| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| The Wanderer |
Posted - 12 Jul 2004 : 14:47:06
Since I am relatively new to this site (I just haappened to stumble on it a couple of weeks ago), I've been reading some of the past posts just to get a feel for the environment. In one of them, Elaine Cunningham talks about how people have different levels of tolerance for anachronisms, especially in the manner in which characters speak.
In my recent readings, I've come to the conclusion that I am pretty sensitive to such things. The hair on the back of my neck stands on end when I hear things like "Yeah" and "Okay" (I made these up since I do not have the books with me, but you get the idea). Certain attitudes also jar me out of the "realms mentality" (e.g. "I got my 200th kill.. Perhaps I should throw a party").
Mind you, I am not bashing the authors who use this style in their books. It is something which will depend on the reader, and there will always be someone who finds a fault. My curiosity is more as to just how tolerant the scribes here at Candlekeep are. I guess I'm trying to pin down exactly what it is that I object to. Any thoughts? |
| 13 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 17 Jul 2004 : 19:26:43
quote:
Originally posted by Anubis
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
...The combat I wrote for Chapter One of my Jack story ...
Where is this Jack story I keep reading about? Any links?
http://www.candlekeep.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1499&whichpage=1 |
| The Wanderer |
Posted - 17 Jul 2004 : 18:55:49
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
...The combat I wrote for Chapter One of my Jack story ...
Where is this Jack story I keep reading about? Any links? |
| Gellion |
Posted - 17 Jul 2004 : 07:47:42
Adding to what I said earlier. I actually like more Modern terms. They let me connect wit the world more. |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 17 Jul 2004 : 07:15:35
quote:
Originally posted by Anubis
quote:
Bookwyrm said:
Personally, I'm more irritated by how the Realms books I've read recently have gone out of their way to show current scenes and actions in game terms.
What would be an example of a scene like this?
Mostly in The Rage. Several times I just thought it should say exactly what the rolls are (Ooh, I know that demon! Lemme make a Knowlege (the planes) check . . . .). Or when an enemy spellcaster seems to cast a spell by just pointing, and so must have had it stored in an item. Well, who cares where it's coming from in a novel? If it's a game, perhaps, but in a novel it slows things down.
Or like when Gorstag gets some intuitive sense and ducks for seemingly no reason while doing a little burglary, thus dodging a strike that could have killed him. Why do that when you can just say "A small sound alerted caused Gorstag to pause, and as he turned . . . ." or something like that? People who don't know about Uncanny Dodge would think that he's some kind of psychic or something.
It's probably overreacting, really. After all, this is a novel based on a gaming universe. And 3e combat actions are pretty easy to write convincingly if you take the time and effort. I've done it, obviously. I just want to enjoy the writing irrespective of thinking "hmm, he must have rolled a critical" or "she's got a good Will save."
As well, it's slowing the story down. Combat in a novel should be fast-paced. The combat I wrote for Chapter One of my Jack story I had to struggle with. I wanted to write it faster, to not have to worry about how many hit points each combatant had, how much damage was delt, and let it all simply flow better. Real life combat wouldn't be like that -- which is why the wound-point system was created for some settings. Like I said, though, I couldn't do that later on, so I figured it was best to get it over with.
Richard Lee Byers could have done it the way I prefered. I won't hold it against him, though, because he obviously didn't need to write it the way he did. He's good enough that it wasn't some sort of crutch to hold his work up. I'd prefer to think he was attempting to be true to the fact that it was a gaming novel. Or perhaps WotC wanted it that way (along with a half-golem, an arctic dwarf, an avariel, and a halfling who obviously had levels in the Warslinger PrC) -- but I'm finding it far too easy to get upset at WotC for everything, even without knowing that it's something they were deliberate about.
So I'm going to give Mr. Byers all the benefits of the doubt that I can. I'm having trouble reading through some parts (the sections where it feels like the game rolls should be in the margins), but whenever I feel like giving up, I remember that there are sections that are very engaging, where (if this were a D&D game) no rolls are occuring. |
| hammer of Moradin |
Posted - 16 Jul 2004 : 16:34:35
quote:
Originally posted by SiriusBlack
quote:
Originally posted by Anubis
In my recent readings, I've come to the conclusion that I am pretty sensitive to such things. The hair on the back of my neck stands on end when I hear things like "Yeah" and "Okay" (I made these up since I do not have the books with me, but you get the idea).
You're not alone. One of my players just finished a newly released Realms novel and she pointed out a couple of words like the ones you listed above that clearly were out of place. One of these included a character using, "O.K.," in a reply.
It stood out to her and she didn't like it. I didn't notice it myself. Now the day I see a drow character talking about his/her "Bling-Bling," is the day SB throws a fit.
I can see RAS's Jarlaxle saying this. He's the rap star of the realms. |
| The Wanderer |
Posted - 16 Jul 2004 : 14:24:48
quote:
Originally posted by SiriusBlack
Now the day I see a drow character talking about his/her "Bling-Bling," is the day SB throws a fit.
LOL!!!
...That was great, Sirius. |
| SiriusBlack |
Posted - 16 Jul 2004 : 14:14:48
quote:
Originally posted by Anubis
In my recent readings, I've come to the conclusion that I am pretty sensitive to such things. The hair on the back of my neck stands on end when I hear things like "Yeah" and "Okay" (I made these up since I do not have the books with me, but you get the idea).
You're not alone. One of my players just finished a newly released Realms novel and she pointed out a couple of words like the ones you listed above that clearly were out of place. One of these included a character using, "O.K.," in a reply.
It stood out to her and she didn't like it. I didn't notice it myself. Now the day I see a drow character talking about his/her "Bling-Bling," is the day SB throws a fit. |
| The Wanderer |
Posted - 16 Jul 2004 : 12:53:58
Very elightening answer, Bookwyrm. I have a bad habit using very broad terms during discussions. I usually end up getting into trouble for it. It is indeed the use of slang that I object too.
The main reason why I started this topic is because I was currently reading a novel whose characters had a very marked disposition for the use of slang. The phrase "dropped like a bad habit", which did occur in the book, sounds more appropriate to a detective novel set in the earlu 1900's than for a fantasy setting.
quote:
Bookwyrm said:
This does not mean one should use formality, though!
I agree. The phrase I used was only an example (I was picturing a Paladin). I believe that there are certain expectation on how the characters will speak. There is this particular feel that, at least I, associate with the characters in the FR, and having them come off as too "modern" disrupts that. It does not have to be formal, but it should elicit the feeling that it is another world.
quote:
Bookwyrm said:
Personally, I'm more irritated by how the Realms books I've read recently have gone out of their way to show current scenes and actions in game terms.
What would be an example of a scene like this? |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 16 Jul 2004 : 08:42:40
Okay, so let's take out all rapiers, gunpowder, the level of shipbuilding, the fact that women are basicly treated as equals to men . . . .
 Well, okay. I won't argue the gunpowder. Silly old Gond . . . .
Now, in case you want to redefine 'anachronism' here to be 'anauniversalism' (to, obviously, coin a phrase), or the transfer of anything distinct to our world:
Basically all foodstuffs.
Basically all animals.
All dinosaurs (if you accept them being in Chult, which I don't)
Many of the gods.
All of the Old Empires.
Any of the lands not expressly created by Ed Greenwood (then again . . . might not be bad)
Oh, and all humans.
Now that we've covered the extreme, I'll take a closer look. You dislike the language? As has been said, it can only be considered a translation. Otherwise you'd have everyone speaking their own language and we'd only figure out the stuff outside of the quotations.
So let's narrow it to "slang," or those parts of language that do not translate because they depend on specific culture ties -- and finally we seem to have something we can agree on. It's not that difficult to say "alright" instead of "okay" or "well met" instead of "hey." Not that I've seen any of the later, which I'm sure I would have noticed. "Okay" I might not have realized was there.
This does not mean one should use formality, though! To use your example of translating "this is going to suck," I would instead write something like "Look's like we'll have a tough fight" or "This is not going to be fun." No one (unless it's very in-character) is going to waste formality -- and the extra time it needs to be said and used -- in such a situation. Not to mention that in a world like the Realms, class speech patterns are far more obvious than they are today. Lingusitic distinctions are common, and encouraged on both sides of the divide. Such as a lazy drawl from the nobility, to show how the cares of the world don't phase them; or an earthy, rough speech from the commoners, to show that you don't really need all that highfollutin' fancy-talk.
Personally, I'm more irritated by how the Realms books I've read recently have gone out of their way to show current scenes and actions in game terms. Yes, it sounds a bit strange because of my Jack story, but please understand that I didn't want to write like that. To me it doesn't flow in a natural narrative. However, once the campaign starts, I'll have to describe any game actions in that way, so I figured I'd better start the pattern sooner. And really, you expect it in a game log; in a novel that people with no knowledge of the game rules are likely to read, it's probably confusing. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 13 Jul 2004 : 16:27:49
As one of the people that Elaine rightly characterized as particularly sensitive to Realms infidelities such as personal names in the wrong style...
I wouldn't call that class of them 'anachronisms' as the Realms don't equate to a single Earth time but in fact contain anachronisms (various nineteenth- and twentieth-century social and economic attributes) if seen from that point of view.
Since I read Realms fiction for stories in the Realms, not just for stories, and I imagine the Realms quite thoroughly, 'Yeah' and 'Okay' will grate on me, and so will absences such as a complete lack of Realms argot. If I like other aspects of what the author is doing I'll get used to it, but part of my Realms-identification will have to be suspended.
I think what's to dislike about such stuff is obvious. Getting wrong such things as how people talk and think, how societies and magic work, is failing to write in the Realms quite as much as calling some town the wrong name or putting it in the wrong place. |
| The Wanderer |
Posted - 13 Jul 2004 : 12:38:55
Both of you bring up a good point; it is quite difficult (if not impossible) to have a book targeted at modern reasders which does not have some anachronisms. Otherwise we would have to study some history or learn a new language before fully understanding the book, which could be a pain.
Yet it is the manner in which these anachronisms are presented that seems to matter the most.
Capn Charlie brought up the movie <i>A Knight's Tale</i>. The thing with this movie is that anacrhonisms where an integral part of the movie. It was medieval England with a modern twist. It also served to set the tone of the movie, which was part comedy, part action. I do not believe that the same holds true for FR novels (not the comedy part; I still laugh thinking about a certain mephit that Paul Kemp wrote about in Realms of Shadow:"By Asmodeus' arse!"  ).
To continue using movies as example, I'll use <i>Shakespeare in love</i>. This is another movie set in the England. The producers of this movie knew that if they used Shakesperian English, people would have a hard time understanding what was being said and would lose sight of the plot very quickly. What they did was create a version of English which sounded more classic while remaining easy to understand for modern movie-goers. The result was that you where induced to believe that this was how people at the time spoke.
This is what I believe holds for FR novels. It's like the difference between a Harper saying: "This is going to suck" as opposed to "It will be a hard-fought battle" when talking about an encounter.
I believe I've gone on off on a tangent  ...
You guys are right in that there will always be anachronisms, but just how much before you feel like it breaks the mood? |
| Gellion |
Posted - 13 Jul 2004 : 00:10:39
They do not bother me at all. I believe that a fantasy world can not have anachronisms because it is not a historical world. It does not have a tim period in relation to Earth. |
| Capn Charlie |
Posted - 12 Jul 2004 : 19:50:56
I have always been fairly tolerant of such things, mostly because it leads down the path to having books written in fantasy languages.
Seriously, so they wouldn't say "ok", fine, but they wouldn't say anything else in english either. We must usually tolerate a certain amount of anachronisms in a game, and methods of speech are usually one of the big ones.
Kind of like in the move A Knight's Tale, they used rock as the music during the movie, with jousting fans getting into We will rock You, and young nobility dancing to some more. Now sure, they could have used period works, and the soundtrack could have sounded like a collection of small girl's music boxes.
They went in with the philosophy of using rock because the music at the time was rock...of a sort. It was new, vibrant, and made the people then feel the way music now does us. They also were speaking in clear english, not the nigh incomprehensible old english that they could have used.
Why do they do these things? Well, an author wants their work to be an enjoyable read. One of the keys to this is using small things like turns of speech to get the point across. There are few things I dislike more than when an author has made up a bunch of phrases and terms for no good reason, just to be different, and usually it makes the work nearly unreadable because you have to either have a dictionary in the back, or have an extra three lines of "or 'ok' in the phrasings of the Tilgari" per page to even be able to read it.
I could understand doing away with anachronism if it was say, a historical fiction book, or even trotting out manners of speech, but to use an existing language in the dialogue of your book certain things will have to slip in. I mean, as I already said, the characters shouldn't be saying a word we can understand(Well, except maybe the Drow) so just accept the inclusion of certain phrases as being part of the translation from chondathan, with things like "ok" being close approximations of the translation of a term that is as equally meaningless to us as "ok" is to them. |
|
|
