Ever noticed when you read something that it seems, I dunno, flat? I've noticed this happening more and more, not just in books, but in writing in general (articles, reports, reviews). No one seems to be using words as a tool any longer!
A teacher once told me - paint with your words. At the time, I had figured this out to mean, use descriptives and visual phrases to portray what you want to convey. For example, the character is feeling down and goes, My life has just gone down in the dumps. You clearly get the visual, of a life being flushed away, going down, in a spiral of oblivion. It paints an image for you in your mind.
As a writer, the only tool you have at your disposal to achieve the aim of creating a memorable story and characters that leap off the page is WORDS.
Yup, words. There's so much behind a word! Ever stopped to think, why did the author use this word and not that one? What does he/she want me to grasp because of this specific word used at this point?
Some authors use words in ways that are out fo the bounds of simple tools. They use words that form a story within a story, a different layer to the plot, that you'd catch only if you were in tune with the writing and not just glossing over the words. This is very much a trick of literature, but popular fiction authors use them too. To see an example, check the free read up at Eirelander Publishing (The Tides of Yule).
I will say it frankly - few of us can expect to write a story within a story. That's deep symbolism that takes time and craft and lots of practise to master. But here's what you can do - you can use words and all that is associated with it.
Words have meaning, and this too takes different levels. Denotative, connotative, symbolic, mythical, and ideological meaning. All this can be layered inside a word you use in your story.
Denotative meaning - refers to the common sense meaning of something.
For example, a skeleton is just that - a collection of bones that form the human body structure. Used in a denotative meaning, it can show a corpse.
Connotative meaning - meaning which has to be deduced by the reader. Its meaning is not obviously apparent at first glance.
For example, you say, the skeletons on the catwalk. This shows a negative connotation, as in a living body is not a collection of bones. See how this immediately springs a visual and creates deeper layer to your writing.
Symbolic meaning - general/constructed meaning which is derived from the sign.
For example here, a skeleton when used can symbolise death, horror, spooky, or even Halloween. It 'stands' in the place of something to convey a meaning.
Mythical meaning - refers to meanings constructed by society through connotative meaning to derive a mythical meaning that can even be said to border on symbolism.
Using the skeleton on catwalk example, this throws you to the myth of the anorexic, skin-on-bones, bone-bag model, or what modelling now stands for.
Ideological meaning - refers to meaning at the service of power.
This one pertains more to the use of a word to project/portray power in the view of achieving a goal.
For example, a slogan by curvy women who go, Real women are no skeletons. The word skeleton here is used in its denotative, connotative, symbolic and mythological meanings to empower these women in this forceful, hit-right-where-it-impacts statement. It is thus meaning that is used in the service of power.
All of these help to create layers in your story. Another example (taken from the start of the upcoming Eirelander release Love Beyond Time by Rebecca Royce) is the use of a staff.
At the start of this book, we are introduced to an old man. He is walking towards the rise of a grassy hill, but the way up is hard for him, as the elements are fighting against him, conjured up by evil powers who want to destroy the man, Abraxas. In his hands is a staff. He uses it to lean on through his trek.
A staff is what? Something like a walking stick (denotative meaning), which however, connotes power in the realm of the paranormal/fantasy. Symbolically, a staff represents power, magic, authority. The fact that Abraxas is old, coupled with the fact that he has the staff, already portrays him in the light of the authority figure, the leader, the wise one. And the fact that he has a staff and not a spear goes to another layer to show the reader that he is a wise one, a spiritual leader, and not a warrior who would have a spear (a weapon) in his hands.
Little details like this help you to paint a deeper and more intricate picture. I agree - not everyone will automatically 'get' what you'd be trying to say, but those who will, to them reading your words will not just be a reading experience but it will transcend their minds as something that engages their imagination and intellectual skills in a deeper manner.
Any questions, just holler!
Aasiyah Qamar - Cultural Romantic Fiction, With a Twist
Available Now!! - Light My World - Eirelander Publishing
Nolwynn Ardennes - The Promise of Fulfilment
Coming out January 8, 2010 - Storms in a Shot Glass - Eirelander Publishing
Coming out July 2, 2010 - Walking on the Edge - Eirelander Publishing
Aasiyah Qamar/Nolwynn Ardennes - Romance the world over
http://www.aasiyah-nolwynn.webs.com/
Showing posts with label symbolism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label symbolism. Show all posts
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Word Associations
Labels:
Aasiyah Qamar,
craft,
layering,
meaning,
Nolwynn Ardennes,
symbolism,
words,
writing
Thursday, June 18, 2009
In her shoes
No, I'm not talking of the book by Jennifer Weiner (that I read and adored, btw), nor of the movie that was adapted from said book.
I am literally talking of, walking in the shoes of your heroine.
T.J.'s post about shoes got me thinking, especially the part about thoughts in a story. Anyone who's ever read my work can and will probably tell you my stories can be compared to the psychoanalysis of the characters in the foil of their respective story and the plot. Meaning - I'm big on thoughts.
I reckon that not everyone has to agree with me. I know great writers who bind you in their plot yet cannot write a deep thought to save their life. I know of great writers who have next to nothing in way of plot but the thought process of the characters take you through a journey that has you panting and turning page after page for every 300+ sheet in the book. And yet the majority of writers, mostly the aspiring, beginning writers peopling the crit world, listen to only one rule - action forward and cut out unnecessary thoughts!
While I agree that the reader needs not be privy to each and every thought that goes on in a character's head (we know that could get terribly boring and tedious!), there is an inherent element to the thoughts-inclusion in a story - it's what binds you to the plot.
There's a difference between reading a book and watching a movie, even if both are dealing with the same story. Take this example:
At the start of the movie version of Bridget Jones' Diary, you hear the song All By Myself playing, and Bridget, played by a chubby Renee Zellweger, is alone in her flat, wrapped in a quilt, a bottle of whatever alcoholic beverage in her hand. Then she stands up, with the bottle still in hand, and she starts to move around the flat while singing along to the lyrics.
What does this tell you? Bridget is single, since she's at home on an evening (helped by the audio cue of the soundtrack through the song All By Myself) and she's drowning her sorrow in that bottle.
Now, we get this, allright. But what is Bridget's sorrow, other than she is by herself and drinking?
Go to the book, and read the first few chapters. First quote: 'Resolution number one: obviously, will lose twenty pounds. Number two: will find nice sensible boyfriend and not continue to form romantic attachments to alcoholics, workaholics, peeping-toms, megalomaniacs, emotional fuckwits or perverts.' I know I have used this example before in another post but I find it truly representative of what I'm trying to convey.
The Bridget of the movie, while still being the character penned by Helen Fielding, is a 'generic' version of the close-t0-30-London-singleton. Whereas the Bridget of the book is Bridget, the fully formed and realized Bridget Jones, not just a general idea of a woman in her shoes. And how is this possible? Through the thoughts of the character!
Something is lost in translation between the book and the screen, and the first thing to get the cut is thought processes. It's true that you cannot 'show' thoughts so easily in visual form, but still, taking out the thought processes takes you from a unique character to a generic character, that any writer could've penned given a few hints at psychology.
Take a further example, Confessions of a Shopaholic by Sophie Kinsella (being made into a movie releasing this year). Imagine Becky, the heroine, getting the urge at the shop to buy something when she knows she shouldn't. Her heart races, the need starts to pound in her head. Her throat goes dry and she simply needs, needs, needs, to buy whatever it is that has caught her fancy. When you read the book, you are privy to the battle and the struggle going on inside her, making you a part of Becky's world, making you urge her to not do this, to get out of there asap. But in the movie, maybe what you'll get is Becky at the store. You see her gaze land on something, you see her pause, maybe bite her lip, and then her hand reaches for her purse, and she pulls the credit card out. Inherently, you know what's happening, but here you do not know what's going on in her head.
We have to face it - many people read because they want this thought process. They want to be involved in the story, in the developments, in the character's journey. If your heroine has never worn Manolo Blahniks and she does buy a pair, your reader wants to know what it will be like for her to break those shoes in, what it feels like to wear them. Similarly, how does it make you feel to be in Jimmy Choo stilettos? And, when your former diva a la Gabrielle Solis trades her strappy sandals for comfy Mommy shoes, what's going on in her head at that moment?
In short, what does it feel like, what is it all about, to be in her shoes? Isn't this mainly what the heroine's (ultimately character's) journey is about? How do you get there without putting your reader in her head, in her thoughts, while you're in her shoes?
I'm eager to hear your thoughts on this! Any comments are more than welcome!
Aasiyah Qamar - Cultural Romantic Fiction, With a Twist
Coming out October 2 - Light My World - Eirelander Publishing
Nolwynn Ardennes - The Promise of Fulfilment
Coming out in January 8, 2010 - Storms in a Shot Glass - Eirelander Publishing
Aasiyah Qamar/Nolwynn Ardennes - Romance the world over
http://www.aasiyah-nolwynn.webs.com/
I am literally talking of, walking in the shoes of your heroine.
T.J.'s post about shoes got me thinking, especially the part about thoughts in a story. Anyone who's ever read my work can and will probably tell you my stories can be compared to the psychoanalysis of the characters in the foil of their respective story and the plot. Meaning - I'm big on thoughts.
I reckon that not everyone has to agree with me. I know great writers who bind you in their plot yet cannot write a deep thought to save their life. I know of great writers who have next to nothing in way of plot but the thought process of the characters take you through a journey that has you panting and turning page after page for every 300+ sheet in the book. And yet the majority of writers, mostly the aspiring, beginning writers peopling the crit world, listen to only one rule - action forward and cut out unnecessary thoughts!
While I agree that the reader needs not be privy to each and every thought that goes on in a character's head (we know that could get terribly boring and tedious!), there is an inherent element to the thoughts-inclusion in a story - it's what binds you to the plot.
There's a difference between reading a book and watching a movie, even if both are dealing with the same story. Take this example:
At the start of the movie version of Bridget Jones' Diary, you hear the song All By Myself playing, and Bridget, played by a chubby Renee Zellweger, is alone in her flat, wrapped in a quilt, a bottle of whatever alcoholic beverage in her hand. Then she stands up, with the bottle still in hand, and she starts to move around the flat while singing along to the lyrics.
What does this tell you? Bridget is single, since she's at home on an evening (helped by the audio cue of the soundtrack through the song All By Myself) and she's drowning her sorrow in that bottle.
Now, we get this, allright. But what is Bridget's sorrow, other than she is by herself and drinking?
Go to the book, and read the first few chapters. First quote: 'Resolution number one: obviously, will lose twenty pounds. Number two: will find nice sensible boyfriend and not continue to form romantic attachments to alcoholics, workaholics, peeping-toms, megalomaniacs, emotional fuckwits or perverts.' I know I have used this example before in another post but I find it truly representative of what I'm trying to convey.
The Bridget of the movie, while still being the character penned by Helen Fielding, is a 'generic' version of the close-t0-30-London-singleton. Whereas the Bridget of the book is Bridget, the fully formed and realized Bridget Jones, not just a general idea of a woman in her shoes. And how is this possible? Through the thoughts of the character!
Something is lost in translation between the book and the screen, and the first thing to get the cut is thought processes. It's true that you cannot 'show' thoughts so easily in visual form, but still, taking out the thought processes takes you from a unique character to a generic character, that any writer could've penned given a few hints at psychology.
Take a further example, Confessions of a Shopaholic by Sophie Kinsella (being made into a movie releasing this year). Imagine Becky, the heroine, getting the urge at the shop to buy something when she knows she shouldn't. Her heart races, the need starts to pound in her head. Her throat goes dry and she simply needs, needs, needs, to buy whatever it is that has caught her fancy. When you read the book, you are privy to the battle and the struggle going on inside her, making you a part of Becky's world, making you urge her to not do this, to get out of there asap. But in the movie, maybe what you'll get is Becky at the store. You see her gaze land on something, you see her pause, maybe bite her lip, and then her hand reaches for her purse, and she pulls the credit card out. Inherently, you know what's happening, but here you do not know what's going on in her head.
We have to face it - many people read because they want this thought process. They want to be involved in the story, in the developments, in the character's journey. If your heroine has never worn Manolo Blahniks and she does buy a pair, your reader wants to know what it will be like for her to break those shoes in, what it feels like to wear them. Similarly, how does it make you feel to be in Jimmy Choo stilettos? And, when your former diva a la Gabrielle Solis trades her strappy sandals for comfy Mommy shoes, what's going on in her head at that moment?
In short, what does it feel like, what is it all about, to be in her shoes? Isn't this mainly what the heroine's (ultimately character's) journey is about? How do you get there without putting your reader in her head, in her thoughts, while you're in her shoes?
I'm eager to hear your thoughts on this! Any comments are more than welcome!
Aasiyah Qamar - Cultural Romantic Fiction, With a Twist
Coming out October 2 - Light My World - Eirelander Publishing
Nolwynn Ardennes - The Promise of Fulfilment
Coming out in January 8, 2010 - Storms in a Shot Glass - Eirelander Publishing
Aasiyah Qamar/Nolwynn Ardennes - Romance the world over
http://www.aasiyah-nolwynn.webs.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)