are brought into full view. She spends the entire chapter hiding away, she mysteriously appears in Makoto's room (side note: Nagito and Kokichi both have "looking over the protag in an unnerving fashion" pics. Byakuya doesn't. Kyoko DOES). It becomes clear in the trial how much she's hiding and how much she's been manipulating things. Chapter 5 is an impossible trial designed as a trap for HER. Her seemingly innocuous actions have come in full domino effect. And only Makoto and the power of being a Man Literally To Unpredictable To Die can save her.

(Makoto obviously isn't a rival character, but it's interesting to see how by THH's requirements he very well could have fit the bill. Think of him from Hina's or Hiro's perspective: he's seemingly innocuous, yet survived way longer than anyone would expect him to, often figures out just the right thing to say, both Byakuya and Kyoko interact with him a lot when neither of them seem to care about anyone else, and ultimately seems to become a lot more actively involved in mystery solving despite not having any right too. Couple that with the fact that he spent a couple days "bedridden" when from an outsider's perspective he could have been doing anything, and ngl Makoto sus. He even survives an execution!)

Both Byakuya and Kyoko take turns providing conflict to the story in ways that develop the plot but COMPLETELY clash with the passive methods of everyone else. They practically take turns being the one doing whatever crazy crap needs to get done. Their character arcs parallel each other too. Byakuya has to learn about the value of human life and emotional connection. Kyoko knows perfectly well how important life and emotions are, but she needs to learn that it's a two-way street, that trust needs to be established and that she doesn't have to do everything important herself. Byakuya, while lacking in empathy, is fully willing to work with others and outsource important tasks. He just views it as a business transaction. BOTH of them are prideful frickers who think they're the only one with a brain cell, and it's up to Makoto to undergo his own character arc, become their friend, and prove them wrong. And then once Makoto DOES finally take control and prove he's the one with the audacity required to actually get everything working, he's able to redirect both Byakuya and Kyoko into finally teaming up with everyone and stopping chaos so much chaos. Without either of them, Makoto couldn't have made it to the final trial (we can see when Kyoko dies in the Bad Ending that it's basically game over, the mystery CAN'T be solved, and I fully believe that the circumstances would have ended similarly if Byakuya had died and they'd lost his pragmatic logical reasoning). But without Makoto, Kyoko and Byakuya couldn't have made it THROUGH the final trial. All three of them are literary foils of each other.

(This is another reason why seeing all three of them in the final trial of DR2 is so fun, because the Trial Point Getters are a well-oiled machine by that point and you get to see them play off each other as 100% allies, while once again getting to see through Hajime's eyes how 100% sus all three of them really are once they get going.)

So that's why I think THH has some really good Rivals, despite neither Byakuya nor Kyoko fitting what we've come to expect from the formula. They aren't insane or representing a philosophical extreme, they're representing clashing viewpoints in solving a mystery and escaping the killing game. In other entries in the series, Byakuya and Kyoko would be killing game fodder for twisty midgame chapters and otherwise not being able to contribute much of interest. But in Trigger Happy Havoc? They're exactly what the game needs to elevate it from simple mystery-solving to full-blown ART.

TL;DR Byakuya and Kyoko are awesome and I love them and a lot of people sleep on their status as Danganronpa Rivals because they grade them on a standard that I think is unfair and ignores their strengths as characters. Also Makoto suddenly becomes way more interesting when viewed through a perspective other than his own. The first Danganronpa game is a materpiece and more fangans need to realize that they don't have to play by the supposed "series formula". After all, this game didn't.

[jlhynde-insanitybrilliance]

What’s your favorite literary device? I know mine.

Chekhov's Gun: Any seemingly unimportant element that becomes significant later on in the story.

[writingwithcolor]

Two Stories: European Translating a Fictional Japanese Novel

yoakesan asked:

Hi!

The protagonist of my novel is Sicilian university student who's working on a translation of an imaginary Japanese novel, which I would like to present as a sub-plot (the main plot features the Sicilian guy attending a local festival near his hometown).

The Japanese novel is about a young woman who has strong feelings of nostalgia towards summer, partly because of a short-lived love story she had with another girl. She spends so much time longing for summer that she can't be happy in the present.

Now, in order to underline this concept, I was thinking that the Japanese novel could end with the protagonist dying before the arrival of summer, but I'm afraid that, since the main plot features a happy ending for the Sicilian protagonist, that might be unnecessarily tragic.

Also, do you have any tips on certain aspects of Japanese culture that I should avoid underlining? The Sicilian guy loves Japanese literature, both classic and contemporary, and likes listening to contemporary Japanese electronic music. I was thinking of mentioning some similarities between the two cultures (islands - sea - volcanoes - cherry blossoms/a typical festival that is celebrated in the protagonist's hometown in the occasion of the blossoming of another tree), but the point of the novel is not to draw a consistent parallel.

Finally, said festival features people from many different countries dancing and playing instruments in traditional clothes. How can I be careful about exoticization when describing that part of the story?

More info needed

I like this concept and have read Japanese novels utilizing similar plot devices. An outsider’s perspective would be interesting. This idea also reminds me a little of The Hours (1998) by Michael Cunningham which won the Pulitzer in 1999. However, I wish you had said something more about this festival in this town so we might look into similar parallels in a Japanese context. Similarly crucial would be information about your own familiarity with Japanese literature and which authors/ novels you intended to draw on for your own inspiration for this unnamed novel. After all, the unnamed novel being translated is key. Its themes, time period, place in the Japanese literary canon etc. would all influence your protagonist and his state of mind, wouldn't it? Having done my share of translation, I have more than once grappled with the struggle of not knowing which word to pick because I don't even know what meaning the original author is trying to convey. 

I think this is an interesting question, and I like the concept of cultures shaped by similar forces and motifs being exchanged through the act of translating a novel. Speaking as a person who lives in another part of the world with unpredictable weather, earthquakes, the sea, etc., I like rediscovering aspects of my current home that also evoke Japan and vice-versa. so I invite you to re-submit with greater detail via DM so that we may provide you with a more definitive answer. 

The other question you sent on whether domestic tourism for hanami in Japan is common and which sites are favored is easy to answer through research using most search engines, so we will not be answering it.

- Marika.

[queer-ghosts]

actually i really don't think there's one ideal type of vampire or list of traits vampires should have. vampirism is a narrative tool and the traits it has have to depend on the story, setting, character dynamics, etc.

I've pretty much invented a different type of vampire for each vampire story I've started writing for this reason.

as an example the story I just started writing is about deep devotion and the heightened feelings that come with it, so these vampires, instead of losing their humanity with time and immortality, feel things more intensely and their human nature turns almost exaggerated as they live and experience the world for centuries.

drinking blood also causes a state of temporary heightened emotion as their essence of live gets renewed and they feel all their feelings at 100%

(I'm still figuring out some relative technical details for these vampires but this is basically the basis.)

[thebeesareback]

I'm pretty familiar with English Literature, but less so with the classics. I've picked up some stories along the way - it's inevitable- but most of my literary references come from the last 500 years or so, not past millennia.

It was interesting for me to hear Donna Tartt talk about how she used a Greek chorus in The Secret History. With a nonlinear timeline and, I suppose, the opposite of dramatic irony, she created an opening scene which told the audience about an important scene at the end of the first part of the story, and how the narrator felt looking back at the events of the novel. She starts by describing a murder and talking about how it had affected the main characters' lives, 10 years out. When I was reading this, I thought of the opening to Romeo and Juiet: From forth the loins of these two foes/ a pair of star-crossed lovers take their life. The audience knows the characters - presumably the eponymous Romeo and Juliet - are going to die. It's about the "why" and the "how", not the "what".

This creates its own kind of tension, and I find it much more compelling than the modern trend where everyone is terrified of "spoilers". Oh, Jon Snow came back from the dead! That was foreshadowed and established. Tony Stark died! OK- now make the actors sell their sorrow, instead of hiding it and getting them to pretend they're not at a funeral because you're so terrified of leaks.

That tension has been used, to varying levels of success, by nearly every crime novel I've ever written. There's an opening scene, or perhaps a vignette, which establishes motivation for the rest of the action. Some parts will remain deliberately concealed. The seductive flash of action captures the audience's attention and helps the author build anticipation for the rest of the novel.

Looking back, it's possible to see the trend become established and modified. In reverse order, we have modern crime fiction with the nuggets of information offered in the opening scene. Then we have The Secret History, which could easily be categorised as a crime novel, starting with reflections on a murder. Before this, there's my personal reference, Romeo and Juliet, where the audience is told that these two loving, silly teenagers are going to die. Reaching back even further, Donna Tartt's actual inspiration, classic Greek plays and epic poems. From there, though, the trail goes cold. What inspired the Greeks? Did they create the opening "spoilers", or was it the first caveperson giving an intriguing grunt to keep their children engaged at the start of a story, so they didn't go outside and get trampled by a mammoth? Who knows.

[physalian]

How to make your writing sound less stiff part 2

Part 1

Again, just suggestions that shouldn’t have to compromise your author voice, as I sit here doing my own edits for a WIP.

1. Crutch words

Specifically when you have your narrator taking an action instead of just… writing that action. Examples:

Character wonders/imagines/thinks/realizes

Character sees/smells/feels

Now not all of these need to be cut. There’s a difference between:

Elias stops. He realizes they’re going in the wrong direction.

And

Elias takes far too long to realize that it’s not horribly dark wherever they are

Crutch words are words that don’t add anything to the sentence and the sentence can carry on with the exact same meaning even if you delete it. Thus:

Elias stops. They’re going in the wrong direction.

I need a word in the second example, whether it’s realizes, understands, or notices, unless I rework the entire sentence. The “realization” is implied by the hard cut to the next sentence in the first example.

2. Creating your own “author voice”

Unless the tone of the scene demands otherwise, my writing style is very conversational. I have a lot of sentence fragments to reflect my characters’ scatterbrained thoughts. I let them be sarcastic and sassy within the narration. I leave in instances of “just” (another crutch word) when I think it helps the sentence. Example:

…but it’s just another cave to Elias.

Deleting the “just” wouldn’t hit as hard or read as dismissive and resigned.

I may be writing in 3rd person limited, but I still let the personalities of my characters flavor everything from the syntax to metaphor choices. It’s up to you how you want to write your “voice”.

I’ll let dialogue cut off narration, like:

Not that he wouldn’t. However, “You can’t expect me to believe that.”

Sure it’s ~grammatically incorrect~ but you get more leeway in fiction. This isn’t an essay written in MLA or APA format. It’s okay to break a few rules, they’re more like guidelines anyway.

3. Metaphor, allegory, and simile

There is a time and a place to abandon this and shoot straight because oftentimes you might not realize you’re using these at all. It’s the difference between:

Blinding sunlight reflects off the window sill

And

Sunlight bounces like high-beams off the window sill

It’s up to you and what best fits the scene.

Sometimes there’s more power in not being poetic, just bluntly explicit. Situations like describing a character’s battle wounds (whatever kind of battle they might be from, whether it be war or abuse) don’t need flowery prose and if your manuscript is metaphor-heavy, suddenly dropping them in a serious situation will help with the mood and tonal shift, even if your readers can’t quite pick up on why immediately.

Whatever the case is, pick a metaphor that fits the narrator. If my narrator is comparing a shade of red to something, pick a comparison that makes sense.

Red like the clouds at sunset might make sense for a character that would appreciate sunsets. It’s romantic but not sensual, it’s warm and comforting.

Red like lipstick stains on a wine glass hints at a very different image and tone.

Metaphor can also either water down the impact of something, or make it so much worse so pay attention to what you want your reader to feel when they read it. Are you trying to shield them from the horror or dig it in deep?

4. Paragraph formatting

Nothing sticks out on a page quite like a line of narrative all by itself. Abusing this tactic will lessen its effect so save single sentence paragraphs for lines you want to hammer your audiences with. Lines like romantic revelations, or shocking twists, or characters giving up, giving in. Or just a badass line that deserves a whole paragraph to itself.

I do it all the time just like this.

Your writing style might not feature a bunch of chunky paragraphs to emphasize smaller lines of text (or if you’re writing a fic on A03, the size of the screen makes many paragraphs one line), but if yours does, slapping a zinger between two beefy paragraphs helps with immersion.

5. Polysyndeton and Asyndeton

Not gibberish! These, like single-sentence paragraphs, mix up the usual flow of the narrative that are lists of concepts with or without conjunctions.

Asyndeton: We came. We saw. We conquered. It was cold, grey, lifeless.

Polysyndeton: And the birds are out and the sun is shining and it might rain later but right now I am going to enjoy the blue sky and the puffy white clouds like cotton balls. They stand and they clap and they sing.

Both are for emphasis. Asyndeton tends to be "colder" and more blunt, because the sentence is blunt. Polysyntedon tends to be more exciting, overwhelming.

We came and we saw and we conquered.

The original is rather grim. This version is almost uplifting, like it's celebrating as opposed to taunting, depending on how you look at it.

—

All of these are highly situational, but if you’re stuck, maybe try some out and see what happens.

*italicized quotes are from ENNS, the rest I made up on the spot save for the Veni Vidi Vici.

[novlr]

[coffeetank]

Tone V/S Mood

More often than not, writers find themselves confused between tone and mood. I was confused between both for a while too. After some research and more studying, I figured out how to differentiate between both. So let me help you out as much as I can!

To start with, let's first define both.

TONE

TONE: the author's point of view of a particular subject matter. It's not easy to understand, so let me explain it a little more. The tone of a story is specific to a particular scene, character, ambience, probability, dialogue, etc. Tones are particular to an instance taking place and are not constant throughout the book.

Example - Take a secluded house in the middle of the woods. A family of 3 stays in the house comprising a mother, a father and a child. Imagine the current scene being a birthday celebration for the kid. They have a cake, balloons and fun music. The tone in this case is enjoyable, lighthearted and joyful. Why? Because in that particular scene, the author is trying to convey the liveliness of the party.

Tones are conveyed using different sentence structures, punctuations, choice of words, and figurative language.

MOOD

MOOD: the atmosphere of the piece and the overall feeling that the reader feels. The mood of a story is almost always set in the first chapter of the book itself; if not, then the writer establishes it before the story picks up pace. Mood is constant throughout the book, even if tones fluctuate. In simpler words, you could say that the mood of a story depends heavily on the genre/plot of the book. If you pick up a crime novel, you would feel the suspense and mystery even though the current scene you're reading would be of a jostling, busy, upbeat crowd because you know what the story is about.

Example - Take the example above. Even though the tone of the scene is joyful, the mood of the story remains eerie. This is because of the setting. The house is secluded and within woods. This restricts movement within the area, sets the story as strange and uncanny. Despite of their being a celebration, the readers will feel a pit on their stomach, expecting something frightening to occur soon. Thanks to factors like setting, the mood of the story can be established as eerie and uncanny.

DIFFERENCE

The main difference between both is the subject matter. Tone is specific to a subject matter whereas mood is constant regardless of the subject matter.

With that, I end this post. If there's anything else regarding both that you'd like some help with, feel free to reach out!

-ashlee

[the960writers]

Gothic vs. Horror Literature: A Study of Genres

Today, the words gothic and horror have nearly become synonymous, but it’s not really true that they are one and the same thing.

Yes, they are both based on terror, fear, mysticism, or suspense—that’s a given—but what divides them from this point? Even if there is obvious overlap, both genres do in fact produce distinct moods or experiences in their audience.

Gothic literature uses terror as a plot device within a mystical setting or with supernatural elements at play to comment on social, political, and religious tensions (and anxieties) of a certain time period or community—even if this is done subtly. There is also usually a romance or romantic element involved.

Horror literature uses terror as an art form to explore the darkest reaches of the human condition through fiction and to inspire a reaction in its audience. This is most commonly done by building tension or suspense using various story elements. Horror is meant to unsettle and disgust you.

Let's take a look at the histories of Gothic and horror literature, some of their most notable works, and see how the two genres remain distinct.

[...]

[victusinveritas]