Righters' Club

Free Republic discussion ^

[Eleutheria5]

Squarebarb:

There were some of us including GOPpoet who were thinking of starting a writer's thread here on FR. There's a horse thread, a football thread, a Hobbit Hole thread, so why not a thread for us writers?

And mainly sticking to fiction otherwise the discussion tends toward politicsa iinstead of the craft of writing.

Okay Eleutheria5, YOU start the thread."

Eleutheria5:

On it. Could use some help from someone who knows how to do HTTP and other techy stuff, though. Tried to learn, but drat that right hemisphere dominance we creative folks have. I've actually been running a board on the aol writers' club since 1996 called Conservative Writers' Club. Mostly it simply fights flame wars with liberal writers, though, and all the conservative contributors, including me, burn out. It'd be great to get away from that and just swap ideas with people who DON'T wish every one of us a flaming death.

[squarebarb]

Yo. Here I am again. I see there has been some discussion on varying the apporach in writing to keep the reader's interest.

I think I mentioned it before but shifting between narrative summary and a direct scene is important.

I try to keep chapters to about ten pages although that's not always possible.

Carton thanks for the heads up.

But it is really important not to have one direct scene after another.

By the way Cormac McCarthy won the Pulitzer which makes me happy, very happy for him.

Another question, do any of you often read the reader's comments on Amazon?

[carton253]

I do all the time.

[carton253]

But it is really important not to have one direct scene after another.

Can you explain what you mean by that?

[carton253]

Read that comments on Amazon that is.

[squarebarb]

Yes. A direct scene is moment-by-moment description of an event, usually with dialogue. This is intense and the reader needs some relief from this intensity, needs to be drawn back and take a longer, broader look at things.

I remember reading a book that I found interesting and well-written but it was one direct scene after another and after a while I found I had just stopped reading it. It lost me.

There are always exceptions. The Road is an exception.

For instance, say you are describing a moment at a command post, two characters involved and addressing one another and perhaps discussing a battle plan.

You can’t go on with that for too long. Even a shift away to another nearby scene will work -— anything that takes a longer view. For instance, shift from the two characters at the command post to something like,

“At that time the trains from Chattanooga had ceased to run regularly. Tracks had been torn up and rails dislodged, heated, wrapped around telephone poles. Smoking piles of debris were to be seen all along the tracks. Bridges were out...”

I just made that up. But you see there is a shift here from intense, detailed descrption (i.e. a direct scene) to narrative summary (summarizing a larger situation in general terms).

It is like a symphony — shifting between different levels of intensity. It can be quite elegant, and once you learn to use the two you will have a valuable tool.

Writers have known this for thousands of years. Check out Kings, Chronicles, etc. and you will see direct scenes followed by narrative summary. Also true for the Odessy, etc.

[carton253]

Okay... I do that. I just am unfamiliar with the term.

For a moment, I thought I was going to have rewrite my rewrite! :)

[squarebarb]

Oh Lord no don’t rewrite your re-write. If you’ve already discovered this good for you. You are certainly a hard-working writer.

But after all it is a work of love.

[carton253]

It really is... and I love my characters. I just want to jump into the middle of my book and share in all their adventures.

[squarebarb]

And I know your readers will too.

[carton253]

I hope everyone is having a good weekend. Since my last attempt to start a conversation about chapters did not go over too well, I thought this week about another topic we could discuss and help us all get better acquainted.

Let's talk verb tenses. It is interesting that I am learning Hebrew and Arabic as part of my post-graduate degree, and I have been told by my profs that the passive voice (especially in Hebrew ((nefal verbs)) is writing at the highest level. This runs counter to everything I have been told when writing English. In fact, Word Perfect, as part of its spell/grammer check would alert you to how many sentences you constructed in the passive voice so you could correct them.

So, I was hoping you all had some tips on how to avoid passive voice that you could share with the group...and.... if you want, any other secrets about avoiding tenses which drag down the narrative.

I look forward to reading the posts and perhaps gleaning some new secrets myself.

[squarebarb]

Very interesting post, Carton, thanks for starting the thread. I’ll post the ‘twisted pencil’ to mark a new day.

Yes I know it is sort of a rule to avoid the passive voice, as in

‘the sails were set’
‘the coffee was served’
‘the floor was swept’

and so on, which leaves out the person or thing doing the action.
I am not so sure it is always a bad thing.

First of all, it is a short-and-sweet way of describing an action, when you don’t want to go into a lot of detail.

I am at present re-reading Patrick O’Brian’s maritime series and he uses the passive voice as a quick way of describing something.

‘The mainsail was set’ is quicker than ‘the forecastlemen hurried up the shrouds to set the mainsail’.

Creative writing teachers seem to hate it, however.
Maybe some people habitually overdo it?

Eveything has its use. Here’s the twisted pencil.
In other words, there is no agent, as they say.

[squarebarb]

[squarebarb]

And I would like to learn more about the use of the passive voice in Hebrew poetry.

Is it modern or ancient Hebrew?

Would it be because of verse considerations -— rhythm and so on?

Does ancient Hebrew poetry rhyme?

I should go look at Psalms again and see if the translators carried the passive voice over into English.

We have very lovely cool weather here, unusual for this part of Texas at this time. Hope it lasts.

[carton253]

I am learning modern Hebrew, which, the professor assures the class, is not the same language as ancient Hebrew.

I know students who can read ancient Hebrew but must start all over again to learn Modern Hebrew.

I am an intermediate student, so I am just learning the passive or nefal verbs.

As for poetry, I really don't know the answer. My Hebrew is so that I can read official Hebrew documents for research purposes.

I am told that the King James version is the closest English/Ancient Hebrew translation there is.

I'm glad your weather is lovely.

[carton253]

When I read other authors, I purposely look to see if they use the passive voice and how often they use it. Right now, I have an old copy of Arthur Hailey's Airport. I know it was a best seller, but I don't like it.

He writes mostly in the passive voice.

The only time I notice the passive voice is when it is pointed out to me. Other than that, I don't. Not when I read... I never stop and say, my word, this is all written in passive voice.

It is easily corrected. But I wonder if it really is that big of a deal.

For the most part, I use passive voice only when I have to. Active voice is easier to write in.

[squarebarb]

I will check my King James here in a minute.

I can imagine that modern and ancient Hebrew are very different — what we have in the KJ is, I think, from about 700 B.C. and of course there must be vast changes. But I wonder how it changed, since it was not a generally-used language from -— maybe 200 A.D.?

Modern English and even Middle Ages English are very different.

No, I don’t care for Arthur Haily much either. His writing is very flat. In a bit I will see if I can come up with some passive voice examples.

[carton253]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Hebrew Just copy and paste this into your browser and you will see how the Modern Hebrew's origin. Though I am not a fan of Wikipedia, they mostly have it right.

It is funny. When learning these languages, especially Arabic, it was amazing how little of English grammer I know. So, when the prof said, "this is the antecedant of the transitive verb in the perfect passive tense with an indirect object... my first reaction was "what!?" I was looking up terms like crazy. I wanted to raise my hand and say, "when I use the antecedant of the transtive verb in the perfect passive tense, could you let me know."

I was never very good at grammar.

[RightWhale]

Science writing uses a lot of passive voice and for good enough reason. The object is the most important part of many science sentences, so to put it first makes the sentence objective as science is supposed to be—the subject is entirely reduced and would disappear altogether in modern science writing even though the language won’t bend that far.

[squarebarb]

LOL! Me neither! I really need a good grammar instruction book, just to have as a reference. Maybe I’ll check Amazon.

I remember having to prase sentences in I think 6th grade and failing miserably.

Will check that Wikipedia article now.

[carton253]

Here is a section from Airport:

By the way... this is the moment of truth. This is where 410 pages have led.

In. D.O. Guerrero's mind the last few minutes had been a jumbled blur. He had not fully comprehended everything that Demerest said. But one thing penetrated. He realized that like so many of his other grand designs, this one, too, had failed. Somewhere-as always happened with whatever he attempted-he had bungled. All his life had been a failure. With bitterness, he knew his death would be a failure too.

His back was braced against the inside of the toilet door. He felt pressure on it, and knew that at moment the pressure would increase so that he could no longer hold the door closed. Desperately, he fumbled with the attache case, reaching for the string beneath the handle which would release the square of plastic, actuating the clothespin switch and detonating the dynamite inside. Even as he found the string and tugged, he wondered if the bomb he had made would be a failure also.

In his last split second of life and comprehension, D.O. Guerrero learned it was not.

Reading that... its okay. It's not sit on your seat edge of writing. I already know how the bomb works cause Hailey reminds me every chance he gets. But, it could be a whole lot more exciting.