Monthly Archives: April 2022

How the written universe works part 2: the physics of conversation #amwriting

The supermassive black hole known as Sagittarius A Star gives the spiral shape to our galaxy and keeps it together. Gravity is the force ensuring that “what goes into a black hole, stays in the black hole.”

How the written universe works 2All around us, gravity works in hidden ways. Gravity on a small scale keeps everything securely stuck to the surface of Planet Earth.

Except in my flying dreams. But I digress.

In writing, punctuation serves the same function as gravity, keeping paragraphs and sentences from flying apart, shaping prose. The physics that constrain the chaos of words and word clusters are the laws of grammar and punctuation. They are the quantum mechanics of writing.

What is spoken must be easily distinguished from the ordinary narrative. Therefore, punctuation is for the reader’s benefit. While we can take some liberties with grammar and dialect when writing conversations, following the established rules of punctuation is essential.

We want readers to be able to forget the punctuation and just enjoy the story. They only notice bizarre punctuations, such as:

All, hands on deck”. Said the captain.

“What do we do with the drunken sailor? Blurted the First Mate!

“Put him in the scuppers at the lee rail. With the captain’s teddy bear,” replied the bosun

So, they put him in the scuppers, and all hands were finally on deck. Some were prone, but all were there until a rogue wave washed drunk dave and the soggy bear away.

I’m sure you noticed the problems when reading the above example.  I have several times been asked to edit work with problems of that magnitude. I respectfully declined the job. No editor has the time to teach a writer how to write.

The one place where the fundamental laws of grammar are allowed to deviate from the norm is in conversation. But even conversations have quantum laws we must follow.

I didn’t make these rules – readers make the rules because their ability to suspend disbelief is the universe we are writing to.

Alfred Hitchcock quote re dialogueCreating memorable characters is the goal of all authors. After all, who would read a book with bland and uninteresting dialogue? Dialogue is where most information is given to the characters and the reader. However, when we are just beginning to write, many of us are confused about how to punctuate conversations. It’s not that complicated. Here are four rules to remember:

Rule 1: Surround everything that is spoken with quotation marks. “I’m here,” Loretta said.

Begin and end the dialogue with “double quotes.” These are called closed quotes. All punctuation goes inside the quotation marks. This is a universal, cast-iron rule that we must follow.

Rule 2: When quoting someone else as part of a conversation, you should set the quoted speech apart with single quotes (apostrophes, inverted commas) and keep it inside the closed quotes.

You can do this in two ways:

  • George said, “When I asked her, Tammy replied, ‘I can’t go.’ But I’m sure she was lying.”
  • George said, “When I asked, Tammy replied, ‘I can’t go.'”

Note that in the second sentence, 3 apostrophes are placed after the period (full stop): 1 apostrophe and 1 double (closed) quote mark. This is in keeping with the rule that all punctuation goes inside the quotation marks in dialogue.

Indirect dialogue is a recapping of a conversation.

  • When asked, George said Tammy couldn’t go.

We don’t use quotes in indirect dialogue. Also, in the above sentence, the word that is implied between said and Tammy.

Rule 3: Commas—Do not place a period between the closed quotes and the dialogue tag. Use a comma because when the speech tag follows the spoken words, they are one sentence consisting of clauses separated by a comma: “I’m here,” she said.

  • When leading with a speech tag, the commas are placed after the tag and are not inside the quotation marks: She said, “I’m here.”
  • Dialogue that is split with the speech tag is all one sentence: “The flowers are lovely,” she said, “but they make my eyes water.” Note that the first word in the second half of the sentence is not capitalized.

Rule 4: When a speaker’s monologue must be broken into two paragraphs, lead off each with quotation marks but only put the closed quote at the end of the final paragraph. A wall of dialogue can be daunting in a story but sometimes happens in essays and when quoting speeches.

Elmore Leonard quote re dialogueWhen you envision your characters in conversation, you must think about what the word natural means. People don’t only use their words to communicate. Bodies and faces tell us a great deal about a person’s mood and what they feel.

Actions (also called beats) serve to punctuate the dialogue, give the scene movement, and maintain a strong mental picture in the absence of description.

George turned away, his expression cold. “She can’t go.”

These small actions can show a character’s mood and are often best placed where there is a natural break in the dialogue. They’re an effective tool and are essential to good conversations, but don’t rely entirely on them.

Just remember, certain facial actions are physically impossible to do while speaking. In life, they happen just before or after the words are spoken.

Try smiling and speaking at the same time. Or, try snorting the words out—it isn’t a pretty picture. Snorting=air goes in through the nose. Speaking=air goes out through the mouth.

They can be done at the same time—but it’s ugly.

Write those actions this way:

“Oh, she would say that.” Jane snorted.

“I love roses.” Tammy smiled. “But they make my eyes water.”

We do need speech tags of some sort. Nothing is worse than trying to figure out which character said what. I suggest using simple dialogue tags, like said or replied. Getting too creative with speech tags can cause the reader to stop reading out of disgust.

Even worse is when the action upstages the dialogue. The dialogue can fade into the background, obscured by the visual noise of the characters’ movements and facial expressions.

writng_dialogue_LIRFFor this reason, we don’t want to inject an excess of flushing, smirking, eye-rolling, or shrugging into the story. Those actions have a specific use in conveying the mood, but anything used too frequently becomes a crutch.

We must be creative, but speech tags must be unobtrusive. Achieving this balance is the hardest part of being an author.

To summarize, grammar and punctuation serve the same purpose as gravity, giving shape to the story and forming it into a familiar, identifiable structure.

Conversations, both spoken and internal, light up and illuminate the individual parts of the story, bringing the immensity of the overall story arc down to a personal level.

Good conversations and mental dialogues bring characters to life and turn them into our closest friends. The laws of grammar sometimes break down when our characters are speaking naturally.

But on the quantum level, punctuation is hard at work, holding the written universe together.

14 Comments

Filed under writing

How the written universe works part 1: the connecting particle #amwriting

The title sounds like we’re embarking on a lesson in physics. We are – in a way. We are embarking on a journey into the physics of how the written universe works. Our first dip into the atomic structure of a narrative will explore grammatical connections and how we make them.

How the written universe works 1First up is the particle. In grammar, a particle is a word with a specific purpose that depends on the words around it. It is a function word that is always associated with another word or phrase to impart meaning.

So, what is a pragmatic particle, and how does it differ from other particles? I suspect you use some form or another every day in your casual speech. English speakers use the pragmatic particle as a marker of empathy, a sound that indicates acknowledgment or agreement.

  • eh,
  • yo,
  • right,
  • oh,
  • well.

Pragmatic particles are short words and sometimes are prepositions. When used in conversations, these particles can express an entire sentence’s worth of meaning with just one word.

But use them sparingly, as they are annoying if used too frequently.

Many particles are action words, so they are technically verbs. But we don’t use them as stand-alone words. We instinctively use adverbs and prepositions as connectors and phrasal verbs. Adverbial particles are words like up or out, and we use them in expressions such as “break down” or “look up” or “knock out.” (Phrasal verbs.)

phrasal verbs

Some people habitually use the word “like” as a connection between thoughts.

Many other connecting words are prepositions. Some of the most common prepositions belonging to the particle category are: along, away, back, by, down, forward, in, off, on, out, over, around, under, and up.

And what of infinitive particles, like the word “to”? It is a word that signifies an unspecified place or ending. The possibilities of what “to” indicates are infinite unless we place a noun after it. We use it to provide a sense of where something is in relation to something else. We also use infinitives to supply a sense of when something is happening and compare two ideas, and express similarities.

  • to heaven
  • to work

Negative particles: not, never, doesn’t

Imperative particles: do and let.

In grammar, a conjunction is a connection: a part of speech that connects words, phrases, or clauses. Conjunctions are like any other essential part of English grammar. They have a particular use, and when they are used correctly, they blend into the background. Used too freely, they contribute to longwinded prose and bloated exposition.

to dole out phrasal verbToday’s readers have no patience with Tolkien’s style of paragraph-long compound sentences composed of clause after clause divided by conjunctions, commas, and semicolons.

However, common conjunctions do have a place in our writing. They connect short, related sentences, preventing choppy, uneven prose.

And there are many other kinds of conjunctions.

What are coordinating conjunctions?

The Fount of All Knowledge, Wikipedia, says:

Coordinating conjunctions, also called coordinators, are conjunctions that join or coordinate two or more items (such as words, main clauses, or sentences) of equal syntactic importance. In English, the mnemonic acronym FANBOYS can be used to remember the coordinators for, and, nor, but, or, yet, and so.

Here are some examples of coordinating conjunctions in English and what they do:

For – presents a rationale (“They do not gamble or smoke, for they are ascetics.”)

And – presents non-contrasting item(s) or idea(s) (“They gamble, and they smoke.”)

Nor – presents a non-contrasting negative idea (“They do not gamble, nor do they smoke.”)

But – presents a contrast or exception (“They gamble, but they don’t smoke.”)

Or – presents an alternative item or idea (“Every day they gamble, or they smoke.”)

Yet – presents a contrast or exception (“They gamble, yet they don’t smoke.”)

So – presents a consequence (“He gambled well last night, so he smoked a cigar to celebrate.”)

Finally, we have correlative conjunctions. These words work in pairs to join words and groups of words of equal weight in a sentence. There are many different pairs of correlative conjunctions, but here are a few we often use without thinking about it:

  • Either / or
  • not only / but (also)
  • neither nor
  • both / and
  • whether or not
  • just as so
  • as much as
  • no sooner than
  • rather than not / but rather

Connecting words and phrasal verbs bind our prose together. They can create run-on sentences, but they can also smooth out choppy passages.

good_conversations_LIRFmemeI try to limit idioms and phrasal verbs to speech, and then only to that of one character. When used in conversation, they sound natural, but even there, I go lightly. I want to show a specific character’s personality but don’t want my prose to feel cliché and overdone.

We must use connecting words to ensure our narrative is easy to read and not too rough and uneven. But we must also avoid run-on sentences and tortuous paragraphs. When sprinkled too heavily throughout the narrative, idioms and phrasal verbs contribute to wordiness, bloating the prose.

Next up we’ll have a look at the quantum mechanics of grammar and the way to make those universal laws of physics work for you.


Credits and Attributions:

Wikipedia contributors, “Conjunction (grammar),” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conjunction_(grammar)&oldid=1076464370 (accessed March 31, 2022).

13 Comments

Filed under writing

#FineArtFriday: Sailboats by Jacoba van Heemskerck

Sailboats by Jacoba van HeemskerckArtist: Jacoba van Heemskerck (1876–1923)

Title: Bild no. 15 (Segelboote) (English: Painting no, 15 – Sailboats)

Date: Circa 1914

Medium: oil on canvas

Dimensions: height: 97.5 cm (38.3 in); width: 113.5 cm (44.6 in)

Collection: Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen

What I love about this painting:

The sharp corners and geometry of this composition raises the viewer’s eye toward the horizon. It feels cubist, is abstract, and reflects a spiritual connection to her subject. I love the symbolism in this image. The sailboats are souls sailing toward the next life across a deep blue sea and beneath a golden sky. The island temple toward which the boats sail is shaped like a pyramid. The elongated sails of the many boats direct the eye up. Everything, including the island temple, points toward heaven.

In this painting, it is easy to see how she would later become involved in creating stained glass—the sharp black outlines and vivid colors of her paintings are perfect for that medium.

According to the Kunstmuseum Den Haag’s website:

“But whereas Mondrian’s artistic approach eventually became austerely geometrical, Van Heemskerck’s developed as a result of a variety of influences (including anthroposophy) into an open, unconstrained and intuitive style. Throughout her life, she would seek – like Kandinsky – to express spiritual experience. The recurring subjects in her oeuvre are therefore invariably symbolic in nature: sailing ships, bridges and trees, depicted in clear, vibrant colours and with firm outlines. Although she was never to abandon the representation of the real world, Van Heemskerck’s style was eventually so abstract that her subjects became virtually unrecognisable. This approach won her great success, especially in Germany, where she exhibited at the Berlin Expressionist gallery Der Sturm every year from 1913 until her death.” [1]

About the Artist, Via Wikipedia:

Jkvr. Jacoba Berendina van Heemskerck van Beest (1876-1923) was a Dutch painter, stained glass designer and graphic artist who worked in several modern genres. She specialized in landscapes and still-lifes.

Her first contact with Modern art came in Paris, where she took lessons from Eugène Carrière.[2][3] She remained in France until 1904, then went to live with her sister, Lucie, and was introduced to the art collector, Marie Tak van Poortvliet, who became her lifelong friend and later built a studio for her in the garden of her home.[1] After 1906, she spent her Summers in Domburg, where she came into contact with avant-garde painters such as Piet Mondrian[4] and Jan Toorop, who offered her advice. Around 1911, she was briefly interested in Cubism.

Shortly after, she became involved in Anthroposophy, possibly through the influence of her former teacher, Nibbrig, who was a Theosophist. She then became an avid follower of Der Sturm, an avant-garde art magazine founded by Herwarth Walden, and turned increasingly to Abstraction.[1] In 1913, she attended the Erster Deutscher Herbstsalon in Berlin, where she met Walden and started what would be a lifelong correspondence.[3] Thanks to his efforts, her work was popular in Germany, while it remained somewhat ignored in her home country.

After 1916, she developed an interest in stained glass windows, designing them for the naval barracks and the Municipal Health Department building in Amsterdam, as well as private residences.[1] From 1922, she lived in Domburg with her old friend and patron, Tak van Poortvliet.

She died suddenly, from an attack of angina.[3] Both Tak van Poortvliet and Walden mounted exhibitions of her work, in Amsterdam and Berlin respectively. In 2005, a major retrospective was held at the Gemeentemuseum Den Haag. [2]


Credits and Attributions:

[1] Kunstmuseum Den Haag contributors, “Jacoba van Heemskerck,” Jacoba van Heemskerck A REDISCOVERY, Jacoba van Heemskerck | Kunstmuseum Den Haag (accessed March 31, 2022).

[2]Wikipedia contributors, “Jacoba van Heemskerck,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jacoba_van_Heemskerck&oldid=1078279427 (accessed March 31, 2022).

Comments Off on #FineArtFriday: Sailboats by Jacoba van Heemskerck

Filed under #FineArtFriday, writing