writing_style.gif
writing style

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Q. What is the purpose of this section in a nutshell ?

 

 

 

Q. Why all them big four dollar words you been a'spoutin' all a time?

What, dost not all who span this spinning sphere, ever hath thus spake?   

“Big words” are only “big” because other's curiosity, intellect, or hunger for knowledge is small.  — Quant

So long as you remain squeamish of heightened language, then you become part of the problem.
 
 
  •  
     
     
     
    Beta reading note
    Simple writing style? Bah, humbug!
     
     
        Emperor Joseph II: And there are simply too many notes, that's all. Just cut a few and it will be perfect.                     
       Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Which few did you have in mind, Majesty?

    •  
     
     
     
     
    A. There ever remain no end of numerous strategies towards prose that will be both clear and evocative,
    seeking for just the right word and finding the perfect turn of phrase and cadence.                                                                                                        

    •  

    And if one ever doesn't understand, one may always ask. As useful as it is correcting one another's mistakes (actually indicating a good grasp of the intent), what actually facilitates best communication is to simply indicate, specifically, whatever is indistinct or confusing. 

    And that is why, on occasion, it will often be worth the simple effort of interjecting comment, point by point, parsing and annotating another's phrases for any linguistic ambiguity. At least in conversation with anyone so forthright as to respond adequately with the requested clarifications, welcoming without fear such process of fault finding and error checking. 

    And this is how new understanding dawns from incomprehension, unless one lives only by re-warming over all that is already deathly familiar and unchallenging. 

    Vague and non specific complaints, however, remain as decidedly unhelpful in the reformulation and improvement of prose as in any other undertaking. And worst of all are those irate anti-intellectual whiners who act out by kicking up as much dust as possible, and then find the sheer temerity complain and blame others when discourse chokes on said dust! ("See? Now look how you've made me flame, thou pompous troll!") 

    But a good clear and polished final product will only result from continual rewrites, with proper feedback and civility. A Dialectic process conducted according to the standard Usenet posting conventions, building up or boiling down the ideas, as desired.  

    And so, with all due respect to the currently  fashionable literary authoritative champions of the "Keep it Simple, Stupid" school of thought among other ubiquitous Bad Creative Writing Advice, and, indeed, in all fidelity to the ongoing struggle against the evils of obscurantism, nevertheless, there remain other thinkers still, who yet do not quail or waver, enduring steadfast in the considered opinion that one ought not to be too easily intimidated by clever word play, big words or elaborated linguistic formulations any more than their complex ideas and whatever deeper meaning, unless one seriously expects and presumes, as only fair, reasonable and even one's due! to be actually talked down to. 

    For indeed, as for what passes for critique, many there are that with blithe conviction denounce culture as pretension, call education effete, exploration Ecclesiastical futility, analysis ungainly, the truth unpatriotic and bemoan any vestige of vitality as plumb antisocial.

    Woe unto us all! Because intelligence is largely a habit of appetite and interest, the simple custom of a second thought. And there are none so stupid as those who will not think! Not merely should they take criticism badly, rather that it sails right over their desiccated heads.

    Ah, but they do fit in, don't they? That's why you ought to see things their way, especially when they refuse to really explain. After all, they feel so deeply! It's not that they are actually lost for expressive short words.

    Regardless that Herman Melville may not be of free choice to every modern taste or just anyone's cup'a tea, nevertheless, 'Moby Dick' should actually remain within reach for any functional adult literacy. And while few of us may dare aspire to the heights of a William Blake, anyone ought to appreciate his deathless prose without waiting for the Reader Digest condensed version to dumb it down. For writing is many things, but always, writing is still the love of language. And vocabulary has always been prominent in the writer's tool kit, as well it should be. 

    Indeed, Patrick Stewart, no less, the actor who plays Captain Jean-Luc Picard of the Starship Enterprise in 'Star Trek: The Next Generation', has described the dialogue of 'Star Trek' in particular, as "heightened language", a nigh superheroic blend of Shakespeare and tech-talk. 

    Indeed, even the lengthiest and most elaborate of sprawling sentence structures will flow forth ever powerful with clarity, but beginning with subjects and verbs and only then with subordinate elements to follow or branch to the right.

     

     

    And consult the FoolQuest.com Terms of Use rants on short attention-span semi-literacy.

     

     

     

    Q.  Why must you be so mean and nasty all of the time? 

    A. Actually, I am kind and sensitive, and therefore, brutally honest. 

     

    Q.  What is key to masterful and resonant prose?

    Rhetorical schemes describe the arrangement of individual sounds (phonological schemes), the arrangement of words (morphological schemes), and sentence structure (syntactical schemes). Rhetorical tropes are devices of figurative language. They represent a deviation from the common or main significance of a word or phrase (semantic figures) or include specific appeals to the audience (pragmatic figures).

    A. For the uncontroverited fundamentals of prose usage The Elements of Style by William Strunk, Jr. is considered the classic, but take a word of advice and make better use of the impressive, clear and comprehensiveOwl Online Writing Lab Handouts Complete Index by Topic. And here is A Dialog Lesson in punctuation. Shucks, learn ya' How to write good ! And then let's evaluate clarity.

    Because, although the essential components of plot structure for the writer to artfully balance remain fairly constant, a great deal of effort may often go into detecting and reworking all manner of pitfalls, in polishing a work to make it read easily, in every aspect of content, structure and prose, Stellar Sentence Structures in Painless Paragraphs, reworking every awkward turn of phrase, such as the begin fallacy, editing out redundant passages, Using Short Words Effectively, retrofitting and filling plot holes in coherent detail, and other gaps. After all, the secret to any good writing is good editing.

    A good writer often dwells upon these tasks, and still may need to come back to the work again later, taking satisfaction in the effort. Whether such will be a lone effort or in joint authorship. 

    So, test your writing IQ and learn the simple secret to good writing that is soul more than syntax [Wayback mirror] , both statement and feeling. And here's food for thought, guidance on The 12 Step fanfic Program.

    Writing is rewriting
    ,
    helpful INVOLVEMENT, ongoing rounds of editing and revision of prose, one's own or for anyone else,
    and never a waste of time!    
     

    Less is more: "Leave out the bits that people just skip ahead."  — Elmore Leonard

     
    Come late and leave early. Edit!  In the immortal words of Alfred Hitchcock:  "Drama is life with the dull parts cut out." An efficient scene should be entered as late in the action as possible, and then transition to the next scene just as soon as everything crucial is revealed or has transpired. Otherwise, there had better be any purpose either in building up before hand or lingering on afterward. Whatever motivation establishing conflict on every level with pathos in fight scenes needs must come before hand and even such crucial exposition and background information as the terrain is best established immediately before a chase sequence, usually lacking dialogue unless it's short and clipped.
     
    “I'm sorry. If I’d more time, I would have written a shorter letter.”
    -Marcus T. Cicero

     

     

    How to Get Attention

    Beyond all the above, if one must, there is one most basic maxim of writing style, choice of narrative modes, that may help keep the narrative prose readable and make a more compelling word picture to direct the mind's eye: 

    Tell me and I will forget,
    Show me and I may remember,
    Involve me and I will understand.
     
     — Confucius as cited by Ben Franklin
     
    Description to increase immediacy, show , don't tell. 
                                                                                                 (or describe)       (or explain)
     
                                Show (describe) in order to evoke emotion, tell (or explain) in order to impart knowledge.
     
  • Concretizing abstraction: Images Versus Sound; Action Versus Dialogue - important exceptions  
          Images are very good at telling us what. Words are very good at telling us why.
     
          Never State What You Can Imply
     
    •  
    -All as applicable and crucial to the Speculative Element of Science Fiction...

     

    Passive or active voice:?
     
    By such a phrase as "It was decided that Socrates should die," the identity and responsibility of his judges is cravenly evaded. Likewise: "Mistakes were made."

    The passive "there was an affliction of debilitating arthritis in his aging body" is weak, "he had severe arthritis" is that much plainer,  but "he reached forward, slowly and painfully, to turn the door knob. And, after actually wresting the door open, he stopped a while to catch his breath. Shaken and rasping from the sheer fatigue, he clenched his teeth bitterly and tried to rub the stiff and tender joints in his swollen fingers" is active, immediate and most descriptive.

    One may even chose details for adding lots of physical action! Not "She ran really fast and slid into second" but "She stretched out her legs, pounding hard and as far apart as they could reach into the soil, then dropped onto her side and slid through the rising clouds of dirt on her right hip, skinning her elbow sharply. . .
    Evoke the emotions and sensations of the character, draw the reader to empathize, recreate the emotional experience for your audience. Generally, fiction writing benefits from being active and immediate. While more vivid storytelling helps to achieve involving prose and the willing suspension of disbelief, even to the extent of what is sometimes called the fictional dream, exposition from some omniscient view, or often worse still, the notorious and much maligned passive voice is Not to be Feared. Because there are skilled and expressive uses if passive voicei, from the immediacy of helplessly vivid subjectivity to the palpably sinister, obscured yet inept irresponsibility of bureaucratic prose, in flaccidity otherwise and carelessly applied, is so often said to be the novice writer's greatest enemy because passive verbs often tend to promote vagueness. And yet, the option of passive voice may provide for expressive focus upon processes and action rather than persons, and stressing that which is acted upon

     

    Even without "writing on the nose," important exceptions to the "show don't tell" maxim include, on the one hand, whatever such events from which the author for whatever reason elects to spare the audience explicit description, the eyeball kick, or on the other hand, hinted suggestion which may even be the more powerful, or else simply focus upon some other more important events, so as not to unduly precipitate, retard or completely interrupt the flow of the story.  

    Elements of discourse, transmission, all that is at all directly accessible post priori and short of eye witness, indeed, verily, the fabled Zen mischief of repetition, determine, indirectly, our perception of any story and it's events.
     
    The analysis of discourse strives for understanding of how various effects are achieved.
     
    Modern worldly readers in the age of streaming video and jet travel possess neither any longer the need nor the patience for detailed descriptions, Setting The scene. And only tiresome zealots need to be propagandistically pandered to and stoked upon every single point of dogmatic ideology. Otherwise, never preach, always convince. Indeed, for heightened meaningful and well motivated conflict on many levels, also, beyond overly one sided propaganda, strive for the best fair presentation to every side of whatever issue. Let every scene to the next relentlessly advance the plot and every event that occurs support whatever essential understanding or recurring concept, often conveyed via some symbolic Objective Correlative motif or topos, theme, premise or argumentative thrust of the story.

    All else in the logic of plotting scenes readily follows from pertinent decisions what need be shown regarding motivated characterization and conflict on many levels with dramatic obstacles.

    Indeed, whereas journalism and history generally rely upon expository summary, the narrative of fiction can be rendered from sources and inspiration in reality by details of action and dialogue.

     

     

     

     
    Declarative action and and active declaration.
    A brief digression in regard to syntaxic confusion possibly arising over a certain fine point of grammar:

    As it turns out after all, grammar and syntax are indeed pertinent and even substantive to the agenda here on FoolQuest.com. To wit: Active voice herein, may be reserved, indeed, as need ever arising, for consideration of persons (as denoted by pronouns), in action and in personality brought to bear. As indeed, even in the imperative grammatical mood, prompting specific action by the usage of whatever corresponding verbs. Whereas: Any preference, by default, for passive voice (sans pronouns) as immediately follows, derives in expressive focus upon processes and action rather than upon persons. Indeed perhaps thereby stressing whatever that which may be acted upon, rather than any causal agent or protagonist. And because, bridging abstract principle into concrete application, ideas of proposed strategic process, action, and, as anticipated, resultant effects all thereof, constitute the bulk of relevant subject matter to the agenda at hand. Assertion after all, remains speaker independent. And so, I rarely self insert. And besides, pronouns are for squares! And as always, you are the target! But here on FoolQuest.com, only for good things:
        
    Bridging the abstract and concrete in deliberation analytic yet strategic, let us set agenda together at last to take action addressing probortunity at hand. Grammatically, the imperative specifies particular performance of action. Hence  imperative expression may be deemed: prescriptive. And declarative statement such as employing the verb (or pseudo-verb): 'to be,' shall be understood to denote assertion of Ontological claim as regarding that which exists or occurs in external objective reality. Hence declarative expression may be deemed: descriptive. And this applies to declarative statements not only as most commonly in active voice focused upon causality and action, but even to declarative statements in prepositional passive voice (Not to be Feared!) focused upon effects of causality and action. But often, declarative statements neither instruct or command specific actions as does the imperative, nor merely describe existing circumstances the way that they are supposed to; Rather declarative statements are sometimes used to indicate desired or recommended conditions in action. Alas that the second application of declarative statement may be misconstrued as the first. And thus imperative implication is lost. The most obvious remedy for all such ambiguity, may be explicitly to transcribe from such declarative recommendation into the imperative outright. But as shall be demonstrated, that can become even less intelligible. What to do?
       
    For example by way of illustration, when John Cleese expounds: “Creativity is not a talent: it's a way of operating.” Imperative or prescriptive recommendation to operate creatively, therein remains implicit even in ostensibly grammatical declarative statement, assertion, Ontological claim, that such is so and not otherwise. And therefore no need to command in the imperative: Operate creatively! Indeed, that might even be somewhat jarring. Instead, recommendations are frequently couched as observation, much as, conversely, observations are frequently proffered ironically, as imperative recommendations, as for example: In order to kill a joke, explain the humor. Obviously, the intent remains cautionary observation, not imperative or recommendation at all.
        
    Alas, however, lest all manner of glowing call to action herein, may as all too often be misread as mere statement. Indeed ever misconstrued as merely "factual" [sic.] neutral, objective and unmotivated declarative statement or: assertion. And thus therefore entirely missing the point of criticality: In short, that as demonstrated in the previous paragraph, statements do inform options of action only all the time. Knowledge is power. (Unless alas, inert.) Its all a matter not only of what, but why. Indeed thereby, declarative statement can become more than mere "factual" [sic.] neutral, objective and unmotivated, instead with consequences and recommendations unfolding and soon enough laid out completely for all to see. Or so one might hope.
        
    Indeed, as one might have noticed, the present text consists in argumentative proposal. And an argument must strive rationally to establish or rhetorically to persuade. An argument indeed first of all indeed asserts declarative statement concerning Ontology, of situation and circumstances in external objective reality, all as to be supported by whatever compelling evidence and reasoning (what). Building then, from explanation of premise or assumptions, a persuasive  argument strives at changing minds, altering decisions, influencing strategy and action (why, purpose). Hence, the ostensibly declarative or descriptive explanation of every what, why and wherefore, even prepositional passive, may actually enter soon enough, into prescriptive recommendation, analytic yet strategic, or even imperative to action as herein extolled. Because practical right action must be guided by abstract reasoning, just as abstract theory must remain ever informed by Empirical practicality. And the entirety of preceding declarative statement, assertion of Ontology concerned with external objective reality, in short of description and explanation, remains actually no less imperative:  prescriptive recommendation of ways and means, beyond mere description. In case anyone might be confused. Indeed, thereby bridging abstract principle and concrete action, just maybe doing things differently together than perhaps as habitual and accustomed. Therefore in the indeed imperative wisdom of Henri-Louis Bergson: “Think like a man of action, act like a man of thought.”
            
    More specifically, the duly diligent agenda and relevant objective of all disruptive game changing innovation even however subversive, remains nothing more or less than stated probortunity, the more dire, the more propitious. The worse the problem, the greater the opportunity. And to reiterate, note how imperative or recommendation remains implicit in assertion, declarative Ontological claim. Present observation indeed  implies recommendation and imperative. There are no rules of grammar or of logic, but only perhaps at all even however vaguely context, to distinguish such clear implication from mere assertion. Or would clarity actually improve, by such imperative declaration: Obey me and: Innovate from probortunity! No, surely that would only sound weird and jarring, indeed even that much the less intelligible. Actually somehow such imperative phrasing would only make less sense, not more. But there there may be a different solution henceforth somehow for crucial clarification of intent. Perhaps indeed by explicit repetition in outreach and invitation: Any questions? Any objections? Any takers? A tag consisting in those six words hence forth might help resolve any such ambiguity as propounded herein, and render the implicit explicit. Or so one only might hope. Because this is an invitation: Let's talk!
      
    Indeed furthermore, never proverbially to put the cart before the horse! For to quote Ernest Hemingway in the imperative: "Never confuse movement with action." The meaning or intention being descriptive assertion, that action remains distinct from mere movement. For as Thomas Carlyle asserts in the descriptive: “Nothing is more terrible than activity without insight." The sufficiently obvious implication in such passive observation, being the imperative or recommendation never to act without insight.
       
    Indeed, in creative solution finding, even declarative or descriptive assertion of problem statement and situation analysis, the expository identification and declaration on description alone, of even most vastly underserved need, can never be enough to adequately guide action towards filling whatever gap even however pronounced. Because observation or imagination in ostensible declaration or description in explanation of any better alternative or improvement, perhaps even vision of any TRIZ "ideal" or optimal conditions, desired circumstances or situation, remains crucial for agenda into actionable action agenda, analytic yet strategic planning. And indeed to reiterate for emphasis, all in the declarative grammatical form of assertions, Ontological claims in the form of declarative statements or descriptions. Indeed  even prepositional passive voice, focused upon effects of causality and action. All Not to be Feared! Again, recommendation transcending the merely "factually" [sic.] neutral, objective and entirely unmotivated assertion, into implicit imperative and intention of recommendation. And nothing could be more ordinary. And hence forth herein, whenever ostensible declarative assertion bears imperative thrust, the implicit may be summarily rendered explicit by the multiple interrogative: Any questions? Any objections? Any takers? Because this is an invitation: Let's talk!
     
     

     

     

    How to Show Instead of Tell:

    Descriptions are often intended to reveal moral or psychological aspects of character. Motivated characterization is shown by external description of physical appearance including even physical characteristics that constitute symbolic elements along with meaningful names, Setting The scene and more, and also via relationships and contrast between characters (foil), with development or not, and any better hidden revelation and understanding gleaned from the reactions of others, dialogue and action.

    Describing Your Characters Through Their Actions who then all the more come to life when they speak and are revealed with dialogue that shows, even sans adverb tags. Motivation unfolds suspenseful, in cycles of stimulus response, Motivation Reaction Units.

    The reader needn't believe whatever one's told, unless it rings true and evokes pathos. To state plainly, that young man is touchingly awkward may easily seem more like awkward narrative. Instead, let the reader have their own emotions. Only show the awkward behavior to play upon our sympathies, and let evidence supplied move the desired verdict from the audience.

    Indeed, perhaps most important to "show don't tell,"  is character motivation, for just such salient coherence and consistency in deeds, behavior and response, is indispensable and key to effective drama, the many levels of conflict inherent to situation.

    Of course revelations of any character's own thoughts and feelings may be conveyed via straight exposition or rhetorical discourse directly providing needed background information from the authorial POV. Likewise introspection of any character's private inner most thoughts and feelings from the POV of inner life. Or, instead, interior monologue may attempt to convey in words the process of consciousness or thought as a means of narrating a story. But stream-of-consciousness or otherwise Representation of consciousness may even endeavor to show, convey or portray in thoughts, experience, the entire subjective Phenomena, as it passes by, often quite at random.

    While, indeed, there are important exceptions to the rule of "show don't tell," and frequently the need for backfill narrative, even black box scene analysis and also hybrids such as the half-scene, nevertheless, more often there may be many better techniques by which events even foreshadowed by anticipatory imagery, can unfold in scenes  or even by creative stagecraft, rather than actually being explained. Indeed, editing film has been likened unto  writing with images, and viewers will actually tend to form context on their own, even from sequences of unrelated shots, however random. Never remind readers they're reading. Allow the reader/viewer/audience to figure things out. Indeed, for that matter, whereas in pornography the sex is always good but all the reader remembers is the intensity of the orgasm, to quote John Casey, in Romance Fiction, show and bring to life “…the swoon, the delicious palpitations of one’s heart is the real eroticism.” -which is to say, feather soft core.

    Favor the specific over the generic. Although an actual story can effectively and evocatively reinforce and return to a central theme, essential understanding or recurring concept, often conveyed via some symbolic Objective Correlative motif or topos, but even then, with variation.

    Fictional characters  like unto real unto the people they generally represent, are wont to associate emotionally to setting via meaningful key "objects," not only real physical props, decor, senses, smell, mood, ambiance, light and sound, but also triggers of memory and motivation perhaps focused thereupon, sentimentality after a prolonged absence, or to heighten or show any range of affect and motivation from tragic loss to pleasant anticipation.

    Good writing is akin to good reporting, conveying the level of intensity and other evocative qualities of any scene, or, for example, in the vital details of group scenes.

    And so, no matter the tone or attitude, atmosphere or ambiance, as evoked by the perfect setting, by Writing from the Senses, SUBTLE AND sensuously, with some reference to sensory perception in every paragraph, describing not only what a character sees, but hears, smells, tastes; the wind on his or her skin, the drone of insects, whatever, for richness of texture the senses remain key to Techniques of Suspense plotting and particularly to building onstage sexual tension and even aversion. Therefore, details of reflection, perception and experience must be chosen to draw out the moment that the reader may in turn be drawn into whatever the ambiance or other qualities of the passage or sequence, whichever point in the narrative.

    Dramatic situations and emotion at disequilibrium may leave characters at the mercy of ever-fluctuating sensory reactions, either overwhelmed or withdrawn. Indeed, growth may be understood as unfolding delayed response as the individual must process events, emotion and information racing ahead of them. After all, stress causes difficulty in organizing and retrieving thoughts, words, answers, or responses.

    The gap in Behaviorism was never cognitive, but Psychodynamic all along. Behavior, including action and expression or dialogue,  is often actually less mediated by cognitive events than by Psychodynamic events, feelings and motivations to be specific, often with inner conflict, in an observable (show: don't tell) cycles of Motivational Reaction Units. Cognition is a rational function of the ego, Phenomenologically manifest in reflection.

  • Emotional decision making

    “Thoughts are the shadows of our feelings - always darker, emptier and simpler.”  —  Friedrich Nietzsche

    •  
    Sensations and perception of physical orientation and condition bring emotion to consciousness, no less sensorialy than exteroceptive taste, touch, sound or brightness and color. Indeed, emotion can be forceful, overwhelming and vivid, with emerging memory or anticipation and imaginative imagery in acute detail. All emotions may be treated with some suspicion, with the distinct exception of anger, the most clear and distinct. Whereas joy is fleeting though no less overwhelming. And grief may be all encompassing and unbearable, catatonic, numbing and hollow like a vise at the temples, inspiring avoidance and denial. Compliments are a double-edged, warming the heart and flushing the cheeks. Embarrassment is an acute discomfort, brought on by the merest comment, glance, or shrug, a compliment, correction, look, or other seemly innocuous gesture. Anger may be the readiest defense after withdrawal. 
     
    Indeed the claimed success of Social Neuroscience in Music Therapy for engagement of the socially expressive facial muscles and emotions via stimulation of the inner ear in Autistic children brings to mind the achievements of such Freudian inspired body oriented psychotherapies as Bioenergetics. in similar engagement of different repressed emotion back into consciousness though various muscle groups. Phenomenologically, Alexander Lowen MD posits that the mechanism for conscious or even tentative preconscious awareness (and interpretation in Situational context) of emotions welling up from the unconscious, are actually the different physical sensations these emotion trigger. Hence, the mechanism of denial and repression back into the unconscious, is not merely by intellectualized rationalizations, but by muscular tension or flaccidity, dulling precisely said sensory feedback of emotion into palpable experience. Hence, the brilliant double entendre in the book tile of Lowen's 'Betrayal of the Body'. For when emotional, physical needs represented by the body, are disavowed, undercut or: betrayed by denial, the psyche in denial is in turn exposed or: betrayed by unconscious subtext of posture and expression, body language, ultimatly no less than by open and honest expression instead of denial in the first place. 
    Nonverbal communication or subtext is highly credible. Even however little action may reveal more than any volumes of dialogue from the same character, or even contradict one another, raising tension. Indeed, cognitive dissonance, the inner conflict of dishonest hypocrisy, manifests in dialogue as Antiprocess. Well rounded characters manifest conscious and even false goals often in both inner turmoil as well as practical outer conflict with radically different unconscious motivation quite unawares yet nevertheless betrayed, demonstrated, shown, by their actions and growth into entirely new goals. However, no less than characters need motivation over all, more, the plot chain of cause and effect very much includes stimulus and response. Thoughts and reactions must be revealed and shown, for the story to remain coherent.
     
    All too common body language phrases as found in The NONVERBAL DICTIONARY, evocative of ready examples of body language, mannerisms and tone among other non verbal factors and cues in showing characterization, indeed as in real life, can be most telling in photo-analysis revealing the truth behind photographs, snapshots and portraits and the vital details of group scenes.

    Aptitude with nuanced nonverbal communication, is sometimes named: covert social skill. But isn't such, rather, a function of Emotional Intelligence rather than social intelligence or social skill? Perhaps that depend upon application thereof, to what extent whatever subtext transacted be genuine, individual and autonomous, or social and disingenuously heteronymous. Other functional subtleties are the proverbial grain of salt, context, moderation, proportion and even the saving grace of social hypocrisy mitigating otherwise barbaric custom, all typically lacking in comically over parented heteronomy.

    Action, great or small, serves many functions, from evocation of characterization to punctuation of dialogue even a simple gesture such as a shrug or a nervous laugh, an action or task, lending context, in turn, all likewise, key in showing characterization, wherein motivation should be apparent no less than in a reaction shot, even as specific as, for example, what sort of frown, confused, troubled, or disapproving, and even through thoughts, however expository. And in all that is spoken and unspoken, unique, original and rounded and multifaceted characters must be concrete with their own unique behavior and responses including dialogue with tone, subtext and believable details of body language, that are consistent with their own perceptible background and outward signs, in Describing Your Characters Through Their Actions. And the logic of deconstruction expands and unfurls consistent story elements and variations out from one another. In the rewrites, details reexamined serve as clues to a better sdeveloped tory.

    Or instead of telling, explaining or else showing cinematically or sensorially, in the novel there has long also been refined the literate elaboration and demonstration by dimensioned anecdote, even sheer gossip.

    Identity is often associated with habit, and yet, the public persona seldom matches the Phenomenal reflection of inner life, POV, 'spin,' interpretive frame of reference, so much of which, in turn, us filtered through our meager and misguided self-understanding. Indeed, beware, the personal constructs of social cognition often arise from various learned or innate naturally flawed Epistemological Methodology.

    Thus, unique and original well rounded and multifaceted characterization may be brought to the fore, shown in behavior even body language and dialogue with subtext, what the character says or thinks, or  does, and by what other characters say about the character and by interaction between characters. and also reinforced and conveyed in the tone or even making metaphor, allegory and imagery extending beyond setting and creative stagecraft, design and props, the vivid Mise en Scčne. 

    Indeed, do we consider our options and consciously take action, or do our actions simply come upon us as we react to situation, and only then rationalize afterward? Frequently, the self conscious illusion of individual will is only the  burden of responsibility in hindsight after misdirection (whether error circumstantially and honestly, by deliberate manipulation or even hamartia and self-deception) has already been key in moving from promise to catastrophe. -An artifact of the personal narrative facilitating growth and the unfolding process of tragic discovery and self recognition called Anagnorisis. Indeed, beyond direct action, our influence upon others may often be even the more misguided and deluded.

    Some say that one becomes addicted to shame when another's heart is closed to one, because, however excruciating, the sheer megalomania of taking the blame protects one from the ugly truth that we really have no control over others and the universe or God. We can't make either love us or, ultimately, even protect those who do. Put more simply, then, and in complete good faith, powerlessness, the impotent helplessness of the human condition is terminally demeaning.

    Drama is conflict on many levels, or contradiction, more than mere crisis, that is inherent to situation, conflict being more than merely an event, but like unto karma, a condition, a relationship. Alas, however, beware! poor staging or presentation of conflict is effectively misdirection that dissipates inherent drama.

     
    Events that are not completely unrelated and extraneous may simply follow inevitably from the plot logic unless there is some twist, or be informative of situation, test the character who thereby accrue self knowledge, even engage conflict on many levels, incrementally or climactically.
     
    Differing viewpoints upon relationships parallel not only the objective and subjective persons of narrative but also communication and the character interaction of plot and growth, systematically. 

    Moreover, well rounded fictional characters like unto the real people they generally represent, wont as we all are to attachment, are often prone to associate emotionally to setting via meaningful key "objects" or personal symbols, not only real physical props, decor, senses, smell, mood, ambiance, light and sound, but also triggers of memory and motivation perhaps focused thereupon, sentimentality after a prolonged absence, or to heighten or show any range of affect and motivation from tragic loss to pleasant anticipation.  

    voice and tone afforded any motivated character's response, reaction or choice of strategy that will be determined largely by their POV, Point Of View, subjectivity, reflection, wherein the literary device of interior monologue may attempt to convey in words, reflection, situation with Representation of consciousness or thought process as a vehicle of narration. Indeed, stream-of-consciousness may endeavor to show, convey or portray experience, the entire subjective Phenomena, as it passes by, however even at random.  perspective or even entirely mechanistic particular involvement in whatever phase of any process considered, but also defined, guided and constrained by values, into somehow or other principled behavior. Indeed, motivated character POV (Point Of View) upon situation often turns out more definitive to story in TEXT, CONTEXT and subtext, even than plot variation.
    As an author finding ones own voice even identity and POV, Point Of View, beyond tone, syntax and structure alone, that is the moment, finally, of the lucid and vivid articulation of theme, gaining momentum and central clarity from whence all else unfolds smoothly and powerfully. Whereas to be relationally bullied, manipulated, confused, invalidated, isolated, estranged and robbed of ones voice, is Peripeteia crushing unto despair.

    “People's level of motivation, affective states, and actions are based more on what they believe than on what is objectively the case.”  - Albert Bandura

    In dramatizing controversy, Good motivated and dramatic dialogue makes it hard to tell who is right and who is wrong. "In a good play, everyone is right."   But how far would they go? Or will they change and grow?
     
    Use it or loose it! Observe dramatic economy that always pays off. Eliminating needless redundancy presses the writer to describe and show in more and better developed detail to guide the reader through motivated character focalisation, filtered perceptions and Interpretive Turn from prior experience, of context, bias, even misinformation, disinformation and delusion outright, Phenomenal and interpretive frame of reference, 'spin,' pandering propaganda, or the scarce resource that is Point Of View, all redolent in theme.
     
    Character and setting INTERACTIONS include the Phenomena of POV, situation of Epistemological "Given Circumstances" of information ever available to any given character, plus filtered perceptions, superficial or deep Viewpoint with propaganda and and often value loaded abstraction out of memory association and personal constructs of social cognition built from successive red herrings, innate naturally flawed Epistemological Methodology and elements of narrative even including Pathetic Fallacy, each with it's own distinct advantages and disadvantages and often conveying, beyond plot frame and sequence, perception, sense, time frame or structures, duration, and pacing, and into the thematic significance of the setting or milieu as a vehicle of reasonable description in character and plausible to the situation, organized description either in any spatial order, vertically, horizontally or depth perspective, as and that might draw the eye or stressing that which whatever such an individual would likely prioritize, uniquely react to and notice first under whatever particular circumstances, will help to avoid an unlikely artificial seeming separation of character from place, again, bearing in mind, who's voice?

    Hence, to pique curiosity, the physical realism of Science Fiction may introduce one to whatever world or situation, sans cumbersome instruction manuals telling too much too soon, instead showing from the verisimilitudinous Edge of Ideas like unto the historical subtext of an invented and often far future or otherwise distant world or setting, abruptly, yet unfolding bit by bit, or even in some entirely novel and surprising manner, baiting the all important hook or grabber and more, actually central and unique to whatever the work's special appeal and invitation to the thrill of shared disorientation. For avid readers of Science Fiction are alert to seek out and make note of seeming incoherencies as tantalizing clues to the mysterious and fabulous world beyond the narrative, even somewhat likewise as the true lover of poetry must seize upon narratively inexplicable visual disruptions or conjunctions of sound. 

    Indeed, while the reportage of exterior observation is dramatic, POV or Point Of View of a participant from inside the action, heightens immediacy. Picking the Right Viewpoint Character or reader surrogate, is among the essential considerations, because, whatever their uses, in some way all narrators, save, perhaps, the authorial spokesperson, remain unreliable, only one among many types of irony bourn by whatever voice in whichever person and by whatever vehicle.
     
    Strong narrative voice is crucial to Characterization and Subtle Description of Setting, all together comprising The 3 Most Important Elements of Fiction Writing.  And there are many ways to reveal, demonstrate, show and evoke characterization as well as different types and methods thereof.

    And as for showing elements and information the importance of which may only become clear later on, Don't Drop Clues -- Place Them Carefully! and clearly for the audience. Even red herrings let alone crucially important clues, particularly such as raise doubt as to the outcome, tension raised by Techniques of Suspense plotting, by going overlooked within the story and especially by foreshadowing, clues or otherwise suggestions as to later events unfolding in the plot, even the content and outcome of the story. 

    Exposition, even however naturally and incidental in dialogue, may reveal information, plot points however crucial, that is, among the characters of the story, known to all or else only to some, hence yet to be discovered by others.

     

    Q. What is paqoz?

    Polemical styles of persuasion employed in plot logic...

    A. "Delicately edged" or more narrowly, Pathos is the feeling aroused or that quality, as of an experience or a work of art, motivation of your audience and Getting Under Their Skin, that arouses feelings of pity, sympathy, tenderness, or sorrow, or even an an argument based upon emotion, pandering, playing on sympathy, fears, and desires, even as is typical of propaganda, to heighten sympathy and identification with central characters, through a range of emotion or motivation, and most strongly at the climactic lowest point.

    "Fuck Pathos" declares Sepher Ehben "And And the horse it rode in on…"
    There is no such thing as a “good faith” emotional argument.
    It is an exploit not an argument
    Only the corrupt engage in pathos and exploitation
    What is on sale is never the actual pay load.

    There can be no excuse. Indeed, with the possible exception of all the more damaging and melodramatic innuendo, "BE" IS FOR "BORING."  In order best to show don't tell, use action verbs instead of Be verbs, as in these evocative figures of pathos or even the symbolic imagery of Pathetic Fallacy.

    To show means either to display in action or else, otherwise, object demonstration, persuasion, even pandering propaganda or a moral, a lesson enfolded, when abstract knowledge alone fails to make an impression.

  • Pathos Quotes

    •  

    Q. Where is to be found the deeper meaning in fiction?

     

    A. Such depth is there to be plumbed and discovered

                                               in sophisticated Literary thematic subtext...

     

    Q. What are tone and mood?

    A. Tone varies to express the full range of human feeling and thought, text and subtext, spoken and unspoken body language, likewise to inform and influence audience reaction or perception. The term is usually used to refer to the tone of language in narrative or drama, or the tone of a narrative, lyric persona or POV, filtered perceptions and Interpretive Turn. Tone is the manner of expression in speech or writing, the attitude adopted by the speaker to the listener, likewise the author's attitude toward the work, events, characters, or audience, even subtext gathered and understood from the tone of syntax and vocabulary used, while mood is atmosphere or frame of mind. No less than as with the literal intonation of voice in speech, the quality of sound, like unto musical tones, produced by the voice in uttering words, likewise in writing tone conveys the author’s attitude, stated or implied, toward whatever subject and which may help convey the theme. Such an attitude might be no less immediately apparent then as in a strident tone of voice, or, on the other hand might be in a complex and subtle a manner which takes time to establish in an extended written work. Layers of subtext and ambiguity are richer and thought provoking. Choose and vary wording and phrasing. Beware repetition, Micro Repetition, Macro Repetition, Mega Repetition. An author’s tone emerges through choice of words and details. But mood is the climate of prevailing feeling in a literary work. The choice of setting, objects, details, images, symbols and words all contribute towards creating a specific mood.

    For example, an author may build up a certain mood around a     character or setting, and even while treating such a character or setting in in quite a different tone. Indeed, such a contrast may be ironic, implied meaning differing from whatever that is stated overtly. Thereby, mood remains distinct from tone. For example, the mood in a Halloween children's special may be deliberately ominous, dark and spooky, while, by ironic contrast, the tone emerges as light hearted, wacky and comedic fare. Tone may be formal or informal, trusting, even to the point of naivety, or deeply suspicious (whether or not the mood is brooding and paranoid), passionate (excited, sorrowful, loving, angry) or calmly meditative, outright bored and jaded, detached or intimate, serious, straight forward, even pompous or else light-hearted, even witty or out and out sarcastic.

    Whereas, mood may shift and change from scene to scene to mirror the emotion of the point of view     character through whose experience that scene is filtered. Indeed, while stark contrast creates impact, otherwise the external mood in situation and setting should mirror the internal mood that is an aspect of POV, filtered perceptions and Interpretive Turn, as perhaps express though persona or character attitude, to more subtly incite the audience to react as intended to events than more blatant propaganda.

  • STYLE, TONE, and LANGUAGE  
  • Tone in Literary Fiction

     

    Q. What is key  to
                         fundamentals delivered via
                                                  Writing Great Dialogue?
     

    A talented conversationalist never monopolizes the conversation but strives to engage others. A conversation is like unto a volleyball to be kept in the air: Set up others to take their shot. With skill, the flow of conversation may be gently guided and directed. Build a repertoire of topics at your fingertips, Ask open-ended questions that cannot be readily answered with a simple "yes" or "no". Find new ways to phrase typical standard questions and prompt more interesting replies.

    A. There are six core polemically purposeful and dramatic motivations for dialogue salient towards literate understanding or modeling of the rhetorical situation[ism] analysis.

    Tone as well as body language, are also important in delivering dialogue, even the punctuation of a simple gesture such as a shrug or a nervous laugh, let alone an action or task, lending context. People speak in each their own realistic variations, individual rhythms, language, voice and style, all crucial to purposeful effective dialogue. Action or dialogue with tone and subtext may be key to show or evoke characterization, spoken and unspoken, wherein motivation should be apparent, and even through thoughts, however expository.

             •   The many splendors of better dialogue
    Unrealistically concise and directed,
                     uniquely showing characters the author knows and trusts,
                                                                in order the better to reveal background...

    Six key functions of imagined interactions are: relational maintenance, conflict management and resolution, rehearsal for future interaction, insight, catharsis and compensatory fantasy.

    Characters are revealed and come to life with dialogue that shows, even sans adverb tags.

     

    Keep it short, snappy, interactive, dynamic, subtle, meaningful but simple.

     
    In drama, the conflict on many levels that is inherent to situation, there are four elements of thirteen possible motivations:
    What do characters want, goals ever put forth and why, what motivates them? And what aids or hinders whatever their quest? In dramatizing controversy, good motivated and dramatic dialogue makes it hard to tell who is right and who is wrong. "In a good play, everyone is right." But how far would they go? Or will they change and grow?

    “People's level of motivation, affective states, and actions are based more on what they believe than on what is objectively the case.”  - Albert Bandura

    The clues to answer such dramatic questions may lie  beneath the surface TEXT and CONTEXT in subtext, What Lurks Beneath, shown by way of each of the senses in setting, action and atmospheric tone, along with the Subtle and Delicate Art of Doublespeak dialogue, that may either harmonize with text, or in true Method subtext, even disagree with text, subtly, so as to draw attention into a  deeper vein or level of conflict by being subtly wrong, to show or evoke characterization, wherein motivation should be apparent, even through thoughts, however expository. Layers of subtext and ambiguity are richer and thought provoking.

    Even however little action may reveal more than any volumes of dialogue from the same character, or even contradict one another, raising tension. Indeed, cognitive dissonance, the inner conflict of dishonest hypocrisy, manifests in dialogue as Antiprocess. Well rounded characters manifest conscious and even false goals often in both inner turmoil as well as practical outer conflict with radically different unconscious motivation quite unawares yet nevertheless betrayed, demonstrated, shown, by their actions and growth into entirely new goals. However, no less than characters need motivation over all, more, the plot chain of cause and effect very much includes stimulus and response. Thoughts and reactions must be revealed and shown, for the story to remain coherent.

    In the end, it can't look like acting. "Writing on the nose" is an old Hollywood pejorative expression denoting dialog lacking the subtlety of subtext. After all, in real life, people rarely just come out and say what they really think. Therefore, motivated characters shouldn't either. Without being blatant, context comes to light in the way that people talk to others consistently with how they take measure and relate to whomever they are talking to, and revealing as to how they feel about that person and perhaps as well, whatever the topic of conversation.

    Each event in sequence that follows from motivated character action consistent with background, must in turn initiate from observable proximate stimulus unless entirely emerging from inner life, and, either way, rather than simply remaining mysterious, known only the mind of the character, must one way or another be shown intelligibly to the audience, even if none of any other characters; either way, in turn, quite probably another vitally important plot point. Whenever the cause and effect chain ever omits such links, expect plot holes stumbling amid succession of unrelated events.

    The dramatic efficacy of revealing and motivated subtext is in desire, giving rise to need and ingenuity. Drama is the gripping and engaging tension-laden presentation of conflict on many levels, whether or not the storyline is even believable. Drama is conflict on many levels that is inherent to situation, conflict being more than merely an event, but a condition, a relationship. Alas, however, beware! poor staging or presentation of conflict dissipates inherent drama.

    No matter how plausible, better fictional dialogue with all if it's hazards greatly differs from ordinary real life conversation in that fictional dialogue generally is and usually must be edited. Among the many uses of dialogue are setting the hook or injecting humor. Among the pitfalls of bad dialogue are unnatural sounding stilted language, especially during exposition of plot, imparting whatever information, recap or back-story, or generally repeating information for the benefit of the audience or filler that does little to advance the scene nor deepen characterization. Only used car salesman actually say peoples' names back to them!

    So, in summation, be mindful of the simple rules and guideline of prose for formatting dialogue, and always make Dazzling dynamic Successful Dialogue Work Harder.  

     

     

     

  • The logical falsity of question begging, is circular reasoning, in other words: when the premise and the conclusion are the same. For example: The Bible is all true because the Bible is the Word of God. After all, it says so in the Bible. Now Socrates was criticized for leading argument around in circles, because he was so masterfully skilled in exposing and reducing almost anything into question begging circularity, including matters of Theology and morality, even unto free thinking blasphemy. And all of this entertained few, while infuriating many. Because even so anciently, different experts already long regarded one another with such contempt, because any expert on one specialty, often becomes convinced that they know everything or at least everything important. But Socrates exposed their ignorance. For Socrates practiced enlightenment by refutation. When hailed as the wisest man in all Athens, Socrates famously retorted that if indeed he. Socrates, was the wisest man in all Athens, it could only be because he, Socrates, knew full well that he knew nothing. Hence, Socratic Wisdom, as opposed to unaware incompetence, has come to mean simply gauging the scope of ones own ignorance and limited knowledge. And as followers of Socrates learned or perhaps actually distorted Socratic Method, Socrates was accused of corrupting the young and eventually actually put to death.

    • The Dialectic of Socrates or: Socratic Method is a technique of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, by asking and answering questions. Socratic method endures as an ancient, renowned and highly efficacious polemical and Epistemological Methodological reasoning and error checking tool and method of investigating problems through controversy, dialogue discussions, definition, observation, analysis and abstract discovery of generalization, embracing valuable Intellectual Traits and dimensions of critical thinking, an open exchange, preferably among frank and trusting equals. Socratic Method proceeds and unfolds in a step by step cross-examination technique/procedure, of imminent critique (the legitimate modified form of Ad Hominem) checking for validity of internal consistency, of questioning assertions or inviting question, in order thereby to draw out inherent contradictions or inconsistencies and midwife, bring to light, self knowledge, starting with Geometry or anything else, but principally in matters of moral principle and character growth, to recognize contradictions between values one avows and the choices one freely makes and perhaps empowerment to improve. - In short, an ongoing systematic questioning of beliefs, traditions and authority. In a word: Philosophy. And the productive discomfort of Socratic Method serves well in the writing of dramatic dialogue, much as in it's own true to life drama.

  • Any productive and congenial Socratic dialogue must be undertaken in good faith. All such superficially plausible but intentionally deceptive and confusing fallacious and specious reasoning and equivocation and perhaps most especially: deliberately ambiguous and damaging linguistically leading questions such as are deliberately ambiguous so that any answer can be twisted against the one who gives it, are all well out of bounds. -Needless true to life drama.

    • Do not simply state, declare or assert that such or other is so, but challenge and question: Would you agree that such is so? By precisely such closed and deliberately narrowed Dialectical process, Socrates promised to call in his very antagonist as supporting witness, in any reasoning so plain and inescapable of whatever solid argument. Whereas open ended dialectical questioning proceeds without any predetermined script, by raising any question, and then further questioning each answer or response in turn, in order to expose just how much we take for granted and how little we actually know. Moreover, any unexpected response may send closed dialectic veering off script into open dialectic. Such is the pursuit of enlightenment by refutation for those of friendly and intellectually honest disposition to value such a thing, and tolerable to those Athenians who enjoyed humoring the eccentricities of Socrates, but all to often, a shabby trick of public humiliation in the estimation of the vain, fragile, prideful, spiteful and powerful, their ignorance and vanity exposed by the gadfly Socrates.

    Modern Scientific Method of experimentation remains predicated upon Socratic enlightenment by refutation in a process of elimination setting aside unviable hypotheses, thereby clearing the field of all but any handful of remaining viable hypotheses, ever less wrong. In true to life practice or merely in fiction wring, the Dialectic readily brings to light meaningful conflict in dramatization of controversy and values and intriguing problem to solve. Socrates hailed drama as most philosophical among the arts. In skillful fiction wring much as in reality, the Dialectic facilitates high dramatization, beyond mere plausible contrivance, of exposition with controversy through dialogue raising conflict on many levels and tension motivated by the relentless pursuit of truth through unceasing questions even perhaps to the point of tragic hamartia or blind error of maladaptive improportion, so-called Socratic irony, a stated ignorance and probing willingness to learn from others by adroit questioning to reveal the inescapable truth and expose the errors of the answers received, by progressions of seemingly innocent questions ultimately leading the respondent to a logical conclusion incompatible with whatever that person's originally stated belief, indeed, exactly such that attempts to evade and back out all deteriorate and fail, just as in any fine drama. But perhaps most dramatically of all, whereas even perfectly honest and straight forward rhetoric or any story or fable with a moral, let alone slippery Sophistry or devious propaganda or any fraudulent manufacture of consensus, indeed, leading questions dishonest and manipulative or honestly transparent, all aim to convince and persuade, in response, the Dialectic of Socrates may often be more akin to a more Literate meaningful thematic exploration, indeed falling short of pat answers, and instead, enlightenment by refutation, the elimination of unviable hypotheses. By his method of challenging the claims of participants in his dialogues, Socrates would expose ignorance in others by first admitting his own ignorance, Socratic irony, to elicit honest answers to pointed obvious question in detail, centering the discussion and evidentiary burden upon the beliefs of those he this cross-questioned.  

    It has been observed that one never learns anything so well as when one is coaxed forth to teach it! As we discover in the Dialogues, the Socratic Method of exploratory cross questioning with even the broadest and most open questions opening and expanding thinking and discussion, may serve to ferret out and expose weaknesses in an argumentative position, thereby to challenge complacency and achieve enlightenment by refutation. Also, however, framing the logical steps in an argument even as very narrow specific rhetorical questions, draws the focus of the hearer either to acquiesce or to rebut, point by point, rather than endlessly gainsaying and bypassing. But to narrow focus and draw attention in any one direction is often a misleading diversionary tactic away from other possible thoughts. Hence, to press a string of leading questions leading directly to the desired answers to elicit, may as readily serve for systematically chopping from whatever the full range of logic applicable, with selective information as well, thereby even repressively molding ideas rather than to nurture the flower of autonomous thought. Moreover, while logically leading questions require understanding of the concepts and principles involved in order to be answered correctly, psychologically leading questions can be answered by keying in on clues other than the logic of the content at all. -In other words, by approval seeking. And all this much too, may already be gleaned at all, even from the Dialogues of Socrates, even if somewhat unacknowledged therein.

    Aside from exploratory open ended questions, a crucial technique of Socratic Method is indeed the intellectually leading question simply to double check and get any point across clearly, step by step, so that all understand exactly what they agree to, and not circuitously to confuse ones opponent as recommended by Schopenhauer, nor otherwise to the point of distorted logic chopping with selective information, nor emotionally leading questions and pressures of approval and disapproval, and certainly not tawdry and blatantly dishonest and abusive are the ambiguous linguistic or semantically leading loaded question, wherein, one way or another, answer to one possible interpretation is then deliberately taken out of context into the other. -For notorious Vaudevillian example: "Have you stopped beating your wife?" 

    For the Dialectic of Socrates remains an intrinsically two edged sword to wield. For plainly, some of the Dialogues remain livelier than others. Some are more skeptical and contentious, and others more propagandistic going largely unchallenged. Of course the former are often deemed more genuine, while the latter considered more the invention of Plato towards his own agendas. Whereas the candor of honest controversy proffers the benefit of the doubt, because the tool of argument serves alike in sporting debate, honest unapologetic discourse among trusted friends, sly caution among knaves and liars, or sorting out who is which. And, make no mistake, here is the real reason why cowards, reactionaries, liars and bullies so resent and vilify controversy. Hence, in drama as in life, it may often be the more instructive to engage in Socratic irony by playing stupid with an indignant liar in order to trip him up by lending him enough rope by which to hang himself, than to play into his hands by entering into an immature pointless shouting match. Devious as tactics of Socratic irony may seem, nevertheless what is worse, cowardly and irresponsible, is to demure and accept bad faith as good.

    Arguments remain difficult getting anywhere without first clearly identifying whatever disagreement. Therefore the Dialectic of Socrates legitimately follows two modes, either logically leading questions in sequence, arguing and double-checking to discover error or disagreement, point by point, in rational polemical persuasion towards an intended conclusion, or else open ended questioning with no preset destination, in free exploration bringing all into question as ever may arise. Leading question may veer off into open ended question at any time, because of an unexpected answer or counter question. The scrutiny by leading question begins by taking any coherent step by step argument, and questioning each point, indeed rephrasing each point is sequence of an argument, as an even rhetorical question to gain ascent and agreement.

    ""An unexamined life is not fit to be lived by a human being." (Apology, 38a) For the capacity for reflection is uniquely human, and there is wisdom simply in even knowing that one does not know, gauging and understanding the scope of one's own ignorance, the limits of ones own knowledge. Hence, in Plato's Dialogues, Socrates constantly asks questions in order to come to an understanding of something or other (e.g., piety, knowledge, courage, temperance, justice, etc.). Upon receiving an answer to a question, Socrates usually commends his interlocutor (ironically), and then asks for clarification of a few points (almost the way Detective Colombo voices nagging after thoughts during a typically infuriating false exit); that is to say, Socrates asks further questions that arise from the answer to the previous question. This process continues until Socrates' interlocutor (if enlightened or entertained thereby, or just reasonably emotionally secure to begin with) either finally admits his ignorance of the subject contrary to his original claim or else (otherwise) simply becomes extremely annoyed with Socrates.

    Socrates wrote nothing because he felt that knowledge was a living, interactive thing. Socrates' method of philosophical inquiry consisted in questioning people on the positions they asserted and working them through questions into a contradiction, thus proving to them that their original assertion was wrong. Socrates himself never takes a position; in The Apology he radically and skeptically claims to know nothing at all except that he knows nothing. Socrates and Plato refer to this method of questioning as elenchus , which means something like "cross-examination" The Socratic elenchus eventually gave rise to dialectic, the idea that truth needs to be pursued by modifying one's position through questioning and conflict with opposing ideas. It is this idea of the truth being pursued, rather than discovered, that characterizes Socratic thought and much of our worldview today. The Western notion of dialectic is somewhat Socratic in nature in that it is conceived of as an ongoing process. Although Socrates in The Apology claims to have discovered no other truth than that he knows no truth, the Socrates of Plato's other earlier dialogues is of the opinion that truth is somehow attainable through this process of elenchus.
     
    Greek Philosophy - Richard Hooker

    This method of inquiry is renowned as the dialectical method: the asking of a series of interlocking and progressive questions. Step by step, by framing every each reasoned argumentative point not as an assertion, but in the form of a question seeking assent, then from forthcoming reply it will be possible for the interlocutor better to discern if the other party clearly follows or agrees. Error detection is also served along with ongoing miscommunication repair and clarification of disagreement. Also, by every inevitable deviation from script, open ended exploration ensues.

    Thus did the gadfly Socrates in his investigations gain the reputation for impractical, esoteric speculation about the cosmos, which not every Athenian appreciated, not liking to be made to feel foolish, especially the most unteachable unreachable envious grudge-collecting dullards in town, often glorified experts in their own narrow fields, discounting all other disciplines and presuming thereby to know everything or at least everything important. 

    Unskilled and Unaware: The more one knows, the more one might come to realize all that one doesn't know. Such is growth in the sagacity of Socratic Wisdom. When Socrates was hailed as the widest man in Athens, he retorted that this could only be because and in so far as he, Socrates, knew that he knew nothing! Socrates valued honest ignorance. Therefore Socrates never resorted to such derision as 'Dismissive Incomprehension,: A Use of Purported Ignorance to Undermine Others.'  Modern research corroborates that the ignorant often think themselves knowledgeable and the unskilled often believe themselves to be capable; lacking as they do, all knowledgeable referents by which to asses circumstances and self evaluate. They fail at metacognition. Such is unaware incompetence, so bereft of Socratic Wisdom. Others learn or become Behaviorally Conditioned only how to garner approval and fit in, but at the expense of all responsible decision and action. Such operant behavior in society, nevertheless externally irrelevant, is called: skilled incompetence, prime example of the unexamined unworthy of the living for any human being.

    The truth will out! To thine own self be true! Argue your point. Criticize. And encourage others, likewise. And you too, like Socrates, may come to stand castigated and condemned by bitter old farts for corrupting youth!

     
    Thus, in fiction no less than real life, by way of Socratic Method, any needed exposition at all can become a dramatic and controversial tinder box, bringing inner conflict out! 
    -The antagonist or obstacle being the motivating phobia and bigotry which is named: anti-critical bias.
    Or else, see what you can make of Bohmian Dialogue.

    But beware the insidious support group exchange of extrinsic motivational conditioning and Constructivist Listening rather than any techniques of Active Reading or Effective Active Listening, Constructivist listening being a process of passively allowing a person to talk without being interrupted, with nary ever a care regarding Miscommunication Competence or Conversational Adequacy, indeed wherein listeners neither overtly respond nor interpret at all, neither to paraphrase, analyze, proffer advice nor seek to relate via personal stories, all because people are simply held to be capable of solving their own problems by thinking aloud. -All very much in accord with Nihilistic value destruction as implicit to the Solipsistic Zen position upon dialogue.

  • A dialectical process towards excellence in Miscommunication Competence and Conversational Adequacy
    •  

    Q. What is the hook, from the first line or grabber or tilt during the teaser? 

    A. Is the very beginning adequate to pique and to hold the reader's interest?  After all, just as the old saying goes, first impressions are everything!

    The "mini-crisis" is the setup at the beginning of the story  in which the dilemma is established, comes to pass or is discovered by the protagonist or just the audience, if it turns out the protagonist knows all along. Also the characters' reactions thereto.  

    The Point of Attack is that first thing the audience will see or hear as a play begins or in the first short segment to pique inrterst before the credits in a TV show, called: the teaser.

    Sharpen anything that comes early on to help pique curiosity and even pathos in order to involve the reader. Indeed, anything puzzling enough to demand explanation, certainly including the unfolding of whatever the anomalous Speculative Element of Science Fiction, may hold the audience as ever any such revelation unfolds. Woo, beguile, slap or tickle. Anything provocative. The teaser is the first scene in a teleplay, just before the opening credits, that sets the scene with an exciting situation and even a cliff-hanger.

    Or it can all be more understated:  How to Open Without a Bang

    Indeed, every vital element to compelling story may already be introduced in a dynamic beginning to foreshadow that which will have impact to come, unless it's only bait and switch.

    Or else, for a a better hook or grabber, the story may start from a big scene in the middle or in media res, even plot inversion, so that the beginning must retrieved, later on, in flashbacks. Also, for the scene to be established from various points of view, the position in sequence of each item may be shifted about or actually shuffled together. Yet the essential components remain the fairly constant.   

  • Hook for publicity
  • How to Find Exactly the Right Story Hook The very premise must tantalize from the opening line!    
  • The weird opener & the unintegrated opener

    • Meeting new friends, getting hot dates, or making more money; success, commercial, political, social or romantic, is after all, a matter of sales, of selling yourself, of creative writing, of telling a story, finding and baiting the hook. Naturally, the most prevalent hook online will be that of whatever success or writing guru, offering the secret of finding your own unique hook and baiting it just so! Ah, but what if I turn all of that on its head? Gentle reader, here's my hook, then, about the agenda of FoolQuest.com: If anyone else were, then why would I bother?  And the bait, something that everyone wants: That your opinion will be valued.

     

    Q.  What is key to effective pacing and rhythm? 

    A. In fiction, there are various conceits for imparting whatever information crucial to the story. Otherwise, there is nothing wrong with the economy of a fast paced adventure yarn which is confident, careful and concise, for The Art is in the Revision. In so far as fiction must be life-like, nevertheless the dull bits are best excised, not spelled out in excruciating detail or padded. Whatever details should be salient and revealing. Use it or loose it! Observe dramatic economy and eliminate needless redundancy.

    Indeed, whatever motivation establishing conflict on many levels and even pathos in fight scenes needs must come before hand and even such crucial exposition and background information as the terrain is best established immediately before a chase sequence, usually lacking dialogue unless it's short and clipped.

    Psychogeography is the art that endeavors to record and to understand the influence of the outer environment upon the human mind, including, no less than plot frame and sequence, sense, time frame or structures, duration, and pacing, as well as, reciprocally, the Phenomenal creative mental emotional process of meaningful association to locale and environment which is so key to the most evocative use of setting in fiction.

    A good descriptive passage shows in specific, well-observed detail, revelation of the character's inner life and driving motivation. Eliminating needless redundancy presses the writer to show in more and better developed detail to guide the reader through character focalization, filtered perceptions from prior experience, context, bias, Phenomenal and interpretive frame of reference, 'spin', propaganda, or the scarce resource that is Point Of View, superficial or deep Viewpoint, and elements of narrative, each with it's own distinct advantages and disadvantages and often conveying perception, sense, time frame, pacing or duration, not merely plot frame and sequence, and into the setting. -A reasonable description in character and plausible to the situation, stressing that which whatever such an individual would likely prioritize, react to and notice first under whatever particular circumstances, will help to avoid an unlikely artificial seeming separation of character from place, again, bearing in mind, who's voice?

    Your Story at Your Speed. Filler, details filled in just for the sake of completion without even so much as local dexterity, even if not excessively belabored, may tend to be both awkward and dull, fails to effectively control pacing so as to build and sustain tension and pathos by Techniques of

    • suspense plotting, anticipation, even aversion, to help achieve immediacy in The Rhetoric of Action. Indeed, a good rhythm of repeatedly building tension, even discomfort and aversion, spoken and unspoken, followed by comedic relief, or charm and alarm, generally helps in holding the attention of an audience. Likewise, in any Horror screenplay, effective timing may be derived from an understanding the physiology of boredom.

    However, all such tricks aside, beyond simply being drawn out, lest only into sheer irrelevance, boredom, aggravation and disappointment, what is also required for suspense is anything to raise anticipation by heightening the moment extended. For, just as any plot requires some dramatic obstacle, even for any story at all, just as eustress will often become a function of Creative Tension, likewise building tension by Techniques of mounting suspense requires an immediate obstacle to raise conflict on many levels and put the outcome of Emotional decision making in doubt. -Even sheer momentary hesitation, diversion or distraction, and some internal or external trigger or motivation thereto, even as the character begins to take action, also with something more to spur them on, then perhaps to some element of surprise. For in the words of Friedrich Nietzsche : “Thoughts are the shadows of our feelings - always darker, emptier and simpler.” Drama is suspense drawn out over the long term of the story arc, whereas suspense is the immediacy of drama in the short term.

    To show don't tell, details of reflection, perception and experience must be chosen to draw out the tension of the moment that the reader may be drawn into whatever the ambiance or other qualities, including suspense, of the passage or sequence, whichever point in the narrative.

     

    Q. Any additional more specific and over all follow up advice about fiction writing?

    A. After a quick review of the fundamental elements of fiction, follow The 39 Steps: A Primer on Story Writing and be sure to drop by Writers Studio 2 and take the Strange New Worlds Hints, then ponder the Aphorisms for Writing Science Fiction and consult A checklist for critiquing Science Fiction while ordering in fluent Literary and Rhetorical Terms from the Pure Fiction writing menu, and consider the Hardcore Critique Guidelines about How to Critique Fiction when Reading Fiction and then Writing about Fiction.

     

     

    Join right in brainstorming an original fanfic spinoff!
    Q. What distinguishes the Star Trek: The Ship of Fools format in particular, from other STAR TREK series, in any media, fanfic included?
    A. Star Trek: The Ship of Fools in particular, from other STAR TREK series, in any media, fanfic included?

    Beginning with the outline for introductory six part mini-series also serving as series "bible" for Star Trek: The Ship of Fool, no effort has been spared by glossing over that which is merely perfunctory and dull. Nothing should be included unless it is interesting, provocative or dramatic. To provide new and colorful motivated and even unique and original well rounded and multifaceted characters, and to speculatively advance the ramifications, or at least take over the top rather than simply rehash or further trivialize, the most appealing STAR TREK tropes. 

    And that  Star Trek: The Ship of Fools outlines and drafts are truly unfinished, with much to be added and changed, rich with points of creative departure for anyone to join right in a real ongoing online writer's bull session. Not just dullardly anal formulaic filling in of the blanks with the obvious simply for the sake of completion in immersive detail, even however arbitrarily.

    Q. Why the title? 

    A. The Ship of Fools, sacred fools, is a classical allegory of the human condition, blind and impulsive in hopes of salvation. And Star Trek: The Ship of Fools is a tale of encounter with the unknown from Rashuman-like multiple perspective, and corresponding dramatic conflict on many levels from clashing motivation. 

    Hieronymus Bosch • Annotated • schooled fools • yellowdog

     

     

    Copyright 2001 - 2023 by Aaron Agassi