Fringe Fiction Unlimited discussion
Questions/Help Section
>
Things that annoy you in books
Lily wrote: "Thank you! I've long since learned that dialogue tags are optional. Tags, whether dialogue or action, are just to make sure it's clear who's talking, and usually only useful when there's multiple c..."I think your post is in reply to a comment I deleted in error.
Either way, dialog tags are generally not needed. In the rough draft, when I write dialog (especially if it's just between two characters) I don't bother including dialog tags at all (or any stage business). I find this helps me to find the natural rhythm of the conversation. Later, I'll go in and add action and tags for fine tuning the flow, adding pauses and beats where necessary.
Gregor wrote: "Lily wrote: "Thank you! I've long since learned that dialogue tags are optional. Tags, whether dialogue or action, are just to make sure it's clear who's talking, and usually only useful when there..."Yep, that was my reply to your comment :)
Also, dialog and dialogue are two different things, to let you know ;)
I do the same. Add tags later to make sure there's a continuous flow, or sometimes, a needed pause.
Lily wrote: "Gregor wrote: "Also, dialog and dialogue are two different things, to let you know."How so? I thought dialog was an alternate spelling in American English that was generally tolerated.
Gregor wrote: "Lily wrote: "Gregor wrote: "Also, dialog and dialogue are two different things, to let you know."How so? I thought dialog was an alternate spelling in American English that was generally tolerated."
It's not an alternate spelling, they're both nouns. A dialog is an actual log, often used in computer language. Dialogue is words spoken out loud (within the context of the written word, of course).
Lily wrote: "Gregor wrote: "Lily wrote: "Gregor wrote: "Also, dialog and dialogue are two different things, to let you know."How so? I thought dialog was an alternate spelling in American English that was gen..."
You may want to do some additional research. I'm not contesting the IT-related spelling. However, 'dialog' is indeed an alternate spelling that has two less letters, and this is why I will continue to use it when typing things out on message boards. In a book, however, I'd likely go the extra mile and tack on those extra letters.
Well, agree to disagree. Thoough even Merriam Webster, and American English dictionary, shows it's two different things. *shrug*
Mod
Dialogue is preferred for exactly the reason you describe. True. However, dialog isn't incorrect on a Goodreads thread, as it is listed as an alternate spelling in several sources. It may be incorrect, and likely is, according to most style manuals currently in existence today.
I find it unfortunate anyone would claim it's an alternate spelling. It's a phonetic spelling. The "gue" sound tends to be pronounced more in Canada English, Brittish and Australian, whereas it tends to be dropped in American English. Which is fine, each country to their own, I have no problem with that. However, on any forum it is the written word and using phonetic spelling lends confusion considering so many are from around the world.
And for anyone nervous about these things in their writing, every single one can be fixed by reading the book I mentioned earlier ( self editing for fiction writers)I have no affiliation with this book. I do think it should be required reading before being allowed to publish a book, though. Every book I R2R and beta read has badly needed it. Even if you don't follow the advice, you will know publishing standards and defy them intentionally, not BC you're clueless as to their existence.
Lily wrote: "I find it unfortunate anyone would claim it's an alternate spelling. It's a phonetic spelling. The "gue" sound tends to be pronounced more in Canada English, Brittish and Australian, whereas it ten..."I will defend my informal usage of the alternate spelling 'dialog' as acceptable to the death, no matter how unfortunate you may find it. If it causes confusion, so be it. Readers of text on the Internet have suffered far worse.
I don't have any one thing that bugs me, per se. It's all in the execution. Love triangles can be horrible when they are unnessasary or if they are handled badly. On the other hand, one of my favorite books of all time is A Tale of Two Cities and the love triangle aspect is an enormous part of that book, but it is integral to the story (and has real consequences for those involved) and is handled beautifully.Basically, I'm willing to accept anything if it's relevant to the story and is written well.
I guess my problem would be stories that are poorly written and useless scenes.
I hate when authors describe everything: Her milky white hand was already shaking uncontrollably as she pushed the rough and battered door to the overly bright room. Okay so that's not the best example, but seriously her milky white hand and why are you describing the door it is insignificant...I mean come on. I get that sometimes it adds to the story and helps you picture it, but some authors do it too much. And the worst is when they go on for pages explaining what something looks like. It is boring. Don't do that. I think a page is enough.
The macmillan dictionary has this for dialog:an American spelling of dialogue
Of course in Canada you follow the British rule. Canada is still a colony after all.
Yet Gregor is right, and if everything else in your book uses American spelling, it might be strange and unwise to use dialogue.
We do not follow any Brittish rule, thanks.As I already said, agree to disagree, and let it go.
I would much rather get back to the topic.
Brittney wrote: "I hate when authors describe everything: Her milky white hand was already shaking uncontrollably as she pushed the rough and battered door to the overly bright room. Okay so that's not the best exa..."Not a Stephen King fan, eh?
I don't mind description. I read a lot of classics, which are heavy on it. What I don't like is when authors describe the mundane events of someone's life, like we need to hear about every day even when nothing happens. If I wanted to read that, I'd read my diary over and over!
I've read some of his stuff and I liked it...took me awhile though. And I have to say that is probably why I don't like most classics. Sometimes it works and the book is great and other times I can't finish it.I agree with that too. Maybe they want to make the book longer...who knows...but I find it pointless.
Character names I can't pronounce (I read out loud in my mind and that makes it very difficult).
M.D. wrote: "Character names I can't pronounce (I read out loud in my mind and that makes it very difficult)."My hard limit is three syllables. Any more than that and my eyes glaze over.
Mod
I second that. I'm at a loss for what to say about a book when that happens.
G.G. wrote: "The macmillan dictionary has this for dialog:an American spelling of dialogue
Of course in Canada you follow the British rule. Canada is still a colony after all.
Yet Gregor is right, and if eve..."
Thanks, G.G.. Yes, dialog is 'an American spelling of dialogue.' However, Lily is right in that it's not the preferred or most commonly used spelling in the U.S.. While at the same time, she is clearly wrong in her assertion that dialog is not an acceptable alternate spelling, as a quick Google search or flipping open a dictionary (a sort of catalog of words) will reveal.
Wow, say goodbye to the topic because apparantly no one can look up "agree to disagree" in google search.I will make myself clear. Anyone who wants to continue having an open and adult dicussion with me about this, can send me a private message. Otherwise, this conversation is over.
Brittney wrote: "I have to say that is probably why I don't like most classics. Sometimes it works and the book is great and other times I can't finish it.
I agree with that too. Maybe they want to make the book longer...who knows...but I find it pointless. ..."
I was told by a lit teacher back in the Stone Age when I went to school that Dickens and his contemporaries were paid by the word, so they never used one word where two would do the job as well. Don't know if that's true, but it sure would explain a lot...
I agree with that too. Maybe they want to make the book longer...who knows...but I find it pointless. ..."
I was told by a lit teacher back in the Stone Age when I went to school that Dickens and his contemporaries were paid by the word, so they never used one word where two would do the job as well. Don't know if that's true, but it sure would explain a lot...
I've heard that too, Jack. Many were published in newspapers but even the book publishers paid by the word.
Justin wrote: "When I'm freaking loving the book from all angles and then I get to the end and wanna hurl because the ending is so bad that I'm a bit dead inside because I've been so let down."Never had that with a book, but I get the same feeling with horror movies that bring in religion in the last 10 minutes. :-(
Lily wrote: "Wow, say goodbye to the topic because apparantly no one can look up "agree to disagree" in google search.I will make myself clear. Anyone who wants to continue having an open and adult dicussion ..."
Both parties have to agree to disagree for it to work. And, generally, people agree to disagree on matters of opinion, not on matters where the dispute is over an easily verifiable fact.
Plus, calling out 'agree to disagree' comes across as both condescending and dismissive. (A quick Google search will show that many people feel the same way about this.)
And now you're resorting to name calling?
Who is not being an adult here? I've admitted time and again that you're at least partially right. Why is it that you can't admit that I, too, am at least partially right?
G.G. is correct, you were the one who derailed this thread by attempting to'school' another poster in word usage, which is behavior that most people consider to be pretty obnoxious.
Mod
Let's all return to the topic of the thread and any further, unrelated discussions that spiraled from it between members should be continued in PM. That will be the meaning of "agreeing to disagree" here because we are all adults, we are all entitled to our opinions while respecting others.
If this thread is done then I'll delete it. If you're all fine with it continuing, then back to the subject of irksome book tendencies.
Brittney wrote: "I hate when authors describe everything: Her milky white hand was already shaking uncontrollably as she pushed the rough and battered door to the overly bright room. Okay so that's not the best exa..."I think they do it for word count.
How about long paragraphs to restart? It's not a new book but I'm reading Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad and there's a paragraph that lasts 4 pages. It's a 110 page book.
Virginia wrote: "How about long paragraphs to restart? It's not a new book but I'm reading Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad and there's a paragraph that lasts 4 pages. It's a 110 page ..."Exactly! I thought the same when I read that part.
This is a cool conversation, so I want to add my thoughts: The biggest annoyance for me in books is any scene that is overtly sexual or violent for completely gratuitous reasons. Case in point, I recently blah-ed over a werewolf "romance" written by a well known, published author who threw an old, fat pedophile and his under-the-age-of-ten harem boys into the plot for seemingly no purpose other than to disgust the reader. Shock value is lost on me. It went out with Marylin Manson and his ripped up fishnets.
Shock value is never a good idea. Even if it works once or twice you have to keep escalating and then you have a mess that comes up against the local obscenity laws. :-)
I personally hate excruciatingly long chapters where you just want to yell "get to the point, author!!" Also hate when there is a sudden shift in characters, or time without due notice.
Love triangles. Agreed. Hate it.Extremely masculine men like alphas or hit men in incongruous situations like wearing floral aprons or discussing whether peg perego or graco are better strollers. Fine, they can cook and procreate, but must we 'tame' them to implausibility?
Characters acting like idiots.This is a pet peeve of mine, because it annoys me even when the author carefully developed the character and the situation, and I know that character would never have NOT done that stupid thing, and omitting it would have been bad writing. . . .
Not that all the times when it annoys me are in fact justified. 0:)
Mod
Justin wrote: "I just read a book that had six short stories and all six did one of the things that annoys me..crap endings! Every ending was either uhh what just happened, okay or WTF..I came to the conclusion t..."I need a good ending too. I don't necessarily need "closure" but something that sticks with me, makes me think...
Mod
A good solid ending is always nice. I'm not a big fan of cliff hanger endings. You can write a series and wrap up most of each book's story.
I hate predictable happy ever after endings. That's not realistic writing. IF something good happens at the end fine, but don't lay it out where you know good trumps evil. Yes if it's a bad ending your pissed, but suck it up like you have a pair and deal with the reality of life. Otherwise read Harry Potter and get all gitty at the end.
I don't like: -love triangles but some authors managed to pull it of.
-Under developed characters
-when the world building is vague/uncompleted
-unrealistic characters
-Typo's ( a couple I can overlook but to much becomes distracting.
-I absolutely hate weak female characters that need a guy to save them.
- Instant love
Jason wrote: "Justin wrote: "I just read a book that had six short stories and all six did one of the things that annoys me..crap endings! Every ending was either uhh what just happened, okay or WTF..I came to t..."Yeah. I think good endings are very important, for books...and TV shows! I think if the ending is bad, it can ruin the rest of the book for me.
I don't like1. Too much description
2. metaphors...a few is fine. But I get annoyed if it's excessive, and especially if the metaphors don't make sense to me.
3. Long chapters. I read somewhere, long ago, that a writer should use long chapters because then the reader won't put the book down. That annoyed me, and now sometimes when I read books with long chapters, I imagine the writer is following that advice.
I like reading in short spurts and prefer to stop when there's a chapter end or section end. If I'm really into the book, I'll keep reading. But I like the idea of continuing to read because I love the book and not because the writer hasn't given me a good stopping point.
Virginia wrote: "and then you have a mess that comes up against the local obscenity laws. :-)"Richard wrote: "Ooh, that couldn't possibly be a reference to the recent Isaacs obscenity case..."
No, just cynicism. I was reading She Must Have Known: The Trial of Rosemary West at the time and it talks a lot about how this need for some greater shock or stimulation is part of an impulsive serial killers psychology.
Ooh I forgot stupid virgin sex scenes, this is a must have in the new adult books.
Fringe Fiction Unlimited
Books mentioned in this topic
"She Must Have Known" The Trial Of Rosemary West (other topics)Heart of Darkness (other topics)
Heart of Darkness (other topics)
Authors mentioned in this topic
Joseph Conrad (other topics)Joseph Conrad (other topics)
LOL... :-) Yes, of course I know that. But it still annoys the hell out of me. The apparent corporate obsession wi..."
Corporatism ownership, it's gotten out of hand. This is why I avoid brand names like the plague.