Does this "bug" anyone else?

[SexyChele]

How do the writers here feel, I'm interested in knowing.

When you are reading a story, everything is going along fine, then suddenly the writer throws in (****). **** = some obvious statement that is supposed to be an aside to the reader. This bugs the crap out of me for some reason. I feel if it were that important for the reader to know, the writer should have found a way to include it in the story proper. I feel by the use of parentheses, the writer is coming out of the story to whisper something in my ear. But little "whispering" is a total distraction to me!

How do other writers feel about this? Is it only me? I know I am somewhat quirky. I know there are times when parentheses are to be used, but they irritate me when they are in a story.

 

[Chicklet]

bugs me too.

 

[ronde]

I have used parenthesis in two of my stories.

In "A Night With Knight", the dialogue was the typewritten internet chat of one person to another, and I included a phrase in parenthesis because I thought the character would probably have used them.

The other was in "Vera on the Veldt" and was a formal title written as "British Army (retired)". This may or may not be correct, but I have seen it in other writing, and believe it to be at least acceptable.

I see no need to include parenthesis otherwise, and I agree, it is distracting. It's like the scene in some movies where the character steps out of the movie and addresses the audience directly. That bugs the hell out of me, and breaks the rhythm of the movie. I could always find another way to tell the reader an aside comment if one is neccessary, but usually the narrative does the job in a fine manner.

 

[Axeltheswede]

Bug

Let me add another thumbs down. I haven't seen this done too many times. But, the times I have, it seemed like the narrator's narrator. There are better ways to advance the story and supply background information.

 

[toffeegyrl]

I do this at times, but it's in the context of the narrator's voice. If the speaker speaks in asides, that's one thing. But if it's a whole paragraph of useless information, that's another.

I know a lot of readers find it distracting, though.

 

[Weird Harold]

I feel by the use of parentheses, the writer is coming out of the story to whisper something in my ear. But little "whispering" is a total distraction to me.

If you notice parenthetical pharases, (whether in parentheses or not,) then the writer is probably not using them correctly.

There are a few narratitve styles where "breaking the wall" to speak directly to the reader is an integral part of the style. When it's done properly, you don't notice.

When it's not done well, you get a "penthouse letter" or "true confessions" effect that pretty much destroys any enjoyment of the story.

 

[SexyChele]

Thanks all - at least I know I'm not crazy! Harold, I can see what you mean. I've experienced a story or two that included something in parentheses and it just seemed to "fit". But most that I find could easily be incorporated into a narrative or dialogue, and alleviate the distruption.

Thanks all!

 

[neurro]

I very rarely do that, and to be quite honest, I don't really care for it myself. If used the right way, it could add flavor to the story in question, but most the time it just distracts the reader.

 

[NoJo]

Parentheses

"Leave out the the damn parenthesis", said the editor.

(Ah, Yes. That was the era when parenthetical phrases bugged people)

"Excuse me, I think the author's trying to interrupt this story...YES? CAN I HELP YOU? what the hell do you want this time?"

Sorry. I was trying to whisper. I did put the comment in parentheses, you know.

"Never mind that: What I want to know is, how come you can get away speaking without quotation marks?"

I'm omnipotent. And if you don't watch out I'll start your next sentence with a fucking COMMA.

", oh shit..."

 

[ZIP CODE]

ditto

 

[Coolville]

grammar grandpa

there are so many unecessary grammatical add-ons that are can be avoided if the writer twists things around a bit.
My bug is the exclamation mark!
It is so seldom seen in literature but it shows up too often on the net.
And bad spelling - as opposed to spelling mistakes - don't even get me started.

 

[NoJo]

Rules, rules, rules.

I know things get up peoples noses, but you sometimes get good effects if you break the rules.
I guess it's like art -- all those great artists KNEW the rules, but experimented with breaking them. Of course, they knew the rules in the first place.

Look at Jackson Pollock -- just paint spatters, right? But his early stuff showed he REALLY knew how to paint.

My humorous stuff breaks a lot of grammar rules, and it's okay, I think, because you can sort of get away with it in humor.

But it's harder to break the rules with serious stuff, because it breaks the spell a bit.

BUT remember "Oedipus" -- In that play the chorus gives away the WHOLE DAMN PLOT in the first sentence. And they keep interrupting the story! (Not sure if they used excamation points though).

 

[SexyChele]

SUB JOE!

You are just what I needed today for a good belly laugh! Thank you, hon. You did more to save what little sanity I have left than you will ever realize!! (There, an extra exclamation point, just because)

 

[Coolville]

sub joe, anything goes and one can only respect those who bend the rules. That's why they're there. Exciting new grammatical usage is a pleasure to read. But you have to know the rules before you can break them and most people don't - unfortunately.
I'll press the BACK button quicker than a quick thing as soon I spot bad grammar or spelling mistakes like writing 'your ' instead of 'you're'... knowwhaddamean?

 

[Coolville]

!

 

[NoJo]

Coolville

Ok Coolville, your right I suppose.

 

[ronde]

I agree with Coolville to some extent, but we have to remember why we have grammatical "rules". I don't think of them as rules but as visual cues developed so that all readers derive the same meaning from text. Thus, we have periods to signify the end of statements, commas to indicate the speaker took a breath or to break up a long sentence into several parts, and quotes to denote speech. In plain text, parentheses are used to clarify or to make aside statements that are related to, but not part of the subject at hand. It is difficult to imagine them used in normal speech. The speaker would use either a breath (,) or simply end the sentence and start another (.).

Other examples of visual cues (rules) abound, because humans get most of their information by the sense of sight.

The old "blue-light special" at Kmart. Would people rush to a red-light special? (I mean the sales at Kmart, not a hooker doing a discount business)

Highways are marked with solid white lines at the shoulder, and with broken lines between lanes. If the traffic is bi-directional, the lines between the lanes are yellow for passing zones and broken for no passing. If one were to take license with the lines on a highway, the best result would be confusion, and the worst could be disaster.

Maps have different colors for roads, land boundaries and water. If mapmakers switched to blue for roads and red for water, would most people get the same information from the map?

I am a firm believer in stretching rules in the interest of improving the reader's enjoyment, but one must be careful lest he change the readers understanding of the words.

 

[Coolville]

we're all in agreement, methinks.

if. I. write. a. sentence. like. this. you. understand, no?

and writing a sentence like this. or this.

bad boy, bad.

all wrong and all cause for your English teacher to you flunk you... (nasty bitch... she should be punished... i know she wears those stockings to tease me....) oops, sorry, mind wandered.

but all understandable.

many say that emails have singlehandedly destroyed the foundation of our grammar system but I think the short, sharp, staccatto writing style in emails is an exciting revolution.

not just 'u no w i mean' or 'i b l8' and all that, not to mention emoticons, but rather the quick and easy form of writing and shitting on capitals and all that. very exciting times.

 

[KillerMuffin]

Extreme Parentheticals and crap like that kinda move outside of the realm of cool grammar experimentation and directly into gimmickland.

Chapterization of a 10,000 or less word story
ALL CAPS instead of modifiers
.... to indicate something other than omission
Using italics every other word (no wait, that's me)
**** <--- calling that a transition


Tips and tricks that some writers use--and poorly I might add--to get from "She was 5'9", 105 pounds, 44DDDD-19-32, and the hottest blonde on the block" to "OOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH MYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY GGGGGGGGGOOOOODDDDDDDDDDDDD I'm CUMMMMMMMMMMINGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Someone shoot me.

 

[Coolville]

I think the problem may be that so many write with one hand while the other hand is... well... fiddlin'. and oooooooooooooohh yeeeeeeeaaaaaaaahhhhhh,.......tht's myyy upinion............!!!!!!!!!!

 

[NoJo]

Crap like that

It depends on how many comics you read as a kid, KillerMuffin.
From your indignant outburst, I'd say not enough!

As to "real" authors I can site for starters

Kurt Vonnegut
Lewis Carroll
John Cheever
James Joyce

as prominent propounders of what you're decrying.

I'm sorry, you have to face it: In the end it's got to be down to personal taste and changing fashions.
As long as somebody "gets it", I can write

" " if I want!

 

[KillerMuffin]

Uh huh.

So a hypothetical HotGuy69 should be nominated for a Pulitzer because he used a James Joyce gimmick?

The "real" author argument doesn't work because it's like comparing Stephen King to Siddharta Buddha. "Real" authors don't exist as a definitive term because anyone whose every written anything is an author. Not necessarily Kurt Vonnegut quality (I loathe KV, btw), but not necessarily a two year old with a crayon either.

"MOST" writers use gimmicks WITHOUT success.

Just because ee cummings can write without caps doesn't mean that KillerMuffin has the talent to do the same thing.

Here's a phrase for you to ponder: "You cannot transcend that which you do not know."

Enjoy in good health.

 

[Coolville]

ee cummings is ee cummings because he is ee cummings. writing without caps is a gimmick. he was the first.
learning the rules, reading the greats and trying, consciously and intelligently, to bend the rules yourself is the only way forward.

'Writing an email doesn't make one a writer. Writing for the sake of writing makes one a writer. getting published takes talent and luck, sure, but I admire those who twist and bend their grammar just as much as any of the greats. there are some good examples here on literotica. few and far between, just like the greats.

"You cannot transcend that which you do not know" has such a negative ring to it. It sounds haughty, in a way.

"I hear and I forget; I see and I remember; I write and I
understand." Chinese proverb

Maybe YOU don't understand, but I hopefully do and that is the road to change, being better, revolution, etc.

If all else fails, here's a quote from Collette, the French novelist:

"You WILL do foolish things, so do them with enthusiasm."

That's universal.

 

[NoJo]

I think lierotica is so great precisiely because it seems that a lot of different people read it.

With so many readers, we have a very efficient and democratic way of improving our style, or adapting it to popular taste, or whatever it is we write for.

I personally have always gone for the more quirky authors, on this site and in general.
If some people don't like it, fine. But that's taste, not rules.


90% of food, music, art, literature, TV is "crap" by some people's standards -- and ALL of it is crap by somebody's standards.


So many people are already paranoid about how "illiterate" they are. Why make it worse?

 

[sirhugs]

I think the problem may be that so many write with one hand while the other hand is... well... fiddlin'. and oooooooooooooohh yeeeeeeeaaaaaaaahhhhhh,.......tht's myyy upinion............!!!!!!!!!!

and I thought we only read one-handed!