Tutorial Writers' Wretreat or Crytics' Crypt? (love needed)

[spawning of Bob]

Now.

 

[spawning of Bob]

I'm waiting.

 

[Slanputin]

@spawning of Bob perhaps the next discussion prompt could be "stealing some-one's thunder"

 

[spawning of Bob]

Also, for the record, this thread is awesome.

There is no other thunder.

 

[Slanputin]

>.< I am the most thundery thunder

 

[spawning of Bob]

You put the mutton Vindaloo in the transmogrifier again? Lager is the only thing that can kill a vindaloo!

 

[lordkingcrow]

Well Slanputin,
I can agree, to some extent, with Fitzgerald on this point. The overuse of the exclamation point is something seen in amateur writing as some people lack the ability to describe something in detail and so thrust this little bit of punctuation in there to get their point across. However, I think you go a bit overboard. Exclamation points are in the English language for a reason. You might as well be telling us the same thing about a question mark. After all, shouldn't the writer be able to describe the situation without the use of this bit of punctuation?

Example 1 (expression of emotion):

"No!" he cried as he watched, in horror, as his father was spitted on the swordsman's blade.
"No," he cried as he watched, in horror, as his father was spitted on the swordsman's blade.

Which conveys more power and emotion?

Example 2 (the overuse of exclamation):

"Let us feast!" he shouted, patting his companion on the shoulder. "Dorag you sly bastard! We would never have made it out alive had you and your men not come along!"

"Let us feast," he shouted, patting his companion on the shoulder. "Dorag, you sly bastard," he chuckled, "we would never have made it out alive had you and your men not come along."

It's not a big difference, but the use of exclamation really isn't required in this second example. The author can add just a few words here and there in order to paint a scene.

That being said, I think you also have to consider the time period in which Fitzgerald wrote. Yes, some great works were produced during that time period, but style changes through the years (Many, many years since his work was first published). Though he should be applauded for his achievements and his perspective, to me, the point he was trying to make seemed more focused on what was going on at the time. You refer to an exclamation point as "spam" and "poor journalism". I think these two articles go hand in hand. In an age where media and entertainment businesses didn't have all the other ways of getting your attention as they do now, how else would you grab someone's attention? Look up old newspapers, movie posters, or ads from that time and compare it to today. I bet you'll find that most modern stuff never touches the exclamation point where as the old used it more liberally.
So, that's what I got. Thoughts?

Edit: So in my reading I missed the end quote and thought everything you posted was a quote from ol Fitz. I've edited it a bit. My bad.

 

[lordkingcrow]

Don't worry Putin, I heard your thunder first and have responded in kind. Bob... Oh Bob, Bob, Bob... I think you might need some help with your thieving thunder ways. I'm going to refer you to TTA (Thunder Thieves Anonymous).

 

[Scalenex]

I am inclined to agree with Fitzgerald. I'm sure if someone looked hard enough they might be able to find an exclamation point in one of my fluff pieces, but in generally I try to confine them to "quotes" or inner thoughts from characters. In a fiction piece if you want to convey excitement, have the characters get excited. Hopefully the reader cares about the characters s/he has been following and will empathize with the character's emotion.

Tacticas I think of as being the writer talking to the reader. Exclamation points are okay when used sparingly.

A lot of well-known writers also disparage semicolons, and make extreme statements about never using them. I don't have a problem with them. Semicolons let you combine two independent clauses into a single sentence without a preposition (and, or, but etc). In most cases two clauses are either unrelated enough to warrant being in different sentences or a preposition will clarify the relationship better, but if neither of the last two things I say apply then a semicolon is okay.

I'm not trying to hijack your point (like Bob). The point about semicolons is that once writers are asked about the craft of writing they tend to feel obligated to make sweeping generalizations and hyperbolic statements.

Avoiding exclamation points goes into the basic precept of storytelling/writing/plays/flash mobs/movies. "Show don't tell."

"I am scared!" does not convey as much as carefully describing a scary scene and the characters organic reaction to it.

 

[spawning of Bob]

Sorry @Slanputin !

I didn't even spot your prompt because it must have been posted while I was writing my own. What rotten luck!

In general terms, I think the exclamation mark has lost impact. I PREFER USING ALL CAPS. ISN'T THAT BETTER?

In writing I often use it to distinguish words which are broadcast.

"Hey Gordon, watch this. Stick your head over the parapet, Bob! I think the enemy have gone away!"

That is cheaper than referring to Elton murmuring an aside then calling in a loud voice.

I'll analyze how I use the thing next time I write a block of dialogue.

 

[Slanputin]

Ok, so I disagree with LKC on some points: exclamation points are not equivalent to question marks. Question marks, along with commas and full-stops (oh go on then, 'periods'), are integral to good grammar: to posit a question without a question mark would be poor grammar. Conversely, exclamation points are optional. Don't get me wrong: exclamation points have their place. I'm not against using them, but they need to be applied properly. Applying them properly (as I interpret it) means bringing attention to specific and significant points. The only place I diverge from this somewhat is in spoken language - people don't speak in essays after all, and it may help to vocalise a character's emotional distress. However, even then applying them often can and will reduce their impact.

@lordkingcrow I think you may have misinterpreted my final paragraph. I wasn't basing my argument solely on Fitzgerald's opinion, it was just a quote which seemed relevant to my point of interest. I don't believe exclamations points are "spam" or " poor journalism" (as I said, I'm not against using them), however they are often employed by the author's of such things in an overbearing, obtrusive, and patronising manner. Whilst they may be a useful tool in the realm of flash-media, I think the overuse of them is something that should be avoided in prose.

Generally, they're easily abused and patronising. Like Scalenex said, I feel the author should focus on conveying their story in an organic manner rather than forcing the point with a "!".

I hold my hands up to your point on semi-colons @Scalenex, it's definitely something I trip over now and again.

Ha, not to worry @spawning of Bob at least the next discussion point is lined up and already sequestering in the back of our minds

 

[Slanputin]

Also, I've never been referred to as "Putin" before.....an unfortunate connotation to have when you're username was innocently inspired by a Boney M song

 

[spawning of Bob]

I think of you as" Slannie"

after seeing Putin as above, I was also bothered by the real world connection. if not for the @tag function I would have called you " 'putin".

Such an action would have reignited the great apostrophe debate. interesting times we live in.

 

[lordkingcrow]

I concede your point on the question mark. I think I made the error of speed reading through your original post. I guess I just never felt there was a major issue using an exclamation point if the situation requires it (which you appear to feel the same... I think?). I think the only place we differ is that I think it can make some text more powerful with it than without, but that's literature for you.

So I think we are all, roughly on the same page. My question is, in what situation would you use an exclamation point?

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

hahaha !!!

 

[lordkingcrow]

Hahaha! Love it.

 

[spawning of Bob]

OMG RARRR!
SO MANY OF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT WHFB AND 40K AT THE SAME TIME!!!!!!!!

THE TYRANIDS WILL COME AND DEVOUR US ALL FOR BREAKING THE WALL BETWEEN HIGH FANTASY AND FANTASY SCI-FI!!!
BEWARE! THE GREAT DEVOURER SHALL COME, THE SHADOW OF THE WARP SHALL BLOT OUT THE SKY AND THE PENANCE OF THE ELDER GODS WILL FALL UPON US!!!

OUR DOOM HAS COME!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!

i renounce all claims to punctuation and all caps

 

[Slanputin]

@lordkingcrow whenever you want to convey an extreme and/or highly emotional statement. Emphasis on the extreme, as it needs to distinguish the sentence from other commands/exclamations etc.

In terms of the impact on the audience, using it infrequently aids in bringing greater emphasis to the point (imo)

I'm beginning to feel this topic is reaching a conclusion. Bearing a reply from others, perhaps @spawning of Bob could start his topic soon

 

[Scalenex]

'm beginning to feel this topic is reaching a conclusion. Bearing a reply from others, perhaps @spawning of Bob could start his topic soon

I agree, we are ready to move on next topic.

So I ask you, cold blooded fellows (and fellasses),

• Does your god have any hold over me?
• The Old Ones are either dead, aloof or not coming back anytime soon. How can they bless? (a supernatural buff)
• Do the Old Ones care enough to curse (punish) their own? Or their perceived enemies?
• Are "blessings" from chaos just the flip side of a curse?
• If we concede that Tzeentch is a special case (layers upon layers of perception and deception, just like "This is starting to feel like inception... there is always a deeper level." @NIGHTBRINGER ) how would his "blessings / curses" feel different?

Let discussion be had.

I don't have as much to say as usual. The thing is one can universally talk about punctuation and formatting, or even dramatic conventions like character death, but in my view every writer can apply their own level of how powerful the acts of a god can be, how broad of a range of mortals the gods can "target", how present or absent the Old Ones are, how linked blessings and curses are from Chaos, and whether or not to take the bait Bob threw out to get in a flame contest with cultural references.

There is no right or wrong way to answer those questions. I was going to say, if you want to make gritty personal stories the gods should _____ and if you want to write sweeping epic stories the gods should _____, but I can't even do that.

You can make a story on the level of a single individuals struggles, losses, and triumphs whether the gods are always interfering or if the gods are always absent. The same goes for massive clashes of armies and nations. I would suggest not switching back and forth between interventionist and isolationist gods rapidly without a good reason. Wherever you fall on the spectrum of divine intervention, use it as a tool to enhance your stories, not drag them around.

So that's my two cents. Whatever you want to do in your fluff pieces is perfectly acceptable. You can make a polite suggestion for how you want me to handle the gods in my fluff pieces but I'm not obligated to follow it.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

@Scalenex : I'm just wondering if you're a professional writer. You always have seem to have some very deep and insightful thoughts on the subject of writing. I enjoy reading your comments.