How You Say It

[dr_mabeuse]

I'm interested in knowing how much attention writers give to the way they say what they're saying, how much attention they give to the flow and rhythm of their prose, the sound of the words they choose.

Specifically I'm interested in the idea of tempo and rhythm of prose in erotic scenes. The "mouth feel" of the prose (I don't know what else to call it), the musical quality. A sex scene has a built-in tempo: starting slow and building up to a crescendo, and I usually try to control the rhythm of the prose to either reinforce this acceleration or to oppose it for effect. I'm wondering whether anyone else pays much attention to this and tries to make the rhythm of their prose reflect action in the story.

I've always been aware of the way that writers use tempo in their stories, and it's somethging I've always paid a lot of attention to as well. In fact, I would say that most of the changes and edits I make, aside from corrected typos and outright gaffes, are done to correct problems in pacing and tempo.

Does anyone else pay attention to this?


---dr.M.

 

[oggbashan]

Yes, but I get it wrong.

Much of my output is so slow that the readers hit the back key before getting to the meat of the story. Then the conversation gets to the point too fast to be believable.

I am trying to fix both faults but it will take practice and study. The course starts next month.

Og

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Does anyone else pay attention to this?


---dr.M.

Doesn't everyone who's trying to really write?

 

[MlledeLaPlumeBleu]

I just channel.

Writing has to be organic.

Then you go back and tweak all the cadences for proper euphonia.

 

[Guest]

I don't actually concentrate on putting that tempo or rhythm into my writing, it just happens.
As Mlle said, I also channel. I get so absorbed into what I'm doing, the sex scenes naturally gather the pace that is required.

Lou

 

[Guest]

"composing" prose

I'm interested in knowing how much attention writers give to the way they say what they're saying, how much attention they give to the flow and rhythm of their prose, the sound of the words they choose. ... The "mouth feel" of the prose

Mab., a very fine inquiry. The "mouth feel" is what I love about my fave literature, and really what I love most about writing. It is always paramount with me. If I can't get the "mouth" right then I'll scrap it - whole paras or the whole thing.

I "hear" language always, so how it sounds (musically, or plainly aurally) has an urgency. I think it comes from my Spanish language origins, a bit from English nursery rhymes, hugely from the Irish (OW, Yeats, Synge, Beckett), much from my study of Russia/ian and its poets, and (said very humbly) from Sh're. All those sounds are part of my mind's "muscle memory" and if my own words jar that muscle twitches.

My ear for this is always ready when I write and it affects each word, its placement, a string of them, even punctuation and para division.

I am often told my prose is poetical, so that pleases me.

As for my erotica, I have the same requirements and needs/desires re. language, but I can't judge it yet (not enough distance in time). Still, I know bits of it work to my "mouth's" satisfaction.

Perdita

 

[The_Fool]

Re: "composing" prose

I am often told my prose is poetical, so that pleases me.

Perdita

My intent is to attack prose in the same manner as I do poetry. It has to be succinct, it has to be descriptive and it has to dance, therefore it has to have a rhythm, even if I am the only one that can hear it. Most of the time I probably fail, but it’s not from lack of trying. I’ve taken this to the extreme with one story, posted on Lit that combines both poetry and prose. One of these days I’ll get the guts to throw it over into one of the other thread and ask for criticism. Get the guts and figure out if I throw it into “Poetry” or “Feedback.”

 

[dee1124]

It's an interesting question, mab. "Mouth feel" is a very good way of putting it. I find that if I'm having trouble with something, reading it out loud helps a lot. We've lost something with the advent of typewriters and e-mail and other media that allow us to type and type and type without hearing what we're writing.

Until relatively recently in the history of literacy reading silently was an uncommon art. If you look at ancient texts, Greek and Latin, you'll see that there are no spaces between the words. This is because the work was meant to be read aloud. If you were writing or dictating to a scribe (literacy was hardly widespread) you chose your words carefully, making sure they sounded well. Libraries in ancient times were not quiet places, they were filled with people murmurring to themselves as they read. It's funny, we make fun of people who move their lips when they read but that was how people read for centuries. Caesar could read silently, we know this because it was so remarkable a talent that it was recorded.

Anyway, "mouth feel" is very important, especially in dialogue. I made this point in another thread, but unless you can believe that the character would actually say the words you put in his or her mouth, it won't work on the page.

 

[Guest]

Hola, Dee

Very astute points. Calls to mind how I learned to read by following the words on the page with my finger passing under each word as I spoke it aloud. I miss that.

gracias, Perdita

 

[dee1124]

I know what you mean, Perdita. When I was taught to read, it was by sounding out words, after learning the sound combinations letters made. After a while the prevailing theory switched to one wherein children were taught to read by memorizing the appearance of words. People taught this way missed something very important, because when they come across words they don't know, they'e stymied.

I'll lecture once more on ancient times (it was my major in college, I acn't shake it (or type, either, it seems)). Ancient Greek poetry was meant to be sung, not read like we read prose nowadays (a quality-accent, not a quantity-accent, that is, high and low tones rather than emphasis and long and short syllables). Open a modern version of a text and you'll see all sorts of diacritical marks on the words. These were invented in Alexandria because the sound of the language had shifted and the scholars were trying to preserve the sound of the texts.

Thanks for "listening."

Dee

 

[Guest]

Dee, what I love on the AH is the variety of areas of study (whether acaemic or autodidact) people bring to these discussions. Yours is one I do not have except by acquaintance. One of my ex's and an old friend (two diff. persons) were Greek scholars. I loved listening to Homer sung.

I studied Russian hoping to read poetry in the original but it was too daunting a task. I know one poem in Russian by heart and I love saying it; carry it in my wallet. I do love hearing a native speaker and when I get the chance I pull out my poem (eight lines by Akhmatova) and ask them to read it to me.

Aside: only recently did I learn how to properly pronounce who're like a northern Englishman, or to be precise like a Yorkshireman (say who-are).

Thanks for "talking", Perdita

 

[Guest]

I'll lecture once more on ancient times (it was my major in college, I acn't shake it (or type, either, it seems)). Ancient Greek poetry was meant to be sung, not read like we read prose nowadays (a quality-accent, not a quantity-accent, that is, high and low tones rather than emphasis and long and short syllables). Open a modern version of a text and you'll see all sorts of diacritical marks on the words. These were invented in Alexandria because the sound of the language had shifted and the scholars were trying to preserve the sound of the texts.

Dee

Dee,

I did Classics as an 'A' level in my English Grammar School. I didn't study much classical poetry, mainly the plays; Sophocles' three Theban plays being my favourite. Just reading the words themselves, from a book, doesn't give a true idea of the rhythm of the piece. I attended a lot of readings, and productions, of some of the great Greek tragedies and comedies, that's where I got a real feel for the 'musical' tone of the text. These classics really are something else, and they always gave me the goosebumps.

Lou