I have less of a point or argument here than a musing. But I wrote about my fascination with fairy-tale time, its unpinnability, and how I keep wondering what relation that might have to the pseudo-contemporary non-time we find in many realistic stories.
What do you think?
#WritingCommunity #WritingConversations #FairyTale #imprompt2 #Bookstodon #PrincessBride
I've got names that work for the time period but can be shortened, as their friends and family do, to something that sounds more modern.
I love using names that don't fit. Not for every character. Usually just my favorites. And I like when the not-fitting is subtle. It's this little perk up moment I think. Just a little "hey pay attention here, reader."
But it IS really interesting how names do so much work to pin a time and world. Don't they?
@allisonwyss I went the other direction for a short story and chose to leave the characters unnamed so it can be nearly anywhere.
I and a few readers like the effect and ambiguity but others were put off by it. It's been interesting as a writing exercise to figure out how to write clearly without names (there are only two characters) and also how to ground it a bit more without losing the openness created by the lack of names and specificity.
I definitely used unnamed characters sometimes in my shorter work. There's this interesting relationship between reader and character that it can create. Sometimes, it makes a space of intimacy, to be known only by a pronoun. And sometimes it feels like the pronoun just turns into a name. But it's more difficult to sustain over a longer work or when you have more than a couple characters.
One thing it can signal is a sort of archetypal sense. A character is named by their role rather than their name.
But sometimes NOT naming can be a way to actually place the characters, rather than to be vague about place. It can signal genre, for example, when used in conjunction with other forms.
I worry sometimes that stories that don't use names can fall into a trap of gender essentialism. It's so easy to make the decision to have one of each pronoun to differentiate characters, then with nothing else as handle, regressive stereotypes can accidentally fall into place or just be assumed. I mean it certainly doesn't happen every time--just something to watch out for.
@allisonwyss
@emmaaum @crcollins
It's an artifact of the language.
In sign language (ASL), pronouns are set by body position. I might lean to the left and sign "bank manager, tall" then lean to the right and sign "bus driver, old". Then I might sign that the (lean left) was wet, and angry at the (lean right), and you'd know the tall wet bank manager was angry at the old bus driver, without knowing (or needing to know) whether each was male or female.
@allisonwyss
@emmaaum @crcollins
If English had programming language extensions, then instead of "He watched her as she cooked his breakfast the way he had seen her mother do it," you might say:
"1 watched 2 as 2 cooked 1's breakfast the way 1 had seen 2's mother do it."
This would be different from "1 watched 2 as 1 cooked 2's breakfast the way 1 had seen 1's mother do it."
No need for gender. Maybe even introduce more numeric pronouns as necessary.
@allisonwyss
@emmaaum @crcollins
Come to think of it, I wonder if that's easily understandable.
"Peter watched John as he² cooked his¹ breakfast the way he¹ had seen his² mother do it."
or maybe
"Peter¹ watched John² as he² cooked his¹ breakfast the way he¹ had seen his² mother do it."
You know, I might actually try this, for my story writing!
@allisonwyss
@emmaaum @crcollins
This could even remain constant across gender change! Let's try it:
Kam¹ had seen the Doctor² recover from near death, but he¹ didn't think he² could survive this one. So he¹ was astounded when his² unmoving form got up, changing to look exactly like Jodie Whittaker.
"What?" she² demanded, glaring at him¹. "It's just regeneration."
"Fine," he¹ retorted, taking female form. After all, she¹ wasn't called Kamelion for nothing.
@allisonwyss
@emmaaum @crcollins
(I'm sorry I highjacked this conversation with my monologue. You can block me now. But thanks for inspiring me.)
One of you is from writing.exchange . Is that an instance for literary people? Maybe you can understand why I feel so liberated not to have to worry about pronouns?
@potungthul @emmaaum @crcollins
I love when conversations sprawl, actually. I mean, I can't speak for the rest, but personally, I like it.
@Xoriff
@allisonwyss @emmaaum @crcollins
"Juh enjoyed suh and thanked kuh for it".
Just to be clear: do you mean: "Juh enjoyed suh and thanked kuh for SUH"?
Fuh's not clear whether yuh can also use usual pronouns or whether thuh are limited to the #conlang's pronouns.
@Xoriff @potungthul @emmaaum @crcollins
This seems so useful! I wonder if your usual pronoun comes to feel kind of like your nickname, or maybe like a diminutive. Like how common it is for names to be shortened to their first syllable, or adding y. This might feel like an extreme version of that.
@Xoriff @potungthul @emmaaum @crcollins
Since we started down this tangent I've been thinking about this and that. And how they work pretty well for differentiating with pronouns (for objects rather than people) even though they don't seem like they would because the difference in this and that is so hazy.
@Xoriff @potungthul @emmaaum @crcollins
I think it would sound just as correct to say "That! That is what I'm talking about." But maybe it's about the relationship to the idea. If it feels more like my idea vs if it feels more like yours? But that doesn't really play out if I think about it very far.
@Xoriff @potungthul @crcollins
Yeah, that feels right. Like calling it "this" is claiming a bit of ownership or closer relationship--which could either feel like someone is stealing your idea or collaborating with you, depending.
@Xoriff @potungthul @crcollins
Ok, so this is not really what we're talking about, but I feel like you might have thoughts on it.
When asking a person who they are:
Face to face, it"s "who are you?"
At the door, it's "who is it?"
On the phone it's "who is this?" (Not that anyone asks this anymore, but we used to!)
Why is this? Are we addressing the question to the door or to the phone or something?
@allisonwyss @potungthul @crcollins ooo that is interesting.
I think "Who are you?" can feel a bit aggressive. Neighboring "who do you think you are?" The phone thing feels like a less presumptuous way of asking what the call is about? I'm thinking "_this_ is an automated message reminding you...". Given that possibility, we couch with "who is this"? Similar for the person (people, delivery) at the door maybe?
Also, caveat. I'm no professional linguist. Just like thinking about words 😊
@allisonwyss @potungthul @crcollins now my brain is completely stuck in this place haha.
It almost feels like we have this sense that asking directly _at_ a person "who are you" is brutish or impolite. I picture a Jane Austin ball "I don't think we've had the pleasure of being introduced", etc.
Like we've come up with dozens of different ways to avoid just stating "I don't know who you are. Who are you?" Maybe that feels too intimate or direct?
@Xoriff @potungthul @crcollins
But you wouldn't say "who is it?" to a person's face, only to a door or another person standing between you and the person. That seems more significant to me than the politeness factor.
I mean, sure, it's rude to ask outright, but "who are you?" IS the construction for face to face and not for behind a door or through phone line.
@Xoriff @potungthul @crcollins
Maybe we're pretending we have a butler answering the door for us, or a switchboard operating connecting us on the phone? I don't think it's correct, but I like this theory.
Allison Wyss
C. R. Collins 🌳 🐸
Elisheva Meira ✡︎ 🌈
Potung Thul
Luke Bergen