Body Language

[Bramblethorn]

It is difficult to put body language into a story because all we authors have as tools are words. Too much emphasis on body movements can distract.

But I have a real problem with body language. Since the 1980s body language has been an accepted part of many recruitment interviewing techniques in the UK. I have a damaged and twisted back, with some completely and some partially fused vertebrae. So my body language is modified by that. I appear to be stiff and unbending.

Yup, body language gets badly over-interpreted. Stuff like eye contact - it's assumed that people who are sincere will make lots of eye contact, but this depends very much on culture (e.g. in China excessive eye contact is considered rude!) and on other issues. I'm autistic, and I have an aversion to eye contact that has nothing to do with sincerity; I've trained myself to do it in interview-type situations because it gets held against me otherwise, but when I'm really at ease with somebody I trust, I'm more likely to stare at a wall while I talk.

I proposed a break in the interview process (I had a ploy for that which I rarely used) to restart in a quarter of an hour. During that quarter of an hour my secretary ensured that the candidate visited the washroom, had a cup of coffee and a chat, and was able to relax a little.

Aww, that's lovely of you. I've interviewed a few candidates and it's awful for everybody when they panic. The worst one I had was a recorded video interview (candidates log on, get the questions, have ~ 2 minutes per question to respond). Guy froze, was literally silent for the first minute, and then couldn't say anything meaningful towards answering the questions, and because it was recorded there was no way to help him :-/

 

[SecondCircle]

Great point, and an interesting story.

For clerks, we would typically ask them two key questions:
"Do you have a reliable means to get to work every day?"
"Do you smoke?"

If we got a yes on the first and a no on the second, they were probably in the running.

As a reader, I'm annoyed by too much detailed description. Descriptions of common body language are like detailed descriptions of sex. They take me out of the story trying to figure out what the hell the characters are doing. And it rarely matters all that much. Let's see...he's turning his wrist to the left and she's...he can't do that...

I recently had a character visit the cheating wife he was poking. She opened the front door:

Before she could say a word, Ken pushed his way in stark naked. "Surprise!" he said, arms extended, jazz hands waving like he was Roy Fucking Scheider.​

I think I worked on that short paragraph a dozen times trying to come up with an image instead of a set of Twister instructions.



rj




(600)

True. Too much description can get characters all tangled in a reader's mind.

But adding in little bits of the way a character is acting or just nods to the setting they are in... doesn't have to be described in detail at all. Note that these are not fully realized breakaways from the dialogue, no flowing exposition or pretty word choice is even needed. It could be subtle hints of this, nods to that, without ever going the distance of becoming redundant.

One small way is with dialogue tags, as someone mentioned. Another is a short sentence or two of something relevant from the scene to keep the reader breathing in the setting. These are all just slight interjections to keep the entire scene alive, rather than only hearing a long trek of spoken dialogue.

I'd not read so much that the conversation gets lost with constant bombardment of distraction, but too little sounds... hollow to me. When there's two little, all my head can conjure up is two people in a vacuum talking. I can't see where they are, there's no atmospherics, there is only panning back and forth from Face A to Face B. The content of their words may be interesting and convey strong emotion, but that's all it ever achieves. It can read very lifeless at times.

Of course any writing device or technique can be horribly used or just botched by sloppy writing. I do not enjoy when midstream in dialogue, the narrator steps away for an info dump on something that was said in attempt to keep the reader up to speed. Personally I like when certain things in the dialogue is "hinted at" or "alluded to". Sometimes being vague will draw intrigue. Not so much that it's confusing, but just so much that the reader wants to peer deeper to find the "inside" of an inside joke.

 

[lovecraft68]

Not sure I'm totally on topic with this because its more an observation-a personal one-than an actual answer or suggestion to the body language discussion.

I'm a simple writer(go ahead, we know you're simple LC, you don't have to tell us) I just write, I tell my story or in many ways it tells itself through me. I've been told time and again by people here and from other places dialogue is my strength.

I'm told that peopel can pretty much hear my characters talking, can see the room around them, they can feel the action, both sex and violence(as I write a lot of that) but how do I do it? Why is it a strength?

I don't know, meaning I can't tell you what it is I do nor could I tell you how to do it.

I simply write sometimes it comes out very well, other times, not so much. But I write it, that's all. I get some long detailed reviews from people "Love the way you did this and mixed this and portrayed that and your use of this..."

I shake my head, I wrote a story, if I did everything they say I did it was by shit luck or maybe a knack for it I'm not aware of. I consider myself instinctual, I go with what I feel not what I'm supposed to do

All that leads to my point that a lot of what I have read here is really over thinking and over complicating it.

See it in your mind and tell me(the reader) what you see. Watch people in real life, what are they doing and what do you think they are thinking while they do it, then envision your characters doing it. Its not brain surgery and its not something that should require long deep introspective looks into "how do I write"

Just write, you'll pull it off or you won't, but you never will without trial and error and no one gets it right the first time, so keep writing and trying and stop thinking.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Not sure I'm totally on topic with this because its more an observation-a personal one-than an actual answer or suggestion to the body language discussion.

I'm a simple writer(go ahead, we know you're simple LC, you don't have to tell us) I just write, I tell my story or in many ways it tells itself through me. I've been told time and again by people here and from other places dialogue is my strength.

I'm told that peopel can pretty much hear my characters talking, can see the room around them, they can feel the action, both sex and violence(as I write a lot of that) but how do I do it? Why is it a strength?

I don't know, meaning I can't tell you what it is I do nor could I tell you how to do it.

I simply write sometimes it comes out very well, other times, not so much. But I write it, that's all. I get some long detailed reviews from people "Love the way you did this and mixed this and portrayed that and your use of this..."

I shake my head, I wrote a story, if I did everything they say I did it was by shit luck or maybe a knack for it I'm not aware of. I consider myself instinctual, I go with what I feel not what I'm supposed to do

All that leads to my point that a lot of what I have read here is really over thinking and over complicating it.

See it in your mind and tell me(the reader) what you see. Watch people in real life, what are they doing and what do you think they are thinking while they do it, then envision your characters doing it. Its not brain surgery and its not something that should require long deep introspective looks into "how do I write"

Just write, you'll pull it off or you won't, but you never will without trial and error and no one gets it right the first time, so keep writing and trying and stop thinking.

I agree.

I think we come from the factory prewired and ready to go for sex. Where we go wrong is when we think instead of fuck. When we think instead of do anything, unless its some novel situation God didn't figure on...like Siamese twin pussy..

 

[SecondCircle]

Yup, body language gets badly over-interpreted. Stuff like eye contact - it's assumed that people who are sincere will make lots of eye contact, but this depends very much on culture (e.g. in China excessive eye contact is considered rude!) and on other issues. I'm autistic, and I have an aversion to eye contact that has nothing to do with sincerity; I've trained myself to do it in interview-type situations because it gets held against me otherwise, but when I'm really at ease with somebody I trust, I'm more likely to stare at a wall while I talk.



Aww, that's lovely of you. I've interviewed a few candidates and it's awful for everybody when they panic. The worst one I had was a recorded video interview (candidates log on, get the questions, have ~ 2 minutes per question to respond). Guy froze, was literally silent for the first minute, and then couldn't say anything meaningful towards answering the questions, and because it was recorded there was no way to help him :-/

I do much the same during conversation. I don't typically hold eye contact. If I'm relaxed or paying attention, I'm often staring off elsewhere and soaking in the words that the other person is saying.

No example of body language is fool proof when it comes to the interpretation of said body language. What we're seeing isn't exactly always how it is.

But honestly, put a certain type of body language in the dialogue within context, pair that with proper characterization, and the movements will mean something. For example, we seem to be using nervousness as an example. People are different in so many ways. But... in real life, we know when someone is acting out of character, do we not? We watch people all the time actually, more than we might realize. Think of when someone was telling a lie, a time when you had no other facts to actually check against, but something in your body screamed that the person was acting off or not making sense. Maybe they were too brief or blunt. Maybe they changed the subject. Maybe they normally DO look you in the eye, but they seemed to have difficulty maintaining eye contact that time.

Ever seen two people and though, "Man, just fuck already." Without any words being said? Sometimes certain looks can carry weight. (Sometimes they're just a look. <shrug> )

Of course no one facial expression or little nervous tick will ever be universal for everyone. Some people just bite their lip. Some people just can't keep their hands still. And the idea isn't necessarily to squint our eyes and interpret exactly what they mean in every scenario or conversation. It's merely to give more dimension to the character talking. To add flavor maybe, to add intent sometimes, to add to personality, to paint a scene better, to make them seem like moving, living, breathing humans, and not just a constellation of quotation marks.

Hmm. Should I remember I can post a small scene from a video of dialogue, and perhaps we could, eh, discuss what we see and how we'd put it in writing.

 

[SecondCircle]

Not sure I'm totally on topic with this because its more an observation-a personal one-than an actual answer or suggestion to the body language discussion.

I'm a simple writer(go ahead, we know you're simple LC, you don't have to tell us) I just write, I tell my story or in many ways it tells itself through me. I've been told time and again by people here and from other places dialogue is my strength.

I'm told that peopel can pretty much hear my characters talking, can see the room around them, they can feel the action, both sex and violence(as I write a lot of that) but how do I do it? Why is it a strength?

I don't know, meaning I can't tell you what it is I do nor could I tell you how to do it.

I simply write sometimes it comes out very well, other times, not so much. But I write it, that's all. I get some long detailed reviews from people "Love the way you did this and mixed this and portrayed that and your use of this..."

I shake my head, I wrote a story, if I did everything they say I did it was by shit luck or maybe a knack for it I'm not aware of. I consider myself instinctual, I go with what I feel not what I'm supposed to do

All that leads to my point that a lot of what I have read here is really over thinking and over complicating it.

See it in your mind and tell me(the reader) what you see. Watch people in real life, what are they doing and what do you think they are thinking while they do it, then envision your characters doing it. Its not brain surgery and its not something that should require long deep introspective looks into "how do I write"

Just write, you'll pull it off or you won't, but you never will without trial and error and no one gets it right the first time, so keep writing and trying and stop thinking.

I don't overthink this either when I write. Not consciously. It just happens that way naturally and flows.

But just because a singer has a natural voice doesn't mean they aren't singing notes and following chord progressions as they play.

It's a simple discussion of certain things that happen as we write, not an unerring technical manual or "how-to". Just observations. Just discussion.

You write what sounds natural to you. This is a fair enough way to put it. This discussion is just a "musing" of why some dialogue sounds natural, and why some of it seems empty to me.

Just chatting. This is where we socialize and discuss the craft of writing is it not?

 

[lovecraft68]

I agree.

I think we come from the factory prewired and ready to go for sex. Where we go wrong is when we think instead of fuck. When we think instead of do anything, unless its some novel situation God didn't figure on...like Siamese twin pussy..

You know that expression go with your gut? That's the way.

I remember a long time ago a teacher asking us how many times we were unsure of an answer, picked one, then panicked and went back and changed it only to find out the first one was the right one.

The first one is usually the right one because we picked it instinctively. Then we start thinking and screw it all up.

 

[SecondCircle]

You know that expression go with your gut? That's the way.

I remember a long time ago a teacher asking us how many times we were unsure of an answer, picked one, then panicked and went back and changed it only to find out the first one was the right one.

The first one is usually the right one because we picked it instinctively. Then we start thinking and screw it all up.

I sought only discussion, not matter of fact answers.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

You know that expression go with your gut? That's the way.

I remember a long time ago a teacher asking us how many times we were unsure of an answer, picked one, then panicked and went back and changed it only to find out the first one was the right one.

The first one is usually the right one because we picked it instinctively. Then we start thinking and screw it all up.

Sure. I tested the theory a zillion times, and its pretty much the way to go, because we sense so much more than we attend to consciously.

 

[lovecraft68]

Just chatting. This is where we socialize and discuss the craft of writing is it not?

I once told someone exactly why I think my dialogue sounds very natural and is a strength for me.

The answer is simple. I grew up in a hell environment and was lonely, then when not alone didn't know how to interact with other kids. I made up people in my head and talked to them all day long and I created conversations in my head between them as I sat and 'listened' so when I write I hear these people talking and its like I'm transcribing what they say.

The person I told that to, said, "That's a great story! You're always at it, aren't you! Now how about the real reason?

 

[lovecraft68]

I sought only discussion, not matter of fact answers.

Right, got that, but that quote was pretty much to JBJ.

 

[SecondCircle]

Right, got that, but that quote was pretty much to JBJ.

I see.

 

[SecondCircle]

Let us try a little exercise with dialogue eh? Just for the sake of discussion or fun. I'm going to post a scene from a movie that is very dialogue heavy. We'll discuss what we see, and perhaps even suggest how we might translate the scene into a literary story.

*eh, note that I understand there are clear differences in how a scene is shot in filmmaking and how one might be written in a story. Nor would I ask for any review or thoughts on the film itself. I would only ask for thoughts on the dialogue and body language in question, subtle though they may be.

https://youtu.be/8uldpQpoZQM

Thoughts?

I may also point to a later scene that excellently builds upon this one, especially as pertains to the spoken dialogue and the body language therein.

 

[SecondCircle]

Now while not terribly full of extravagant examples of body language in said clip, think of how you would illustrate such a scene in a story. You could write only the spoken words, with simple dialogue tags like, "he asked" or "he stuttered".

But would it truly capture the scene? The atmosphere? The tension? One of the lines might read...

"You are harboring enemies of the state, are you not?" Landa asked.

"Yes," the man replied.

"You're hiding them under your floorboards, yes?"

"Yes."

To me, that is enough to tell me what's going on... but those looks man. The casual way the Colonel asks if he may smoke his pipe, then discusses things like they are a business deal. Merrily enough, with some measure of charm even. He's relaxed, he's confident. He's sure. The other man simply sits with some hidden measure of contempt trying to act normal somewhat. Until the dialogue turns. Theres that look in Landa's eyes. You can practically feel the shift of tension in the room, just from that facial expression. You can see the man breaking down. You can see the guilt he knows he already feels for what he'll choose to do.

This CAN be conveyed strictly within quotes, but does it feel right? Do you feel the glare of a Nazi Colonel? Are you looking through that man's eyes, first person POV. Are you FEELING those thoughts he's having? The way he says yes... he can barely force out the breath to say the word.

You don't need endless description. Just like a surgeon doesn't need to slice the entire body to find the organ he needs. The right tiny knives carefully placed in the right places, you can carve into an audience's heart.

Or is the scene served simply by "Yes," he whispered, choking on the word...?

 

[lovecraft68]

Now while not terribly full of extravagant examples of body language in said clip, think of how you would illustrate such a scene in a story. You could write only the spoken words, with simple dialogue tags like, "he asked" or "he stuttered".

But would it truly capture the scene? The atmosphere? The tension? One of the lines might read...

"You are harboring enemies of the state, are you not?" Landa asked.

"Yes," the man replied.

"You're hiding them under your floorboards, yes?"

"Yes."

To me, that is enough to tell me what's going on... but those looks man. The casual way the Colonel asks if he may smoke his pipe, then discusses things like they are a business deal. Merrily enough, with some measure of charm even. He's relaxed, he's confident. He's sure. The other man simply sits with some hidden measure of contempt trying to act normal somewhat. Until the dialogue turns. Theres that look in Landa's eyes. You can practically feel the shift of tension in the room, just from that facial expression. You can see the man breaking down. You can see the guilt he knows he already feels for what he'll choose to do.

This CAN be conveyed strictly within quotes, but does it feel right? Do you feel the glare of a Nazi Colonel? Are you looking through that man's eyes, first person POV. Are you FEELING those thoughts he's having? The way he says yes... he can barely force out the breath to say the word.

You don't need endless description. Just like a surgeon doesn't need to slice the entire body to find the organ he needs. The right tiny knives carefully placed in the right places, you can carve into an audience's heart.

Or is the scene served simply by "Yes," he whispered, choking on the word...?

You know it occurs to me that this is a two way thing. You're speaking about the author can he/we convey what we saw, can we capture it, but...its up to the reader as well. Some readers really get a lot out of what they read and 'catch' everything some readers....don't.

Just like watching it, you're giving the scene a lot of props. I thought it was unoriginal and predictable(But that's Tarantino in a nutshell to me anyway) but neither of us are wrong, its what we take from it, so two readers....one may say "wow I could feel that smoldering gaze" the other would say, "Yeah, yeah, the guy confesses and they shoot up the floor boards yawn"

 

[SecondCircle]

You know it occurs to me that this is a two way thing. You're speaking about the author can he/we convey what we saw, can we capture it, but...its up to the reader as well. Some readers really get a lot out of what they read and 'catch' everything some readers....don't.

Just like watching it, you're giving the scene a lot of props. I thought it was unoriginal and predictable(But that's Tarantino in a nutshell to me anyway) but neither of us are wrong, its what we take from it, so two readers....one may say "wow I could feel that smoldering gaze" the other would say, "Yeah, yeah, the guy confesses and they shoot up the floor boards yawn"

Well, of course taste will always win out in anything as subjective as art. For example, I've always had people tell me how amazing the Fast and Furious movies were, or how excellent Harry Potter books are. They may very well be to some people, but they aren't my thing. Just not my tastes. So that goes without saying I suppose.

But the idea behind the clip isn't to necessarily praise the clip so much as see how we'd each do it differently.

 

[SecondCircle]

The clip that ties to this scene later in the film (the last clip for those that don't like them).

https://youtu.be/lydYhl1982Y

Bear in mind, she's the girl that took off running after the floorboards were shot up. She'll be (by no choice of her own) hosting a viewing of a Nazi hero film at her theater. Landa is the head of security as it were. So she's having a conversation with the man who had her family hunted and killed.

(Jesus, fuck, ignore the water mark. Apparently no clip shows the scene entirely save for this watermarked version.)

Now, I can see say, Lovecraft's point on this one. It could be boring to some, or out of anyone's taste. The focus is on their interaction, just as an example. And Tarantino is a good example of "some think terrible, some think awesome. " The characters actually birdwalk entirely, even venturing off onto how the dumbass strudel would taste.

The point behind that though (though, true, some think it's unnecessary or irrelevant) is the attempt at sustaining tension. It isn't just OMG tense... but the girl IS watching a man blabber on intellectually about a fucking strudel with the horrid thoughts of "he's the one that killed my family. Does he recognize me?"

So with that in mind, what would we all have done differently? Imagine you ARE in fact the reader, how could this be written to appeal to you? How would you feel if you were looking through the eyes of that french lady?

And for body language, that long stare at the end... what does that truly mean? Surely that's one of those body language examples that may be interpreted many ways. Does he know? Doesn't he? How would it translate to paper, er, laptop?

 

[Kethandra]

More and more, when first writing a scene, I just write the dialogue, with no description at all. Later, I flesh it out with what is needed to portray what I imagine. Usually, I need less description than I would have thought on the first writing.
That doesn't mean I don't have lots of expository chunks in the story, but I am finding that dialogue can do more describing than I once allowed for.


On body language, I think it's a great asset to dialogue in fiction, almost vital. I say almost because there are always plays and screenplays and radio. Shakespeare managed to tell a couple not-so-boring tales without much exposition at all.
Body language doesn't need to be described directly; it can be referred to in dialogue. ("Get your paws off me you damn dirty ape" let's us all know the action that has taken place, just as "Get your eyes off me, boy, before I snatch them outa your head and skullfuck you" let's us know where the boy's eyes were looking.

"X" She mumbled the answer, eyes to the ground, hands twisting at the cloth napkin in her lap.

versus

"X" She spat her response out, fists planted on her hips, brows furrowed as she stared down the questioner.

versus

"X" She said.

Body language matters, it's a writing decision on how best to convey it. And a fun one, with no single right answer.

 

[SecondCircle]

More and more, when first writing a scene, I just write the dialogue, with no description at all. Later, I flesh it out with what is needed to portray what I imagine. Usually, I need less description than I would have thought on the first writing.
That doesn't mean I don't have lots of expository chunks in the story, but I am finding that dialogue can do more describing than I once allowed for.


On body language, I think it's a great asset to dialogue in fiction, almost vital. I say almost because there are always plays and screenplays and radio. Shakespeare managed to tell a couple not-so-boring tales without much exposition at all.
Body language doesn't need to be described directly; it can be referred to in dialogue. ("Get your paws off me you damn dirty ape" let's us all know the action that has taken place, just as "Get your eyes off me, boy, before I snatch them outa your head and skullfuck you" let's us know where the boy's eyes were looking.

"X" She mumbled the answer, eyes to the ground, hands twisting at the cloth napkin in her lap.

versus

"X" She spat her response out, fists planted on her hips, brows furrowed as she stared down the questioner.

versus

"X" She said.

Body language matters, it's a writing decision on how best to convey it. And a fun one, with no single right answer.

Well met and well stated.

On many things in writing, there is no single right answer.

I do usually catch things like how the dialogue feels after I do a read through/edit. Often something so subtle can be added, or taken away to give it what it needs.

Good examples by the way.

 

[Handley_Page]

"Yes, dialogue tags," I nodded sagely. "An insidious way to insert adverbs, but it works for me." I looked back. "And here comes another," I smiled evilly.

Forgive my ignorance, please, but should that not be:-=

I looked back: "And here comes another," I smiled, evilly.

 

[SecondCircle]

Forgive my ignorance, please, but should that not be:-=

I looked back: "And here comes another," I smiled, evilly.

Hmm. Technically, one cannot "smile" nor "nod" words.

 

[sr71plt]

"An insidious way to insert adverbs, but it works for me." I looked back and added, "and here comes another." I smiled evilly.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

Aye, this is true.

Much like the old thing where a misplaced comma can dramatically change the meaning of a sentence, simple body language can do the same. It might reveal a liar, or reveal feelings about another character that they themselves won't say aloud.

Seems like this should be incredibly prevalent in erotica. Attraction itself is shown in so many more ways than simply stating it. The brush of skin, that look of hunger in someone's eyes, the quiver of their lip, even acts of indifference can add flavor to a character's words.

They can. But as noted, it's very easy to overdo. I was flinching a little when you got to quivering lips - it's too much detail.

I'm guilty of it. Here's a few lines I'm not proud of:

She sobbed again, clinging weakly to the toilet. It annoyed me that she looked pretty doing that; it's not a look most women can pull off.

She grabbed my wrist with a clammy, shaking hand. "Do you know what I am? Trash! I'm part gypsy..."

I got across what I wanted to - "She" is drunk and melodramatic and "I" am jealous of her beauty and cool towards her misery. But by the time you get past weakly, clammy, and shaking, it feels like I'm trying too hard to paint the picture with physical description. Even just dropping clammy would have helped.

 

[Kethandra]

Well met and well stated.

On many things in writing, there is no single right answer.

I do usually catch things like how the dialogue feels after I do a read through/edit. Often something so subtle can be added, or taken away to give it what it needs.

Good examples by the way.

Well met indeed. And thanks. Good topic. "Well met" happens to be a greeting I use regularly, so I am pleased to have it offered up in my direction.

 

[SecondCircle]

They can. But as noted, it's very easy to overdo. I was flinching a little when you got to quivering lips - it's too much detail.

I'm guilty of it. Here's a few lines I'm not proud of:



I got across what I wanted to - "She" is drunk and melodramatic and "I" am jealous of her beauty and cool towards her misery. But by the time you get past weakly, clammy, and shaking, it feels like I'm trying too hard to paint the picture with physical description. Even just dropping clammy would have helped.

Aye, but to whom?

Art, in the end, is quite subjective. As we said earlier. For instance, your example read just fine to me. (Of course, within the context of the story, mileage could vary.) Subjectivity should go without saying though. For some, it will be over the top, for some it won't, for others they won't even notice.

Remember, we cannot "see ourselves". That is, it often takes eyes other than our own to really judge our writing. It's why we need editors and proofreaders, no? And the readership will no doubt have their unbiased opinion on how things went. You may think it sounded like you were trying to hard. A reader may think "wow, pretty good. Feels like I'm there."

There can be too much, or too little, of any element in writing. But... have you ever wondered, who the hell decides this?

Ultimately the reader. But often, a reader just reads and tastes the end product. They may not understand that those fresh peppers and that sliced onion actually made the end product what it is.

The editor? Publisher? From technical standpoints, yes. From artistic expression? Rarely. Plenty of styles have been rejected by reputatable publications only to find a major niche and ultimate success with readers who love said style.

Who then? The writer? How can a writer be so unbiased to realize when the audience can see the strings of his puppet, thus shattering the illusion of immersion?

There are standards of course. There is a general feeling shared by say, a majority, in which we understand what "too much description" or "pacing that drags" etc.

Wall of text and quotes may be wrong for me, but be fine for many others.

So how do you gauge what is too much or lacking?

You could simply say "she was sick" and I could be expected to understand what that entails, without a need for words like clammy, warm, feverish, or sweaty. But does that not actually pull the rug right out from under the storyteller at the campfire in the first place? Any age old folk tale could have been summed up with a simple "He slayed the dragon and went to the tower to kiss her. She woke up and fell in love with him. They were like, happy and stuff forever."

Would there really be any wide eyed listeners at that campfire? Or would they be seated at the other one that made the tale sound so vivid and realistic that they thought they were IN that god damn tower feeling the heat of flames and tasting the stench of singed hair?