« jumping, and readers | Main | writing sex (again), fanfic, slash, and making light »
more questions: Gabriel Oak, and playful language
Revonda asked on the (defunct) forum boards:
Are we going to find out the meaning of Gabriel's notation from MacBeth under the picture he drew of Elizabeth's mother? I haven't read MacBeth in years, not since I attempted to teach it to 9th graders who just couldn't understand why the characters talked "so funny." So, I'm rereading it now--in an attempt to unravel the clue.Now see, I'd say that's going beyond the call of duty. I'm very impressed that Revonda should go re-read MacBeth just to figure out my little hint. I'm hoping in the meantime she's read Fire Along the Sky, which will answer her question (at least in part). Because of course I can't come out and tell you; what's the fun in that? And to turn the tables: anybody know where I got the name Gabriel Oak? It's a tribute to a particular character in a particular novel.
Pam had a few questions, which I'll now try to take in bite sized bits:
Waddaya think of mixed metaphors or invented euphemisms that don't work? Wordplay, I guess. Is it pretentious, irreverent, or is it essential to the development of our language? Also - and this is personal (so I'll post it on a blog, hah)- I just returned to work from a mat leave and have found I'm now responsible to write articles for the company magazine. How do you handle criticism from an editor you barely know - or is that better than one you do know? Should I get to know her better? Have you addressed this before, and if so - please point so I can click. Keep up the good fight.Mixed metaphors and wordplay are hard to do well, and mostly have to be restricted to very limited use in dialogue. Remember this basic rule: you're creating a fiction bubble, and drawing attention to the language itself is like throwing a dart at that bubble.
You've got a character who wallows in malapropisms, you may make the reader pay attention to the wrong things. I know this problem because my father was an ace when it came to this stuff, and I'm always tempted to use his malapropisms when I write about him -- but usually they don't work.
Now, if you're talking about wordplay off the page, in the spoken language -- of course. Language is always flexing its muscle, changing, growing. We play with language as we use it. All good and necessary. My motto is, play with your morphology, see what new words pop up. I kept track of new coinages when I was a faculty member. One of my favorites was babe-age as in "Check out the babe-age!" I don't think that one has stuck in general usage, but there are other new words being bandied about that will. Jump in, it's fun.
As to working with a new editor: As this is non-fiction you're going to be writing, there's less room for you to beat your chest and announce with great drama that you are an artist. You will have to figure out the tone of the publication and the culture of the place that produces it, and yes, you need to get to know the editor better. Just sit down and have a conversation. Ask him or her how they like to go about editing, if they have any conventions you should know about, what they look for in a well written piece. Stick to talking about work related writing, if you can.
December 5, 2004 12:17 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.tiedtothetracks.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.cgi/276
Comments
Thanks for the tips. I'm sure the talks with my editor will help a lot. Returning to the workforce after a bit, I know I got hung up on all our titles at work. The reality is, both of us are just people doing a job. That could be the spirit of Christmas talking though.
Posted by: Pam at December 5, 2004 01:57 PM
"Remember this basic rule: you're creating a fiction bubble, and drawing attention to the language itself is like throwing a dart at that bubble." Well put. I just ran across this yesterday, from Ursula LeGuin:
"In fact, while we read a novel, we are insane -- bonkers. We believe in the existence of people who aren't there, we hear their voices, we watch the battle of Borodino with them, we may even become Napoleon. Sanity returns (in most cases) when the book is closed. Is it any wonder that no truly respectable society has ever trusted its artists?"
Posted by: Robyn at December 5, 2004 02:01 PM
Ursula strikes again. She really is good.
Pam -- funny, Christmas usually does the opposite for me. All the over crowding and commercials -- when the thirty year old ad for Salad Shooters show up, you know Christmas is around the corner. All those crappy kitchen implements they sell to gullible teenagers who have to get something for their mother, and hey. A salad shooter sounds kinda cool. So I'm usually on a shorter tether this time of year, especially as where I live, it's hard not to be Christian. But I persist.
Posted by: sara at December 5, 2004 02:19 PM
You know, I felt that name was familiar when I first read it, but I didn't think too much about it until you mentioned the tribute to another character-- it's to one of Evangeline's boyfriends in Hardy's FAR FROM THE MADDENING CROWD--right??? Now, I suppose I'll have to re-read it too. First, Shakespeare, now Hardy. You have a true gift of expanding one's education!
Posted by: Revonda at December 5, 2004 05:15 PM
Yep, I agree: It's Gabriel Oak from Hardy's Far From the Madding Crowd, a long-suffering character that stands by patiently through the years until Bathsheba agrees to marry him. A pretty good film was made of this with Julie Christie and Alan Bates (would have given your mysterious person from the CA visit a run for his money in terms of heartthrob/hunk/hottie given the 30+ years offset) in the 1960's (Now, doesn't that date me!).
Posted by: asdfg at December 6, 2004 06:55 AM