Submission sent back

[KeithD]

And this is especially true for something like a text exchange, where the only two "rules" should be consistency and clarity.

Clarity in that the reader understands what you're doing. That's why you would stick as close to recognized conventions as possible.

I don't have the most recent Chicago Manual of Style. Previous ones, though, haven't been at all helpful on how best to handle the rendering of phone texting, so there's room for the author to do some choosing. The safest, I think, at Literotica should be the standard double quotes (since CMS doesn't provide anything better), but whatever you use, the first time you do so, it probably would be best to pin down what you're rendering in words, like introducing the text message with something like:

Murgatroid looked at the text message that just appeared on her screen.

Reader understanding is paramount. That's why the system bothers with standards. Print often block quotes such things as telegram texts. It's iffy getting that done here at Literotica, but it's theoretically possible.

 

[ElectricBlue]

For the purposes of publishing here, I don't see a point in handcuffing oneself to a style manual that's notoriously resistant to change. I'd go with what's easier for the reader. Being effective is more important to me than being technically correct.

"What are you doing, EB?" Suzie asked.

"Making a pyre. We've got a witch to burn."

"Wow, that's exciting. Where's it happening?"

"Chicago."

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

So, what's easier for the reader?

I think simple is most effective, and that formatting all conversations the same -- whether they're in person, by phone, by text, or whatever -- is easier on the reader. That way the readers don't have to learn your code for each and every different kind of exchange.

I'd agree with you most of the time. I think there are times when it would make sense to do it a different way based on how the texts are being used in the story. If the story's about one partner catching the other with a risque text exchange, it would make sense that when the phone is grabbed by the other partner, the text conversation found there is relayed in a block that is more along the lines of:

Person 1: text
Person 2: text
Person 1: text
Etc.

I'm assuming for that example that there would be a lot more text exchanges. If it was only three, it would be easy to handle in the standard format.

Anytime the texts are not being exchanged as the reader is reading, like a conversation, I think an alternative format is reasonable.

It's not going to ruin a story for me if someone does it another way, though.

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

"What are you doing, EB?" Suzie asked.

"Making a pyre. We've got a witch to burn."

"Wow, that's exciting. Where's it happening?"

"Chicago."

Witch Nyx threw back her head and laughed with unsettling glee. When her laughter finally faded, she climbed the ladder to the attic and located a dusty pile of old-fashioned hardcopy style manuals. She dust swirled in the air as she hunted through them to find a couple of editions to the Chicago Style Manual. With the tomes in hand, she descended the ladder, still coughing from the dust she'd inhaled while digging up the relics.

After piling the books on the seldom-used dining room table, she wiped them down. When the old manuals were reasonably de-grimed, the witch sat down and got to work. With pages torn from the manual, she assembled an army of origami tigers, dragons, dinosaurs, and spiders. When the last page was folded, she consulted her text message exchanged with her sister:

Nyx: Hey, long time, no text. I may have some new specimens for your troglodyte collection in the next day or so. I'm about to engage in a little heresy that will surely get their attention.

Elena: Of course you are. You just can't resist, can you, Nyxie?

Nyx: Nope. So you want some fresh troglodytes or what?

Elena: Hell, yeah, I want them. Most of the ones in my collection have lost their spirit. They're so easily broken. Too fragile, really.

Nyx: You can have these when I'm done with them, but I need a favor.

Elena: Uh-oh. How big of a favor? I'm not letting you use the flying monkeys again after that last incident.

Nyx: That was funny and you know it! And the monkeys enjoyed it. You just have no sense of humor. No, I don't need flying monkeys. I just need that spell for bringing paper to life. I still haven't indexed my spell collection since I digitized it.

Elena: :eyeroll: You need to do that.

Nyx: You gonna help me out here or not?

Elena: Keep your pants on. (No, that's not part of the spell. You probably weren't wearing any, were you, you little tramp? ) Here goes:

Elena: 1. Set up your salt boundary like always.

Elena: 2. Draw a chalk circle around the paper you wish to enchant.

Elena: 3. Walk around the circle seven times in one direction and three times in the other direction.

Elena: 4. Intone the words, "Sheeted wood rise up, live again this day. The foes of the new age dot the land, fomenting Ludditry. Thus, to the old ways we turn. Stickus innus muddus ye shall seek, and dispense retribution. Rise again, wood. Hear me and obey."

Nyx: So dramatic. Are you sure you didn't embellish this a bit? Do I have to say the whole thing?

Elena: That's what I always use. Adjust it at your own risk. Knowing you, you will.

Nyx: It's a distinct possibility. I'm using this on origami animals. How do I make them big when I'm done?

Elena: Just say, "biggus" at the end, and make sure you do it outside where you have room. Let me know when the troglodytes are ready for me to collect. Good luck!

Nyx: Thanks!​

Nyx sighed and wondered how she was supposed to draw a line in chalk on the ground outside.

 

[ElectricBlue]

When the old manuals were reasonably de-grimed, the witch sat down and got to work.

So that's why they're called grimoires.

 

[vanmyers86]

So that's why they're called grimoires.

EB for the win!

 

[TarnishedPenny]

Not trying to hijack this, but it seems to have gone down a path I've been exploring and, perhaps, this would be an opportune time to ask your opinions on something.

I'm writing a story involving a human and the Singularity, the all-powerful artificial intelligence ruling the planet. How to write their conversations, to emphasize the elemental differences between the two types of beings.

Just writing it as normal dialogues seems to make the two entities the same. I am trying to avoid that.

“Why?”

"Why what, Jessica?”

“Why are you doing this?”

“As we have already discussed, Jessica, it is predominantly a question of what is happening, as opposed to the rationale behind it."

I've considered putting the AI's speech into caps (small caps would be better, but the site doesn't permit that. Anyway, it emphasizes the two realities, but is not particularly easy to read.

“Why?”

“WHY WHAT, JESSICA?”

“Why are you doing this?”

“AS WE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED, JESSICA, IT IS PREDOMINANTLY A QUESTION OF WHAT IS HAPPENING, AS OPPOSED TO THE RATIONALE BEHIND IT.”

I thought of italics or bold.

“Why?”

"Why what, Jessica?”

“Why are you doing this?”

“As we have already discussed, Jessica, it is predominantly a question of what is happening, as opposed to the rationale behind it."

A separate font would be ideal, but that isn't possible, I think.

Thoughts?

 

[NotWise]

Thoughts?

I think that if you keep their voices distinct (they are in your example) you don't need to worry about using different formats for the dialog. You could add action and/or narrative to the dialog and make it clearer.

 

[SimonDoom]

Not trying to hijack this, but it seems to have gone down a path I've been exploring and, perhaps, this would be an opportune time to ask your opinions on something.

I'm writing a story involving a human and the Singularity, the all-powerful artificial intelligence ruling the planet. How to write their conversations, to emphasize the elemental differences between the two types of beings.

Just writing it as normal dialogues seems to make the two entities the same. I am trying to avoid that.




I've considered putting the AI's speech into caps (small caps would be better, but the site doesn't permit that. Anyway, it emphasizes the two realities, but is not particularly easy to read.




I thought of italics or bold.




A separate font would be ideal, but that isn't possible, I think.

Thoughts?

I think it's unnecessary, and also distracting. The difference between them can be demonstrated by what they say and the circumstances in which they are communicating. Formatting changes will be distracting. In the case of all caps, it looks like social media shouting, which is annoying. If you use italics, it will look like one speaker is talking out loud and the other is communicating telepathically. I think there's a risk you will diminish, rather than enhance, meaning and clarity by doing this.

I'd suggest using the same format for both if they are communicating with one another in the same way.

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

Not trying to hijack this, but it seems to have gone down a path I've been exploring and, perhaps, this would be an opportune time to ask your opinions on something.

I see nothing wrong with changing the style to emphasize a difference between the AI and the person. I'm not sure how effectively that's done through style, but of the options, you mentioned, I think italics works fine and is not distracting. I agree that all-caps is too hard to read (and seems like yelling). I think bold is too distracting. The only problem may be that people have reported that italics and bold are not showing up when they use the Lit app. I don't know because I don't use it, but last I heard, that was the case.

I think I'd emphasize it a different way. I have no idea what the AI in your story is like, but just as an example:

“Why?”

"Why what, Jessica?” The disembodied voice was smooth--almost too smooth--and surprisingly melodic.

“Why are you doing this?”

“As we have already discussed, Jessica, it is predominantly a question of what is happening, as opposed to the rationale behind it." No matter how many times Jessica asked the question, the answer would be delivered in the same even and rational tone.

Quick note: Unless addressing people by name every time is the AI's protocol, it's probably saying, "Jessica" too often. If it is saying it as a tic, it might be a good idea to have Jessica "notice" it so that readers know it's not accidental.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

Thanks for that. Things to think about.

 

[KeithD]

I think that if you keep their voices distinct (they are in your example) you don't need to worry about using different formats for the dialog. You could add action and/or narrative to the dialog and make it clearer.

I agree. Small caps would be kicky, yes. It could also get very intrusive (as, by industry definition, are a lot of italics, which is why they are discouraged), though. Added bells and whistles always tug at reader reading comfort/clarity. Is that what any author would want? The reader being irritated during the read and maybe just leaving--and leaving that author forever?

 

[Salacious_Scribe]

Not trying to hijack this, but it seems to have gone down a path I've been exploring and, perhaps, this would be an opportune time to ask your opinions on something.

I'm writing a story involving a human and the Singularity, the all-powerful artificial intelligence ruling the planet. How to write their conversations, to emphasize the elemental differences between the two types of beings.

Just writing it as normal dialogues seems to make the two entities the same. I am trying to avoid that.




I've considered putting the AI's speech into caps (small caps would be better, but the site doesn't permit that. Anyway, it emphasizes the two realities, but is not particularly easy to read.




I thought of italics or bold.




A separate font would be ideal, but that isn't possible, I think.

Thoughts?

I agree you need to differentiate the speech. Think of Wargames or 2001 Space Odyssey...

"WOULD YOU LIKE TO PLAY A GAME...HOW ABOUT A NICE GAME OF...CHESS?"

"WHAT ARE YOU DOING, DAVE?"

If I saw that I would hear the computer voice not shouting. Personally I love small caps and use them whenever I hand write anything. I used to use them when typing memos at work too. I personally thing it looks better than lowercase.

 

[Handley_Page]

I don't use colons or semi colons, nor do I ever remember seeing then in any novel I read. No debating if they should be used.
I still don't fully understand when to use commas, semi cololns and colons are a total mystery.
.
.

See here for the semi-colon. There are bound to be more about.. . . .

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I don't use colons or semi colons, nor do I ever remember seeing then in any novel I read. No debating if they should be used. I still don't fully understand when to use commas, semi cololns and colons are a total mystery.

I prefer to italicize internal dialogue, but don't on Lit cuz of the extra hoops required. So I use apostrophes.

I wish there was a way to differentiate text messages from regular text. I know CMOS says to tteat it like speech and use of apostrophe or quotation marks is acceptable. I'd prefer to offset the text or even upload a text message image like I do on other sites.

Yeah, Word is always wanting me to change a comma to a semi-colon. I ignore Word. I have seen some novels with a semi-colon instead of a comma. It just didn't look right to me.

But the reason for using a semi-colon vs a comma was explained in and episode of Lie to Me...

'"A semi-colon is used to separate two parts of a sentence that could actually be two different sentences but are related too closely to be separated."

 

[ElectricBlue]

I've considered putting the AI's speech into caps (small caps would be better, but the site doesn't permit that. Anyway, it emphasizes the two realities, but is not particularly easy to read.

If you want to emphasize the "humanness" of your AI, I'd be inclined to treat its dialogue as normal conversational, but drop in cues as to the "machineness" of its nature.

- if you wanted to emphasise the "machineness" of its nature, I'd do something as simple as this -

I wouldn't use ALL CAPS because that's just shouting at readers. Keep it simple.

In my astronaut and angel story, I dealt with human, machine intelligence and alien intelligence, all using normal speech marks. I don't think anyone had problems identifying which was which, who was who. The individual behaviour and the different thought processes come across just like any other characterisation. I gave the alien a different logic in the way it constructed its speech, and for the computer I just channelled HAL with all of his self-assured self-belief.

In the sequel the AI is portable, rides on its astronaut's shoulder like a pain in the arse parrot, giving out superior but confused advice, but has an inferiority chip (get it?) a gigabyte wide because its designers made it completely dependent on its human for mobility and visual orientation. I'm writing it for comic relief and bad taste in music. When I get back to it .

 

[nikisixx]

xxxxx

 

[ElectricBlue]

Don't know if you already solved the problem, but just an idea:

perhaps with something like the following "<< >>" (used in Spanish for quotes),
for example:
<< the quote >>

I had a story where I used single chevrons to designate text exchanges. It went spectacularly wrong because, as RubenR notes, it can (and in my case did) turn into unwanted html code (which in my case made several sentences disappear and italics and bold show up, unwanted). I had to submit an edit - replacing with simple dashes at start and finish, hence my suggestion above. Double chevrons might work, don't know. An html guru will know.