Words fail

[SophiaY]

I was mulling last night as I was driving home on the limitations of language in a dramatic narrative –

Okay, let me try that again, that was soo academic (laughing at myself).

Words fail to accurately describe certain things, music for example. Unless a reader is familiar with say what Eb major is, it’s just about impossible to convey the soundings of that key. You can refer to a certain musical piece or song, and hope that the reader knows it, but you can’t give them an original melody, only a metaphor of it.

Certain kinesthetic events are also either very difficult to describe, like the details of dancing, or just don’t have the same impact when written about – like physical comedy.

I suppose where I am going with this thought is, what do you do when you wish to write about things that you can’t assume that your reader has personal knowledge, or can make the associations?

(Sheesh, things that go through your mind on a road...)

 

[rgraham666]

In my case, I simply write about the character's reaction to the thing.

I can't describe Beethoven's Ninth. Don't have the technical vocabulary. Wouldn't know a E flat from a F sharp.

But I can describe the sense of awe, the sudden expansion of emotional horizons on a character hearing it. The way their heart fills with joy, the unexpected drip of tears.

And really, the details of the thing are rather secondary.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I know just what you mean. Even some quite simple things are difficult to describe in such a way as to give the reader a strong visual image of the event or action.

Personally - and I know that not everyone goes this way - I work toward describing impact and feeling more than physical movements or fine detail (like the intricacies of a piece of music). It can get tricky trying to do that while heeding the "show don't tell" maxim that I think very right, but one can get there with some care. Metaphor and comparison can help; while they're usually used to help make abstract thoughts more concrete, metaphors can also convey complex actions more gracefully than a very lengthy description.

I think that's the key thing, really - length and focus of description. I daresay that one could technically describe a dancer's movements with enough precision that someone could visualize them, but the amount of space and type of words needed would distract the reader and kill the emotional impact. Something that quickly conveys the feeling while making the necessary sacrifice in detail seems to me the better choice. Otherwise, one ends up in the story I once read here there, for reasons best known to the author, interrupted an otherwise fairly interesting sex scene to give me the exact numerical measurements of the bricks in the wall the two characters were having sex against. I'm still trying work that choice out.

 

[Kev H]

IMO, this is the greatest challenge of all writers, to work at a scenario until you have given the reader "as good as they're going to get." Your example of music is perfect, as is the describing of a painting or sculpture. Other forms of art seem to be the most challenging. I spent a great deal of time on my posted story trying to describe how the paintings affected the main character, knowing it was pointless to give some academic-like description of them, even though I saw them clearly in my head.

I'd bet we have all struggled with this from time to time, and it would be a great topic for support from other authors here at the AH.

 

[oggbashan]

Whatever you do, someone won't connect with what you are trying to convey.

It is a simple mistake to assume that your readers have the same images as you do when you write a descriptive passage. An example is book illustrations. If you know and love the book, and a new illustrated edition is produced, do the illustrations match your imagination? Usually they don't.

Who is wrong? You or the artist? You could both be producing valid visualisations of the text but don't share the same experiences.

If the story is very technical, some readers will skip those parts entirely. If the story stands up without an understanding of music, why include the music?

Some Science Fiction novels are like that. There are pages of technical garbage about advances in science yet the story is really just another Western shoot-em-up set in the year 2525 instead of the Wild West.

If you do genuinely know and love a particular arcane subject you may be able to produce that love in your story. In one of my Lit stories I included a description of the characters changing the sash cords on a sash (guillotine) window. One of the items of feedback said that the reader would know how to do the repair from my story alone. Others probably skipped that part.

You are damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

Og

 

[Selena_Kitt]

interrupted an otherwise fairly interesting sex scene to give me the exact numerical measurements of the bricks in the wall the two characters were having sex against. I'm still trying work that choice out.

Masons write erotica, too!

 

[Selena_Kitt]

If you do genuinely know and love a particular arcane subject you may be able to produce that love in your story.

this is true... and you always have to walk the line between just showing off <grin> and including only what is integral to the story... especially if you know a lot about a subject, or just even research it in great detail...

 

[3113]

Excellent Question!

A really excellent question and one we all struggle with. I *think* that if you are a dancer, musician or artist AND a good writer, then you have the upper hand in describing such things. The real problem comes when you're not any one of those things. I've read descriptons of musical compositions--or even the reaction of a character to it--that fall flat because the author is trying too hard. The character listening to the music will "soar upon its beautiful notes..." and he will have "never heard such a magical composition...." blah, blah, blah. I can't hear that tune--and I don't believe it's brilliant either.

Better to describe it in more visual/physical terms. Like "The music rose like a gull above the waters..." They're going to imagine the music in their heads anyway (they're not going to hear it, right?)--so give them a description that gives them the FEELING you want them to feel. Or give them something they'll know "The pounding of a bass drum." That they can hear.

The other problem is this: The writer often gets so caught up in trying to describe the music that they FORGET that it's being heard by a particular character. The music in a book might be widely thought brilliant by music lovers, but at the moment, it's just brilliant to the character listening to it. So who is the character? Are they a musician/music lover? It makes a huge difference. Let's take writing for example. Which, we'll assume, we're all "masters" at. Most people will go to a movie, say, and just enjoy it. Even if it's a terrible movie, they'll come out saying, "That was pretty good." Or, worse, "That was so moving...the relationship between the daughter and the dying mother..." But we storytellers might say, "What are you talking about? The daughter had no character at all! The mom was a stereotype! The drama was so contrived!"

And if we see a really brilliant movie, then we don't just enjoy it--we delight in what it's doing. We say, "The beginning is just amazing. It traps the viewer just like the character is trapped and you see all the themes set up right there! The inescapable violence..."

Musicians, dancers, artists are the same. They will silently enjoy what they're seeing/hearing at the time--but afterwards, they will talk about it. They will be excited. And in their heads while they're watching, they will have amazement not only at the whole thing, but at the parts as well. They will hear/see things the average listener/viewer will miss. Nuiances, peaks, valleys, twists.

If the character listening to the music hasn't got the ear, however, well...there aren't many songs that most of us tin-ear types find "brilliant." Just ones we really like and sing along with in the shower. This makes it easy. Does the song make our average joe tap his toes, or does it make him want to hum along, or does it make him want to take out his lighter and hold it up in tribute ot the musician?

Those are my takes on getting over this very difficult problem. And it will always be difficult. Of course, it also helps to look at authors who have done it right. The two who have evoked music best for me (and I'm one of those tin ear types) are Louise Marley (sci-fi writer) and Emma Bull (fantasy author). Check out: The Glass Harmonica by Louise Marley (who is also an opera singer), and War for the Oaks by Emma Bull (who also plays and sings in folk bands).

 

[Stella_Omega]

this is true... and you always have to walk the line between just showing off <grin> and including only what is integral to the story... especially if you know a lot about a subject, or just even research it in great detail...

he technical knowlege and love of the subject is important to inform the work- but the real genius lies in k nowing how much of it to put into the work, remembering that the proimary reason for the reader is intertainment.
I just finished a Neil Stephenson bookl; "Cryptonomicon" a dense, detailed thriller about WWII cryptography and it's impact on the current world. Every once in a while, he fills five, six, twelve pages with matematical notation, which is simply incomprehensible to me. But, the book is so well-written that I can skip the technical details, and still enjoy the story.
SImilarly, there is a shitload of amature fiction out there based on Pirate of the Carribean- and it ranges from absolute crap, to work that could have ben excellent original fiction. ONe such was a rip-snorting yarn about making way through a balsting storm. It used terms like "topmen" and "forsheets" which sound smutty, but are naval terms- and it used them in a way that made clear exactly what the terms meant. And it did so in a way that impeded the narrative flow not at all. I wrote a note congratulating the writer, and the next story he produced was chock-full of that sort of thing, and a failure as a narrative.

What a great topic, Sophia!

 

[Liar]

I suppose where I am going with this thought is, what do you do when you wish to write about things that you can’t assume that your reader has personal knowledge, or can make the associations?

I guess it has been said by other replies here, but I'll say it again, short, and in my own words: Find something global that most people can relate to, and you can most of the time describe it well enough, by similie and/or metaphor.



Silly example of using something which most people know what it looks like (David Bowie) to describe something that they don't know what it looks like (John Watson):

"If you took a couple of David Bowies and stuck one of the David Bowies on top of the other David Bowie, then attached another David Bowie to the end of each of the arms of the upper of the first two David Bowies and wrapped the whole buisiness up in a dirty beach robe you would then have something which didn't exactly look like John Watson, but which those who knew him would find hauntingly familiar."

From So Long and Thanks for All the Fish by Douglas Adams.

 

[crazycatt]

In my case, I simply write about the character's reaction to the thing.

I can't describe Beethoven's Ninth. Don't have the technical vocabulary. Wouldn't know a E flat from a F sharp.

But I can describe the sense of awe, the sudden expansion of emotional horizons on a character hearing it. The way their heart fills with joy, the unexpected drip of tears.

And really, the details of the thing are rather secondary.

Yes, exactly. Emotion is universal... use it to describe colour to the blind, music to the deaf. We all know emotion.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

"Writing about music is like dancing about architecture." --Thelonius Monk

 

[Selena_Kitt]

"Writing about music is like dancing about architecture." --Thelonius Monk

that is stunningly accurate...

I'm going along, writing this little fantasy about a rock star concert... get up to the concert point and I'm... like... ummm... gee... how in the hell do you get this experience across?

I have to lean toward the ecstatic... rather than description, even... it just doesn't apply...

there are just some things that there aren't words FOR...

 

[Stella_Omega]

that is stunningly accurate...

I'm going along, writing this little fantasy about a rock star concert... get up to the concert point and I'm... like... ummm... gee... how in the hell do you get this experience across?

I have to lean toward the ecstatic... rather than description, even... it just doesn't apply...

there are just some things that there aren't words FOR...

yeah.. like that whining cry she makes just before she comes...
All you can do, really, is describe your reactions to these things, and try to make that universal

 

[3113]

there are just some things that there aren't words FOR...

And yet, it's our job as writers to find them...or the nearest approximation. Ah, the eternal Sisyphustic struggle of the writer, to describe the world using only inadequate words

 

[dr_mabeuse]

And yet, it's our job as writers to find them...or the nearest approximation. Ah, the eternal Sisyphustic struggle of the writer, to describe the world using only inadequate words

The greatest joy of literature is seeing the inexpressable expressed in words. That's what it's all about, isn't it? The rest is all piffpaff.

 

[efevece]

Insight

It´s just to say I´ve learned a good lesson today. All of you are the teachers.

Emotion. Internal dialog. Reaction to something; intended action toward something.

Writing about the emotions while hearing a song or seeing a sculpture, instead of discribing the orchestra or the marble. Writing about the love or lust a woman makes me feel, instead or her physical shape. Writing about the five senses during love (sex, fuck), instead of just plug A to slot B. Or the sunset; or thunder; a waterfall; a face; a body.

Well! Perhaps I can´t put it in words...

 

[Stella_Omega]

It´s just to say I´ve learned a good lesson today. All of you are the teachers.

Emotion. Internal dialog. Reaction to something; intended action toward something.

Writing about the emotions while hearing a song or seeing a sculpture, instead of discribing the orchestra or the marble. Writing about the love or lust a woman makes me feel, instead or her physical shape. Writing about the five senses during love (sex, fuck), instead of just plug A to slot B. Or the sunset; or thunder; a waterfall; a face; a body.

Well! Perhaps I can´t put it in words...

My favorit line of half a million stroke stories "OH GO-O-ODDDD I'M CUUUUUMMMMIIINNNGGG!!!!!" she screamed

it's so sincere!

 

[Kev H]

My favorit line of half a million stroke stories "OH GO-O-ODDDD I'M CUUUUUMMMMIIINNNGGG!!!!!" she screamed

it's so sincere!

But did she sing it with a forced vibratto?

 

[SophiaY]

Gosh, golly...

What thoughtful replies! Simply overwhelming a little ol country gal… blushing and rubbing my toes in the dirt.

(Okay, those who know me a little can stop laughing now)

rgraham666: “In my case, I simply write about the character's reaction to the thing.”

Problem I see with that is how do you connect the reaction to the narrative if the object is unfamiliar to the reader, if known to the character?

BlackShanglan: I daresay that one could technically describe a dancer's movements with enough precision that someone could visualize them, but the amount of space and type of words needed would distract the reader and kill the emotional impact.

Yes! I think it’s a problem when trying to describe anything that is unknown – anyone remember slugging through the middle of Moby Dick? – but especially for certain sensory experiences like music, dancing, and other things that are outside our heads.

Kev H: I spent a great deal of time on my posted story trying to describe how the paintings affected the main character, knowing it was pointless to give some academic-like description of them, even though I saw them clearly in my head.

I think that visuals are perhaps the easiest (not to say that they are easy). Perhaps because, as I’ve read, we get about 80% of our information from sight. Hmmm…come to think of it, maybe taste is the hardest. (laughing) I once told a woman that her mouth tasted like a ripe papaya, she looked at me blankly – she’d never had one.

Oggbashan: It is a simple mistake to assume that your readers have the same images as you do when you write a descriptive passage. An example is book illustrations. If you know and love the book, and a new illustrated edition is produced, do the illustrations match your imagination? Usually they don't.

Accepted, but there has to be some common ground. For example, I just started a short story (very short, all my stories are – no endurance, or patience), that features a guitar duet. The duet uses a point/counterpoint motif – two ballads weaving, contrasting together – and I used two songs that I’m familiar with, but quickly realized that few people reading would be, so I changed them – if I had stayed with the original tunes, well, it would have satisfied me, but it would be too obscure for a reader – no, “ahha, got it, cute!”

SelenaKittyn: …and you always have to walk the line between just showing off <grin> and including only what is integral to the story.

I only show off up front, and personally, myself. (impishly grining)

3113: And if we see a really brilliant movie, then we don't just enjoy it--we delight in what it's doing. We say, "The beginning is just amazing. It traps the viewer just like the character is trapped and you see all the themes set up right there! The inescapable violence..."

My significant (okay, she’s a New Yorker, and you know what that signifies), likes to argue that the day film was invented, written literature became obsolete. If there is a space for word fiction, it has to find one outside of the traditional narrative – like how painters had to find one once photography was developed; painting no longer was the medium of record.
(Quoting here, don’t shoot the messenger, and yeah, she is both opinionated and blindingly bright, I forgive her a lot – laughing again)

Stella: remembering that the proimary reason for the reader is intertainment.

For those who are looking only for mind candy, yes. However, I think – (yeah, snobbery) – that an author owes more, to enrich, enlighten, and entertain; otherwise…
“Why are you wasting my time
Why are you wasting my time
I've sat here for hours just
To feel it with you
And I could have done something
I could have done something else
But I guess somehow
Somehow I believed in you”

dr_mabeuse: "Writing about music is like dancing about architecture." --Thelonius Monk

Long ago, and far, far away, I used to do a “’Round Midnight.” One of the loves of my life was a woman who listened, and got it.

(If I were straight, I would have been his groupie – and that dear folk, is a hell of a compliment from me)


Okay, I’m sure that I have gone overboard with all this. Thank you all, seriously, for your replies – I truly enjoyed reading them.

 

[CharleyH]

I was mulling last night as I was driving home on the limitations of language in a dramatic narrative –

Okay, let me try that again, that was soo academic (laughing at myself).

Words fail to accurately describe certain things, music for example.

LOL, you can never be TOO academic!

Actually I disagree with you. The music can be mentioned, and no one needs the song to get a rhythm or beat. A good writer moves her/his characters as they dance or move for example, and that (body movement) equals the description (FEEL) of the music.

 

[Liar]

The greatest joy of literature is seeing the inexpressable expressed in words. That's what it's all about, isn't it? The rest is all piffpaff.

"Piffpaff" is hereby added to my vocabulary. Thanks, Doc.

 

[SophiaY]

Speaking as someone who managed to get through college by obfuscating, I promised myself that I would wouldn’t do it again (now ask me what I would do, over and over, what I did in college – laughing).

I agree with you said, as a generalization – but there are particulars that can’t be expressed fully (unless you are willing to leave a reader clueless).

“Her fingers flew over the strings as she played a flamenco song that reached deep into me.”

Most of us have heard Spanish music at one time or another, and we can “feel” the scene. However, if it had gone on to say, “the moment she shifted from G major to C minor was when I felt as if she were brushing my nipples” – well, that would both pedantic, and obscure. Even if that was the exact, right, way to put it.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Stella: remembering that the proimary reason for the reader is intertainment.

For those who are looking only for mind candy, yes. However, I think – (yeah, snobbery) – that an author owes more, to enrich, enlighten, and entertain; otherwise…
“Why are you wasting my time
Why are you wasting my time
I've sat here for hours just
To feel it with you
And I could have done something
I could have done something else
But I guess somehow
Somehow I believed in you”

good gawd, my typos!

I agree with you here, completely- but when you, the writer, are writing fiction, you do have to remember that your reader is most likely looking for entertainment first. And not neccesarily mean mindless entertainment, either, or I would never read Terry Pratchett or Neil Stephenson. Or you! Or, try to write my stories in the way that I do.
You can simply lay out your information or philosphy or whatever point you are trying to get across, as in a textbook.
If you can engage your reader, though, you have a better chance of getting your subtext across. Ayn Rand comes to mind here- *BEG* without the seductive scenarios that kept so many young people reading, her ideas would have sunk into the abounding morass of crackpot-isms.
And Niel Stephenson has some trenchant and simple points to make about modern business practices that I have finally grasped because of the way they're presented in the book I just read- showing their practical consequences in a fictional setting. And the fictional setting was thoroughly entertaining!

 

[SophiaY]

You've read my stories?

Gasp, blushing.

(and yes, laughing -- but thank you)