The separator between the comment pane and the story pane is moveable. Drag it up or down if you need more room to read on the screen.
From: flibinite
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: 17 Mar 2003 13:45:33 -0800
Elle -
I thought, as this is my second time posting to the Fishtank, that this time I might want to be one of the first ones in, rather than the last. I understand the format for responses, and will do my best to try and follow them, though it will be hard for me with this story.
Positives -
Good writing, to me, requires some obvious things ...plot, cohesiveness, intelligent use of language, good characterization and imagery, a specific and consistent point of view, and a resonance with the reader, amongst other things. This story has all of these, has all of them easily. Again, to me, GREAT writing requires that at least a couple of more items be an integral part of the story's structure, to be something the reader can feel as a visceral component of the words, that leap out and speak to them of the author's intent, the author's feelings about this thing they have written ...great writing requires courage, and an unflinching emotional honesty. This story has those ...in spades. This is GREAT writing.
I was lucky enough to have read this story about five months ago, though I did not comment much about it to you at the time, and I was struck then, as I was again today upon rereading, with just how open and honest this piece is, how readily and well it bears it soul to the reader, about what you are feeling, about what you are trying to show us with your words. The structure is wonderful, classic ...the set-up, the body, the conclusion, with a clean and simple flow, from the quietude and thought of the opening, right through the jarring pain and angst of the middle and the end. All elements are well described and create accurate and vivid pictures of the place and time and actions of the characters involved. I have more, and would go on, but that would be more than two positives.
Negatives -
LOL ...I think you need a bit more work on comma placement, as I had to reread a few sentences that didn't pause in the way and at the times I thought they should, though often your layout proved correct. Also, "false Prophets"? I suppose it could/should be capitalized, maybe even is in the Bible, but it looks wrong to me. Weak negatives, I know, but there really wasn't anything that jumped right out at me to criticize, in style, content, or structure.
IMO, a great effort ...a well-written and vividly emotional and honest story, elle ...all a reader could ever ask for, no matter what their political or religious beliefs.
Jo (flibinite)
From: Frank McCoy
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 16:02:08 -0600
"Desdmona" <me@desdmona.com> wrote:
This is something that I never thought I would try to post. It's something that until recently I would never have believed I could even have imagined, let alone written. But I did; and I have; and now I think I want to.
This is an entirely true story; should you be inclined, like Jeffrey, to dismiss it, I will simply say that in the intervening eight months since I wrote it, my worst fears have only been confirmed.
God, damn the hand of glory.
__
The subject matter may be interpreted as dealing with current events. I will remind contributors to rename the thread if you'd like to discuss something, outside the FishTank guidelines, that is contained within this story.
FishTank Guidelines:
1) 2 positive comments
1. Moving.
2. Scary.
3. All-too true.
(Sorry, that's three.)
2) 2 suggestions for improvement
1. Just a tiny bit more even-handed, would set a little better.
(I know ... You did a fair job as it was.) It's just that .... Well, perhaps in the woman-in-the-desert's recollection, might be something quite similar to what SHE is going through, for one of the Christians she had never known, but hadn't stood up for. As it was, it didn't quite (almost but not quite) come across that both sides have this insideous attitude. I suppose we're supposed to get that from the one-sided news reports going on all the time right now ... But I feel a story like this should stand on it's own. People in the future might not remember what it's like today.
2. ... Sorry, can't think of a #2 to get picky about.
2. (Thought of something:) Picky but: It's not much of a sex-story.
Actually, for my peace-of-mind, I'd rather you kept it that way. As a sex-story, it would give me nightmares too.
3) Try not to repeat!
Tried to be original.
/ ' / â„¢
,-/-, . __ /
(/ / ((/|/ / </ <
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 12:55:34 -0600
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 08:35:20 -0500, "Desdmona" <me@desdmona.com> wrote:
__
The subject matter may be interpreted as dealing with current events. I will remind contributors to rename the thread if you'd like to discuss something, outside the FishTank guidelines, that is contained within this story.
The story, presented as a situation which is true, and definitely one which could be true, begs for a discussion of larger issues. I think that the story's impact is stronger for those issues than as a tale within itself.
The story does handle its subject well. Eve doesn't show exactly what her beliefs are, and apparently doesn't dare speak of them to her uncle. Does that matter? Her actions suggest that her reaction is acceptable to Tros. Jeffrey's insistence that no one really takes him seriously is countered by the fact that no one says anything to contradict his religious-based beliefs.
I love the ending.
Only the dream part makes it a sex story. And then, only in the context of having some sexual aspect in a story which isn't about sex, or even focused on the sex. The torture wouldn't need to be sensual or erotic in any fashion in order to covey the point. Except that the rape is a definite contrast to Eve's perception that her outfit is somehow too revelaing, too sexual, for Tros. Whereas rape and torture of the infidel apparently is an acceptable form of sexual behavior for true believers.
Maybe I'm reading too much into that, but it is my take on it. Anyway, the ending works very well for me.
All of this only served to accentuate the unreality of the conversation she was having with this man now.
"But Tros, my God ...you're talking about every member of another religion ... men, women, children ... almost a billion human beings! What possible justification could there be for such a thing? And what would the world look like after that sort of a ...a ...that sort of a ..." Eve stammered, her tongue dancing around the word, but unable to enunciate it.
A holocaust. That sort of a holocaust ...
Others comment on the use of ellipsis - those three dots - to indicate stammering. I think that it works, maybe, but I'm not sure that it is the strongest way to say it. I'm not sure of the best handling of it, but it is something to think about.
The last line there, it is a thought, maybe even a softly spoken one. Should it have quotes around it? Whose thought is it?
It would be ironic if both thought it at once, and perhaps Tros actually spoke the word she refused to speak.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: john
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: 18 Mar 2003 20:51:19 -0800
Close your gob, John, before you start to drool! Yes, it was extraordinary! Yes, quite remarkably literate. Erotically smooth in it's delivery. Yes, intelligent. OMG!! An author. Yes, but settle down and try to write a cogent paragraph or two.
Suggestions.
1] I might have chosen a more active hook, perhaps some of the rant
rather than the reaction. But I might be wrong. The reaction,
although quite long (a page), is lovely. It reads like poetry. So
maybe keep it. But fix the first paragraph slightly. The antecedent
to "Comes and throws ... (damn, I wish Katie hadn't taught me this
spacing stuff; I was rather happy doing my ellipsis and my italics . .
. my way) is "speaker." That automatically summons the image of a
rape by some person. I think you intend the reference to be
"madness." Inverting the opening sentence would make that change
without hurting the sensuousness of the prose. Like this. "Her eyes
riveted with a kind of horrified fascination on the speaker as she
mused, I wonder if I'll know the precise moment when MY madness
overtakes me. Comes and throws me ..." Small, but critical I
think to avoid initial confusion.
2] More sex. Whoa! Did I say that? For a very definite purpose, though, okay. The nightmare rape, should be laid more directly in the lap of Uncle Tros. Eve feels repressed by his very presence, and that in itself could stimulate the sexual nature of the dream. Don't you think a leer at least, a kindly touch that might just have a double meaning, an outright advance even, an innuendo, even an assault would betray the other side of Tros. Would make her anger at her husband all the more believable. Would make the reader see the contradiction of his rant with his reality. Unrealistic? No. The worst of the worst child molesters were the very priests that preached against it. I think by not exploiting that side of Tros, you risk losing the story in politics and religion rather than grounding it in fear and ignorance.
What I loved was your use of language. I looked up words even! I never do that. Your voice was sooo real, that it compelled me to re-read the first page to understand it, then read it a third time, just to hear its music once again. It sings.
What I loved was your anger. Eve knows enough about Islam that she almost has to have suffered. How can one dream such details otherwise? Eve knows, somehow, the fear of being labeled. The ferocity of her anger toward the hapless hubby is exceptionally well handled. On the human level, who hasn't awoke from a nightmare and refused to be comforted, especially with the realization that the nightmare is now a daymare, that it originated in things that others take for granted or accept as some necessary evil.
Dare I say I liked it very much. Thank you,
John
From: oosh
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 23:58:38 +0000 (UTC)
Rumors of Glory
By ellè attend
she_waits@hotmail.com
The first thing I admired and appreciated about this piece was its clear, concise three-part structure, and the way the third section pulls the first two together. It's a great pleasure to see the whole architecture of a story working to serve a single end.
Unlike most of you, I'm not working from the plain text version of this story, but from the Word document from which (I imagine) the plain text was derived. It makes effective use of italics, and it's a pity that in the conversion process the italics were lost - as was some of the punctuation.
On punctuation, I don't see any uses of ellipsis in this story. Ellipsis is used to indicate an omission, usually from a quoted passage. What Elle is doing here is using dot-dot-dot to indicate a trailing-off or a resumption in quoted speech. I think that here it is correct that the dot-dot-dot should appear immediately after whatever trails off ... ...and immediately before what resumes. I don't see the rationale for applying the rules for ellipsis to what isn't ellipsis.
There's not much scope for improvement in this piece. I did find a couple of typos: "decidely" and "unconciously". I noted that a non-US spelling was used for "Saviour", but a US spelling of "any more". Early on, I think "snow white" should have a hyphen, but "pale-blue" should not. (I've taken to going through my pieces checking all the hyphens: it's a mine-field/mine field/minefield!) Finally, I thought that in this passage:
'"It exists as surely and as concretely as that glass you're holding, or this table," he reached out, touching the glass surface of the patio table with a huge, gnarled fist.'
...there should be a full stop (period) after "table" and the "he" should receive a capital letter.
Finally, I appreciated the message of the piece, which is perhaps always timely, but seldom so much as now! I liked the way the author was able to make her point by simply juxtaposing two situations, and inviting the reader to make the connexions. It's genuinely thought-provoking: for example, it raises the question whether all forms of religious fundamentalism involve equating female beauty with "sin" and, by analogy with the so-called "holy war" principle (which has its roots in the Old Testament), whether they will always necessarily involve the more or less brutal subjugation of women. Elle poses this question very neatly by deriving the name "Eve" (who, according to Genesis, brought sin into the world) from "Evangeline" ("good news").
Thank you, Elle, for raising this fascinating question in such a gripping and memorable way. People might not want to take this question seriously; but they should. Oh, but they /should/.
O.
From: Bradley Stoke
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: 18 Mar 2003 00:47:19 -0800
Elle
Such a wonderful name, though I wonder about the final accent on Elle (a subtlety perhaps lost in the limited typographical appearance of the newsgroup, which also plays havoc with any intelligent foramatting). In English, the nym almost means "she waits" or "she is waiting", though in a sense perhaps it should be elle arrive.
It's difficult to critique in the standard way a story which covers such a heart-felt and intense subject as religious intolerance. In a sense it wasn't sex fiction at all. Whether you can call rape or nudity sex at all is another matter, but the main focus of the story is the extreme conclusion of a doctrine of religious belief, which was most recently seen in reality in Afghanistan (not quite next door, but near to the Kurds of Turkey, Iraq and Iran). Your views are far too close to mine on the subject of the mutual need for tolerance and a resigned acceptance that the actual practice of genocide when it takes place a long way away will always seem more acceptable to people than when it's here and now. There are fanatics of all kind who spout the most appalling rubbish, even if they are pillars of the community.
The story benefited from the cloying, close, fetid heat of the setting. Everything was pushed into close shot, the mouths, eyes and physical sensations filling the screen, including the dream sequence. This is camera work that picks up the trickle of sweat and the tightness of shorts in this strange place near the Cascade Mountains.
I've not read any of your stories before now, but you are clearly already a fully formed writer, sprung into our midst. You pace the story well, the characters are believable, the focus is exactly where it should be and there is no wasted prose.
Well done.
Bradley Stoke
www.asstr.org/~Bradley_Stoke
From: Katie McN
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 01:35:48 GMT
Hi oosh!
<oosh@gmx.NOSPAM.net>,
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 23:58:38 +0000 (UTC) I noticed your interesting post:
[ ... ]
On punctuation, I don't see any uses of ellipsis in this story. Ellipsis is used to indicate an omission, usually from a quoted passage. What Elle is doing here is using dot-dot-dot to indicate a trailing-off or a resumption in quoted speech. I think that here it is correct that the dot-dot-dot should appear immediately after whatever trails off ... ...and immediately before what resumes. I don't see the rationale for applying the rules for ellipsis to what isn't ellipsis.
Could you please post some writing reference for this construct so I can read and understand usage for whatever is being done here. This is the second time you've pointed out that I'm wrong on this subject and I'd be happy to change my ways if my knowledge is limiting my understanding.
If this is an author preference issue, which is certainly part of fiction, I continue to be distracted by the usage and probably will continue to mention that it troubles me whenever I see it being overdone as it is here in my opinion.
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com
From: oosh
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 02:48:35 +0000 (UTC)
Katie McN <katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com> wrote in news:9stc7v4jbp5495993b70t9hbc0lso141nh@4ax.com:
Could you please post some writing reference for this construct so I can read and understand usage for whatever is being done here. This is the second time you've pointed out that I'm wrong on this subject and I'd be happy to change my ways if my knowledge is limiting my understanding.
I googled for "dot dot dot" and the first relevant article I found was at
http://www.yorku.ca/ycom/style/sg22.html
which favours the style of not preceding or following " ..." used to signify ellipsis unless it occurs at the end of a sentence.
There are many conflicting views about how it should be done. However, my view that dot-dot-dot is distinct from ellipsis does find some support here - though I don't know how weighty:
http://indiemadnesse.sandwich.net/ifroast/ifrguide.htm
http://www.mirror.org/terry.hickman/Ellipsis.html
The issue is somewhat complicated by the fact that "an ellipsis" refers to a figure of speech (an omission), and not to the three dots that sometimes indicate it. For example, in the following sentence there is an ellipsis:
"The ringleader was hanged, and his followers imprisoned."
The missing word is "were". There's no need for dot-dot-dot here, but it's still ellipsis.
But if I were to give an example of dot-dot-dot in quoted speech:
"Tomorrow," he said, "I might go down and ..."
Here the grammatical term for what's happening is aposiopesis, I think. It's certainly not ellipsis.
(Likewise, brackets are not "parentheses". They signify parenthesis, which is another figure of speech.)
If you really want to master the figures of speech, have a look at this fascinating site:
http://humanities.byu.edu/rhetoric/
O.
From: E. Z. Riter
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 03:18:42 GMT
"oosh" <oosh@gmx.NOSPAM.net> suggested:
If you really want to master the figures of speech, have a look at this fascinating site:
http://humanities.byu.edu/rhetoric/
Good reference, oosh. I keep a copy of The Little, Brown Handbook on my desk and The Elements of Style nearby.
E. Z.
From: Katie McN
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 05:03:25 GMT
Hi oosh!!!
<oosh@gmx.NOSPAM.net>,
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 02:48:35 +0000 (UTC) I noticed your interesting post:
Katie McN <katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com> wrote in news:9stc7v4jbp5495993b70t9hbc0lso141nh@4ax.com:
Could you please post some writing reference for this construct so I can read and understand usage for whatever is being done here. This is the second time you've pointed out that I'm wrong on this subject and I'd be happy to change my ways if my knowledge is limiting my understanding.
I googled for "dot dot dot" and the first relevant article I found was at
http://www.yorku.ca/ycom/style/sg22.html
which favours the style of not preceding or following " ..." used to signify ellipsis unless it occurs at the end of a sentence.
I agree that there are many conflicting views and realize that the media target and document purpose have something to do with the proper formatting of an ellipsis. I suggest that the least likely method is that suggested by the above reference and am unable to find any book of fiction or non-fiction that uses the approach described by the website although I'm sure there must be an example to be found somewhere.
I now realize that the method I suggested some other place in this thread is used for preparing input for subsequent use in type-setting and the final result is changed from what is input to something where proportionate half spaces are used in the final product. This does not seem to be useful for a text file that is prepared as the final form such as what we need for Usenet.
There are many conflicting views about how it should be done. However, my view that dot-dot-dot is distinct from ellipsis does find some support here - though I don't know how weighty:
http://indiemadnesse.sandwich.net/ifroast/ifrguide.htm
http://www.mirror.org/terry.hickman/Ellipsis.html
The issue is somewhat complicated by the fact that "an ellipsis" refers to a figure of speech (an omission), and not to the three dots that sometimes indicate it.
I'll be happy to stipulate this and call it the symbol that refers to an ellipsis if that is more appropriate. This would not change the way I think the symbol should be depicted, only what it is called. I wonder what the name of the symbol is that fits > word ... < ?
The weak sources mentioned above appear to be from people who have no more knowledge than a typical lay person and are the result of chat room activity where people are talking about symbols used in computer word processor programs. Not very useful.
The problem I'm having is that I can't find a printers reference that names any symbol: dot dot dot.
For example, in the following sentence there is an ellipsis:
"The ringleader was hanged, and his followers imprisoned."
The missing word is "were". There's no need for dot-dot-dot here, but it's still ellipsis.
But if I were to give an example of dot-dot-dot in quoted speech:
"Tomorrow," he said, "I might go down and ..."
Here the grammatical term for what's happening is aposiopesis, I think. It's certainly not ellipsis.
(Likewise, brackets are not "parentheses". They signify parenthesis, which is another figure of speech.)
If you really want to master the figures of speech, have a look at this fascinating site:
http://humanities.byu.edu/rhetoric/
If I wasn't editing a story now, I could see myself wasting untold hours at this site. Thanks for the reference.
It was amusing to go to the above website, enter the word 'aposiopesis' and to have a list of cites displayed that included what I will now call the ellipsis printers symbol used as I mentioned elsewhere. I then traced all the references for the subject word and cannot find a symbol for aposiopesis. Just for fun I entered ... in the search window and sadly came up empty.
I've decide to call the symbol for this construct > word ... < an Oosh when it is used as a symbol to indicate an interruption of conversation and will refer to something like this > word ... < as an ellipsis printers symbol whenever you're likely to read my posts and probably will revert to ellipsis at all other times. ;-)
BTW I tried dot dot dot at the same source to no avail.
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com
From: Katie McN
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 07:51:22 GMT
Hi oosh <oosh@gmx.NOSPAM.net>,
Gary suggested this reference. After reading it again and combining it with what Bing says, it appears that I can declare victory in an obscure way - I still feel fulfilled and so forth: Check out the ellipsis definition here:
http://storiesonline.net/Pages/writerguide.html
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com
From: Bradley Stoke
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: 18 Mar 2003 01:27:42 -0800
oosh
Thank you for your references. They look excellent, especially the last one.
However, I will be a little heretical here (in a non-religious sense) in asserting that I'm not sure that knowing the correct rules of rhetoric in a formal way (or even those of presentation) is necessarily much use to most writers. Although it grates when you see the more horrendous abuses of the English language, I don't think a formal knowledge necessarily produces golden prose. Or even great stories. In any case, in our age, very few people now have a formal training in grammar (which I actually think is a shame).
Most people learn the rules of rhetoric by immersion in the practice of it, rather as they do language in the first place. Learning the words to describe it do not enhance a person's understanding of what it is. They merely give that person the ability to discourse on the subject to other equally qualified people.
Many of the writers on ASSM and elsewhere (even those published in the real world) would at best bluff through any formal analysis of the rhetorical tools they use. They might simply say that something sounded right. Or it seemed the right approach. Or its just worked. In fact, I think undue emphasis on the formal description of these things may just be another example of the intimidating armoury used by those who view themselves as the guardians of whatever to maintain the current hierarchy.
Which isn't to say that the links that you provided are not extremely useful and well worth investigating.
Bradley Stoke
www.asstr.org/~Bradley_Stoke
From: Katie McN
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 15:12:10 GMT
Hi bradley_stoke@hushmail.com (Bradley Stoke),
On 18 Mar 2003 01:27:42 -0800 I noticed your interesting post:
oosh
Thank you for your references. They look excellent, especially the last one.
However, I will be a little heretical here (in a non-religious sense) in asserting that I'm not sure that knowing the correct rules of rhetoric in a formal way (or even those of presentation) is necessarily much use to most writers. Although it grates when you see the more horrendous abuses of the English language, I don't think a formal knowledge necessarily produces golden prose. Or even great stories. In any case, in our age, very few people now have a formal training in grammar (which I actually think is a shame).
Most people learn the rules of rhetoric by immersion in the practice of it, rather as they do language in the first place. Learning the words to describe it do not enhance a person's understanding of what it is. They merely give that person the ability to discourse on the subject to other equally qualified people.
Many of the writers on ASSM and elsewhere (even those published in the real world) would at best bluff through any formal analysis of the rhetorical tools they use. They might simply say that something sounded right. Or it seemed the right approach. Or its just worked. In fact, I think undue emphasis on the formal description of these things may just be another example of the intimidating armoury used by those who view themselves as the guardians of whatever to maintain the current hierarchy.
Which isn't to say that the links that you provided are not extremely useful and well worth investigating.
The post from Oosh was a subtle joke IMHO. None of the references supported the point she was trying to make in any significant way. A couple of them quoted people who didn't have a clue about the subject at hand. Finally, after all the silliness, a reference to formal rhetoric was given as if any of the earlier information might be a rigorous argument supporting her position.
I couldn't stop laughing as I wandered around the rhetoric site, trying to imagine what kind of person would spend his or her life working with a massive number of Latin derived terms that are presented in such a confusing way that few could understand what was being said.
As my favorite character Claudette of the North might say, "A true tour de farce." ;-)
Bradley Stoke
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com
From: Poison Ivan
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 10:29:18 -0500
"oosh" observed ...
The issue is somewhat complicated by the fact that "an ellipsis" refers to a figure of speech (an omission), and not to the three dots that sometimes indicate it.
From a typesetting point of view, there is an "ellipsis", which is a thing
displayed on the printed page. Most modern fonts even have a thing called an ellipsis glyph/sort in them. Perhaps what we're seeing is typesetting jargon moving into the mainstream?
The spacing of the "ellipsis character" should be determined by the typeface designer, and is largely determined by type size and the lightness of the typeface. Most typefaces have lousy ellipses in them, though, so many typographers roll their own. The ultimate goal is to make the text look nice on the printed page, so the decision really boils down to aesthetics.
You see a variety of internal ellipsis spacing:
1. three dots flush
2. thin spaces (M/5) between the dots
3. thick spaces (M/3) between the dots (per the Chicago Manual of Style)
looks far too wide to me.
There are also many different conventions for spacing before and after an ellipsis. I understand French has different conventions than English, but I don't know what the French conventiosn are. It gets a little complicated when the ellipsis is adjacent to other punctuation. For English, the most common spacing when an ellipsis is adjacent to other punctuation is:
i ... j no punctuation - spaces before and after ellipsis k .... period after - no space before or after ellipsis (is this where French is different?) m ..., n comma after - no space before or after ellipsis q ...? question mark after - no space before or after ellipsis p ...! exclamation mark after - no space before or after o, ... p comma before - space before and after ellipsis
Of course if you're using the font's ellipsis character, the spacing fore and aft will change depending on the spacing within the ellipsis.
Honestly, all these differences in spacing are so subtle that they are probably irrelevant in the limited ASCII Usenet media.
If you have plans to submit your story for publication somewhere, find out what their style guide says and use that. The typesetters will munge up your ellipses anyway, so anything you do will likely get changed. These days, I believe most places dislike spaces between the dots - it messes up automatic line breaks and can make the ellipses hard to find.
Another possibility I've seen used: instead of using an ellipsis for speech trailing off, use an em-dash set off by word spaces. "You should put spaces - oh, never mind."
Poison Ivan
^ prefers the dash
From: Katie McN
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:09:42 GMT
Hi "Poison Ivan" <poisoniv1@hotmail.com>,
A good answer to the question. I realize now that there are n as n grows large methods of portraying the ellipsis and agree with your thought that one should follow the style guide provided by one's publisher. I pontificated based on what I was told by my non-fiction publisher and assumed it was a "standard" and not just one opinion of many. In the end, as you mention, the type-setter changes things to suit the font used by the printer and one has little control over what is rendered regardless of what is submitted.
BTW Oosh sent me a really nice note about a draft of a new Katie R story so I'm going to stop pointing out that she's yet to provide a reference for the new part of speech she's invented which is informally referred to as an Oosh and so forth. ;-)
xxx,
MK
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 10:29:18 -0500 I noticed your interesting post:
"oosh" observed ...
The issue is somewhat complicated by the fact that "an ellipsis" refers to a figure of speech (an omission), and not to the three dots that sometimes indicate it.
From a typesetting point of view, there is an "ellipsis", which is a thing displayed on the printed page. Most modern fonts even have a thing called an ellipsis glyph/sort in them. Perhaps what we're seeing is typesetting jargon moving into the mainstream?
The spacing of the "ellipsis character" should be determined by the typeface designer, and is largely determined by type size and the lightness of the typeface. Most typefaces have lousy ellipses in them, though, so many typographers roll their own. The ultimate goal is to make the text look nice on the printed page, so the decision really boils down to aesthetics.
You see a variety of internal ellipsis spacing:
1. three dots flush
2. thin spaces (M/5) between the dots
3. thick spaces (M/3) between the dots (per the Chicago Manual of Style) looks far too wide to me.
There are also many different conventions for spacing before and after an ellipsis. I understand French has different conventions than English, but I don't know what the French conventiosn are. It gets a little complicated when the ellipsis is adjacent to other punctuation. For English, the most common spacing when an ellipsis is adjacent to other punctuation is:
i ... j no punctuation - spaces before and after ellipsis k .... period after - no space before or after ellipsis (is this where French is different?) m ..., n comma after - no space before or after ellipsis q ...? question mark after - no space before or after ellipsis p ...! exclamation mark after - no space before or after o, ... p comma before - space before and after ellipsis
Of course if you're using the font's ellipsis character, the spacing fore and aft will change depending on the spacing within the ellipsis.
Honestly, all these differences in spacing are so subtle that they are probably irrelevant in the limited ASCII Usenet media.
If you have plans to submit your story for publication somewhere, find out what their style guide says and use that. The typesetters will munge up your ellipses anyway, so anything you do will likely get changed. These days, I believe most places dislike spaces between the dots - it messes up automatic line breaks and can make the ellipses hard to find.
Another possibility I've seen used: instead of using an ellipsis for speech trailing off, use an em-dash set off by word spaces. "You should put spaces - oh, never mind."
Poison Ivan
^ prefers the dash
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 19:04:51 -0600
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 10:29:18 -0500, "Poison Ivan" <poisoniv1@hotmail.com> wrote:
"oosh" observed ...
The issue is somewhat complicated by the fact that "an ellipsis" refers to a figure of speech (an omission), and not to the three dots that sometimes indicate it.
From a typesetting point of view, there is an "ellipsis", which is a thing displayed on the printed page. Most modern fonts even have a thing called an ellipsis glyph/sort in them. Perhaps what we're seeing is typesetting jargon moving into the mainstream?
Word processors work like that. Wordperfect definitely complains if I don't write my ellipsis as " ... " with spaces. If I do that, it will use the ellipsis character. Same with the em-dash - - - those turn into special characters.
I haven't used Word for a while, but I'd guess it does a similar thing.
The spacing of the "ellipsis character" should be determined by the typeface designer, and is largely determined by type size and the lightness of the typeface. Most typefaces have lousy ellipses in them, though, so many typographers roll their own. The ultimate goal is to make the text look nice on the printed page, so the decision really boils down to aesthetics.
You see a variety of internal ellipsis spacing:
1. three dots flush
2. thin spaces (M/5) between the dots
3. thick spaces (M/3) between the dots (per the Chicago Manual of Style) looks far too wide to me.
There are also many different conventions for spacing before and after an ellipsis. I understand French has different conventions than English, but I don't know what the French conventiosn are. It gets a little complicated when the ellipsis is adjacent to other punctuation. For English, the most common spacing when an ellipsis is adjacent to other punctuation is:
i ... j no punctuation - spaces before and after ellipsis k .... period after - no space before or after ellipsis (is this where French is different?) m ..., n comma after - no space before or after ellipsis q ...? question mark after - no space before or after ellipsis p ...! exclamation mark after - no space before or after o, ... p comma before - space before and after ellipsis
Of course if you're using the font's ellipsis character, the spacing fore and aft will change depending on the spacing within the ellipsis.
Honestly, all these differences in spacing are so subtle that they are probably irrelevant in the limited ASCII Usenet media.
If you have plans to submit your story for publication somewhere, find out what their style guide says and use that. The typesetters will munge up your ellipses anyway, so anything you do will likely get changed. These days, I believe most places dislike spaces between the dots - it messes up automatic line breaks and can make the ellipses hard to find.
Another possibility I've seen used: instead of using an ellipsis for speech trailing off, use an em-dash set off by word spaces. "You should put spaces - oh, never mind."
Poison Ivan
^ prefers the dash
If I just write in ASCII text, I'll use ... for ellipsis, and - for em-dash. Most people read them like that anyway, and I post on usenet in text in any case.
Now, how to best use them is a tricky question. I think you're method covers the basics.
When you typeset it, even in a word processor, the special print characters are no longer just dots or dashes. That makes sense for typesetting, and word processing is close enough to desktop publishing (lots of people use Word to format magazines and books) so as not to matter much.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Bingain
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 05:58:03 GMT
"Garylian" <Garylian@charter.net> wrote in message news:3E76ACBD.E9D26EB8@charter.net ...
Personally, I like the way that StoriesOnline has it written up, which I think is correct.
http://storiesonline.net/Pages/writerguide.html
According to "Decisions, A Writer's Handbook" by Leonard J. Rosen, Allyn & Bacon, 1998, there seems to have only one use of ellipses which is not related to deleting quoted words.
<starts plagiarism>
4. Use an ellipsis to show a pause or interruption.
In Dialogue: "No," I said. I wanted to leave. "I ...I need to get some air." [Bing's note: no space between the two I's and the 3 dots.]
In Prose: When I left the seminary, I walked long and thought hard about what a former student of divinity might do ... My shoes wore out, my brain wore thin. I was stumped. [Bing's note: No space between "do" and 3 dots, space bewteen dots and "My".]
[24e, p 299]
<ends plagiarism>
It seems there are some variations on this issue. I wonder if anyone has the MLA Style Manual which covers this area. I know, we don't normally write to that goddamned style, but since most book publishers use it, I think it gives a hint on how most writers use ellipses.
Bing
From: Katie McN
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 07:47:20 GMT
Hi "Bingain" <bingain@NOEXISTyahoo.com>,
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 05:58:03 GMT I noticed your interesting post:
"Garylian" <Garylian@charter.net> wrote in message news:3E76ACBD.E9D26EB8@charter.net ...
Personally, I like the way that StoriesOnline has it written up, which I think is correct.
http://storiesonline.net/Pages/writerguide.html
According to "Decisions, A Writer's Handbook" by Leonard J. Rosen, Allyn & Bacon, 1998, there seems to have only one use of ellipses which is not related to deleting quoted words.
<starts plagiarism>
4. Use an ellipsis to show a pause or interruption.
In Dialogue: "No," I said. I wanted to leave. "I ...I need to get some air." [Bing's note: no space between the two I's and the 3 dots.]
In Prose: When I left the seminary, I walked long and thought hard about what a former student of divinity might do ... My shoes wore out, my brain wore thin. I was stumped. [Bing's note: No space between "do" and 3 dots, space bewteen dots and "My".]
[24e, p 299]
<ends plagiarism>
It seems there are some variations on this issue. I wonder if anyone has the MLA Style Manual which covers this area. I know, we don't normally write to that goddamned style, but since most book publishers use it, I think it gives a hint on how most writers use ellipses.
Bing
I partially like your discovery, Bing. It indicates that the name I was using for what Oosh and elle wrote is valid and certainly much classier than dot dot dot. OTOH is seems to show that the method Oosh and elle were using to format the text is correct and so we'll have to search for another source for the definition and so forth. ;-)
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com
From: Garylian
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 23:21:01 -0600
Katie McN wrote:
Hi oosh!
<oosh@gmx.NOSPAM.net>,
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 23:58:38 +0000 (UTC) I noticed your interesting post:
[ ... ]
On punctuation, I don't see any uses of ellipsis in this story. Ellipsis is used to indicate an omission, usually from a quoted passage. What Elle is doing here is using dot-dot-dot to indicate a trailing-off or a resumption in quoted speech. I think that here it is correct that the dot-dot-dot should appear immediately after whatever trails off ... ...and immediately before what resumes. I don't see the rationale for applying the rules for ellipsis to what isn't ellipsis.
Could you please post some writing reference for this construct so I can read and understand usage for whatever is being done here. This is the second time you've pointed out that I'm wrong on this subject and I'd be happy to change my ways if my knowledge is limiting my understanding.
If this is an author preference issue, which is certainly part of fiction, I continue to be distracted by the usage and probably will continue to mention that it troubles me whenever I see it being overdone as it is here in my opinion.
-
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com
Personally, I like the way that StoriesOnline has it written up, which I think is correct.
http://storiesonline.net/Pages/writerguide.html
Garylian
From: Katie McN
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 07:43:50 GMT
Hi Garylian <Garylian@charter.net>,
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 23:21:01 -0600 I noticed your interesting post:
Katie McN wrote:
Hi oosh!
<oosh@gmx.NOSPAM.net>,
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 23:58:38 +0000 (UTC) I noticed your interesting post:
[ ... ]
On punctuation, I don't see any uses of ellipsis in this story. Ellipsis is used to indicate an omission, usually from a quoted passage. What Elle is doing here is using dot-dot-dot to indicate a trailing-off or a resumption in quoted speech. I think that here it is correct that the dot-dot-dot should appear immediately after whatever trails off ... ...and immediately before what resumes. I don't see the rationale for applying the rules for ellipsis to what isn't ellipsis.
Could you please post some writing reference for this construct so I can read and understand usage for whatever is being done here. This is the second time you've pointed out that I'm wrong on this subject and I'd be happy to change my ways if my knowledge is limiting my understanding.
If this is an author preference issue, which is certainly part of fiction, I continue to be distracted by the usage and probably will continue to mention that it troubles me whenever I see it being overdone as it is here in my opinion.
-
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com
Personally, I like the way that StoriesOnline has it written up, which I think is correct.
http://storiesonline.net/Pages/writerguide.html
Garylian
I like it in the sense it is vague enough that I can claim to be correct and indicate the vicious personal attack Oosh made on my earlier comment was blasphemous. ;-) However, the definition is not complete in that it doesn't cover the space in front and after the three dots; show how to had the case where one wants to show punctuation after the ellipsis symbol to include a question mark or exclamation point; or, how to handle an ellipsis symbol that indicates there are missing words at the start of a sentence.
The cool part about this discussion is that we can find support for virtually ever position although some of them are a bit suspect.
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 19:28:23 -0600
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 23:21:01 -0600, Garylian <Garylian@charter.net> wrote:
Katie McN wrote:
Hi oosh!
<oosh@gmx.NOSPAM.net>,
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 23:58:38 +0000 (UTC) I noticed your interesting post:
[ ... ]
On punctuation, I don't see any uses of ellipsis in this story. Ellipsis is used to indicate an omission, usually from a quoted passage. What Elle is doing here is using dot-dot-dot to indicate a trailing-off or a resumption in quoted speech. I think that here it is correct that the dot-dot-dot should appear immediately after whatever trails off ... ...and immediately before what resumes. I don't see the rationale for applying the rules for ellipsis to what isn't ellipsis.
Could you please post some writing reference for this construct so I can read and understand usage for whatever is being done here. This is the second time you've pointed out that I'm wrong on this subject and I'd be happy to change my ways if my knowledge is limiting my understanding.
If this is an author preference issue, which is certainly part of fiction, I continue to be distracted by the usage and probably will continue to mention that it troubles me whenever I see it being overdone as it is here in my opinion.
-
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com
Personally, I like the way that StoriesOnline has it written up, which I think is correct.
http://storiesonline.net/Pages/writerguide.html
It is short, but just a little too much so as to make it entirely ...
... well, sufficient to cover all cases.
I don't think I needed the ellipsis there, and the lack of quotes makes its use suspect in that case anyway. I didn't put in the interrupting scene, imagine one for yourself.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Katie McN
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 03:37:32 GMT
Hi Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com>,
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 19:28:23 -0600 I noticed your interesting post:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 23:21:01 -0600, Garylian <Garylian@charter.net> wrote:
[ ... ]
Personally, I like the way that StoriesOnline has it written up, which I think is correct.
http://storiesonline.net/Pages/writerguide.html
It is short, but just a little too much so as to make it entirely ...
... well, sufficient to cover all cases.
I don't think I needed the ellipsis there, and the lack of quotes makes its use suspect in that case anyway. I didn't put in the interrupting scene, imagine one for yourself.
Plus, I can cite references that show you've presented the material incorrectly even if you change what you have here to something else. ;-)
The bottom line is that we have another topic to put with copyright, hetero sex and all the other stuff that causes heated emotions and controversy.
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com
From: Gary Jordan
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: 19 Mar 2003 12:19:01 GMT
Hi, Katie!
The bottom line is that we have another topic to put with copyright, hetero sex and all the other stuff that causes heated emotions and controversy.
It's been a long time since I updated the "Medals of Humor" page. What would the medal for an ellipsis flame warrior look like? I wonder ...
Gary Jordan
"Old submariners never die; they just wallow in sunken tubs."
<I>"This communicating of a man's self to his friend works two contrary effects, for it redoubleth joys, and cutteth griefs in half." - Francis Bacon, Essays </I>
From: Katie McN
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:41:38 GMT
Hi pjcocoa@aol.come.to.bed (Gary Jordan),
On 19 Mar 2003 12:19:01 GMT I noticed your interesting post:
Hi, Katie!
The bottom line is that we have another topic to put with copyright, hetero sex and all the other stuff that causes heated emotions and controversy.
It's been a long time since I updated the "Medals of Humor" page. What would the medal for an ellipsis flame warrior look like? I wonder ...
It would be hard to come up with something that could be used long term. As soon as you decided on a symbol that fit, someone would post a new definition which would invalidate your design.
I'm beginning to think that maybe the ellipsis is a figment of my imagination. ;-)
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com
From: Bingain
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 15:20:54 GMT
Actually, on second thought, I think, even according to the Rosen's book I was referring to, that ellipses can be placed at the end of a sentence in a dialog to indicate incompleness. In a sense, a dialog is a quotation. It is a way you show what the characters in a story said or thought.
<citation>
You may want to end your sentence with a quotation that does not end a sentence in the original. If so, whatever mark of punctuation (if any) follows the last quoted word in the original should be deleted. Then add a period and an ellipsis, following one of two conventions. If you do not conclude your sentence with a citation, place the sentence period after the final letter of the quotation; place the ellipsis; and conclude with the end quotation mark.
Official mortality figures for the Civil War do not include the "Probably substantial number of civilian deaths - from disease, malnutrition, exposure, or injury ...."
If you do include your sentence with a citation, skip one space after the final letter of the quotation; place the ellipsis and follow with an end quotation mark; skip one space and place the citation; and then place the sentence period.
Official mortality figures for the Civil War do not include the "probably substantial number of civilian deaths - from disease, malnutrition, exposure, or injury ..." (McPherson 42).
[Rosen 299]
</citation: Rosen, L. R. "Decisions, A Writer's Handbook". Allyn & Bacon,
1998>
If my conclusion is right, and Rosen is right about the placement of ellipses, then we can have the following situation:
Tim thought for a moment and went on, "But you can't hide here all the time. You have a life outside this cockpit, and ...." [3 dots, then period, then end quotation mark]
Tim thought for a moment. "But you can't hide here all the time. You have a life outside this cockpit, and ..." he said, then paused. [space, then 3 dots, then end quotation mark]
This above guinea pig example is actually taken from a story I'm working on. An extracted scene is as follow:
<extract>
"Well," Syrinx said, playing with her fingers, "I know. Well, actually, I don't know. I enjoyed the time. But when I got back, I felt scared, uneasy, and ...and I just don't like the anxiety inside me. I mean, you know, I actually feel more comfortable here playing the silly game with you."
Tim laughed. "To be honest, me too," he said. He thought for a moment and went on, "But you can't hide here all the time. You have a life outside this cockpit, and ...."
"And what?" Syrinx said, after a long silence from Tim.
Tim came back from his deep thought. "Well, just do what you feel comfortable with," Tim said. "Take your time. Don't rush."
</extract>
Anyone has a more appropriate way of expressing the dropped/interrupted words in Tim's first dialog?
Bing
From: oosh
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 12:58:16 +0000 (UTC)
bradley_stoke@hushmail.com (Bradley Stoke) wrote in news:aaacc8d6.0303180127.557b56e3@posting.google.com:
However, I will be a little heretical here (in a non-religious sense) in asserting that I'm not sure that knowing the correct rules of rhetoric in a formal way (or even those of presentation) is necessarily much use to most writers.
I couldn't agree more.
O.
From: oosh
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 01:10:01 +0000 (UTC)
Just tenderly bracketing the following for our delight ...
"PeeJ" <pee.j@virgin.net> wrote in
news:b58d83$nos$1@titan.btinternet.com:
In FT#82 raised the question of should there be spaces before and after an ellipsis.
This is what the The Oxford (University Press) Book of Style has to say about the ellipsis:
'An ellipsis can be used to show a trailing off, interruption of, or pause in speech or thought in order to create dramatic, rhetorical, or ironic effects. (A final dash signals a more abrupt interruption.) Use this technique sparingly, as it can smack of melodrama.
An ellipsis at the end of an incomplete sentence is NOT followed by a fourth full point. When a complete sentence is to be followed by omitted material, the closing full point is set close up to the preceding sentence, followed by the three spaced points of omission. This indicates [in British English] that at least one sentence has been omitted between the two sentences.'
The following are examples quoted:
I only said, 'if we could ...'.
I never agreed to it .... It would be ridiculous.
Could we ...?
Could we do it? ... It might just be possible ... !
The door opened slowly ...
I don't ...er ...understand.
Their champagne was tolerable enough, and yet ...
The gavotte, the minuet, the allemande, ...
Bill Walsh, Copy Desk Chief of the Washington Post is emphatic that an ellipsis consists of three dots separated by "thin" spaces and surrounded by spaces.
My view is that there can be a style difference between British and American English, and even between publishers. On Usenet groups the writer is, in effect, the publisher and they should set their own style. If they use an editor they should advise him/her of their style requirements. If they don' t the editor will impose his/her own style.
These include how to handle numbers, when to use figures and when to spell them out. The same applies to times. Should it be 5 o'clock or five o' clock? What about okay? OK, ok or okay? Tee shirt, t-shirt or T-shirt? UK/US or U.K./U.S.A., NATO/Nato etc
In professional publishing if the house does not have its own style book, it will have its own style sheets which its copy editors are obliged to follow. The main reason is to establish consistency, the failure of which can detract from the flow of reading.
For British English the most popular guide is The Oxford Book of Style, $25.00/£17.50, and in the US The Chicago Manual of Style, which unfortunately is rather expensive at $31.50/£31.50 the in-store price is even more. A much cheaper alternative is The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage ($10.50/£8.43 Amazon), but not so comprehensive. Sometimes these are obtainable from book clubs at very much reduced prices. Prices shown are from Amazon.com and Amazon.co.uk
Manuals of style usually cover both usage and also the spelling and hyphenating of many awkward words and their plurals. I consider them to be essential tools to have at hand whenever I am writing or editing.
PeeJ
From: Katie McN
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 02:02:01 GMT
Hi PeeJ and oosh <oosh@gmx.NOSPAM.net>,
Hey Everybody, It's my editor joining in on the battle of the disco ellipsis. Way cool.
I'm not going to invade the crisp prose presented below with intrusive commentary. Instead, I'll post my few remarks here.
Note that several references are provided in the material submitted by PeeJ and that these don't agree on the subject of ellipsis in the details of definition or on how the ellipsis symbol should be presented in fiction.
How will we use the valuable information PeeJ provides? We're given two opportunities.
First, we can select information from each of the listed books to form a single definition. I just completed this task and was shocked to discover that the combined knowledge of these experts can be reduced to just what I submitted to the group at the start of the thread.
Second, as we see here, even experts can wander away from the straight and narrow. This suggests that we should forgive Oosh for not properly understanding the revealed truths of writing and move along to another subject. ;-)
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 01:10:01 +0000 (UTC) I noticed your interesting post:
Just tenderly bracketing the following for our delight ...
"PeeJ" <pee.j@virgin.net> wrote in
news:b58d83$nos$1@titan.btinternet.com:
In FT#82 raised the question of should there be spaces before and after an ellipsis.
This is what the The Oxford (University Press) Book of Style has to say about the ellipsis:
'An ellipsis can be used to show a trailing off, interruption of, or pause in speech or thought in order to create dramatic, rhetorical, or ironic effects. (A final dash signals a more abrupt interruption.) Use this technique sparingly, as it can smack of melodrama.
An ellipsis at the end of an incomplete sentence is NOT followed by a fourth full point. When a complete sentence is to be followed by omitted material, the closing full point is set close up to the preceding sentence, followed by the three spaced points of omission. This indicates [in British English] that at least one sentence has been omitted between the two sentences.'
The following are examples quoted:
I only said, 'if we could ...'.
I never agreed to it .... It would be ridiculous.
Could we ...?
Could we do it? ... It might just be possible ... !
The door opened slowly ...
I don't ...er ...understand.
Their champagne was tolerable enough, and yet ...
The gavotte, the minuet, the allemande, ...
Bill Walsh, Copy Desk Chief of the Washington Post is emphatic that an ellipsis consists of three dots separated by "thin" spaces and surrounded by spaces.
My view is that there can be a style difference between British and American English, and even between publishers. On Usenet groups the writer is, in effect, the publisher and they should set their own style. If they use an editor they should advise him/her of their style requirements. If they don' t the editor will impose his/her own style.
These include how to handle numbers, when to use figures and when to spell them out. The same applies to times. Should it be 5 o'clock or five o' clock? What about okay? OK, ok or okay? Tee shirt, t-shirt or T-shirt? UK/US or U.K./U.S.A., NATO/Nato etc
In professional publishing if the house does not have its own style book, it will have its own style sheets which its copy editors are obliged to follow. The main reason is to establish consistency, the failure of which can detract from the flow of reading.
For British English the most popular guide is The Oxford Book of Style, $25.00/£17.50, and in the US The Chicago Manual of Style, which unfortunately is rather expensive at $31.50/£31.50 the in-store price is even more. A much cheaper alternative is The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage ($10.50/£8.43 Amazon), but not so comprehensive. Sometimes these are obtainable from book clubs at very much reduced prices. Prices shown are from Amazon.com and Amazon.co.uk
Manuals of style usually cover both usage and also the spelling and hyphenating of many awkward words and their plurals. I consider them to be essential tools to have at hand whenever I am writing or editing.
PeeJ
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com
From: Poison Ivan
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 22:52:48 -0500
"PeeJ" wrote ...
My view is that there can be a style difference between British and American English, and even between publishers. On Usenet groups the writer is, in effect, the publisher and they should set their own style. If they use an editor they should advise him/her of their style requirements. If they don' t the editor will impose his/her own style.
I think there's a lot to say for defining your own style. The Usenet medium can be so restrictive that publishing style guides aren't always useful. There are practical problems with ellipses, for example. If you put spaces between the dots, what happens when a line break occurs in the middle of the ellipsis? Do you get two dots on one line and one dot on the next?
Most word processors are smart enough to turn the spaces inside an ellipsis into non-breaking spaces, but most news software is not.
Similarly, a dash written as two hyphens " - " can confuse some software, which may inconveniently break a line between the hyphens.
So I don't put spaces inside my ellipses, and I use a single hyphen surrounded by spaces for my dashes. I'm reasonably sure all software will do the right line breaks if you format your puntuation that way.
Or maybe - you should just - keep your lines ... short.
Poison Ivan
^ spent far too much time thinking about this a few years ago
From: Poison Ivan
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 01:39:37 -0500
Great story, elle.
The only suggestions I can make are all trivial things that would be fixed by a final proofreading pass. But what else can a poor Fish Tanker do?
Even at nearly eighty he was fit and trim, carrying himself with the confident, easy assurance of one of those men who strides through the world with the unshakable belief that his cause is just, and his body more than equal to the tasks which his spirit will set it.
I would put a comma after "eighty", but that is very minor. A bigger deal: I'd cut the comma after "just." I don't think it should be there, and it doesn't hurt the rhythm of the prose any to remove it.
She shivered a little, in spite of the heat, and raised her drink to her lips, wrapping them around the straw.
I'm not a grammar expert, but my brain tried hard to associate the "them" in this sentence with "her drink." Obviously it is supposed to refer to "her lips," but I had to pause and puzzle it out.
Good things: I love your similes. "words ... like poisoned darts." And the transparent waves. The spitted lambs. And more. Every one of them was spot on.
Your description of Tros at the beginning was wonderful, too. So many physical descriptions are deathly boring, but not this one of the uncle. I think it's successful because it also reveals a lot of how the narrator thinks of Tros, so it serves two purposes.
You pack a lot of story into a short piece. I enjoyed it a lot.
Poison Ivan
From: Desdmona
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 13:40:52 -0500
Rumors of Glory
By ellè attend
she_waits@hotmail.com
ellè~
This story is filled with such vivid imagery that I swear my throat felt dry, and my face felt flushed from the heat. And the imagery is done in such a way that I feel it from the story and yet, it doesn't pull me from the story. Too many times a story can portray such vivid images that the images become more than the story. You've managed this fine balance superbly.
I think there are many messages in this story: it's not our religious differences that separate us, but the fanatics of those religions. It isn't good enough any more in this day and age to think fanatics are harmless - whoever they are, wherever they are. Complacency is just as dangerous as fanaticism.
I'm in awe of a talent that can write a story with this depth about fanaticism and yet, only use the word, fanatic in any form, just once. Wow! I had to use it two times just to make my point. It's just another testament to your fine writing.
It's very telling when a large percentage of FT comments have to do with typo's rather than substance. Sometimes the substance needs no improving.
I only have one suggestion. It's weak, and I make it only because of the forum this story is in. To be honest, I'm not even sure I feel strong enough about it to really recommend it. But I'm going to throw it out, if for no other reason than to be provocative, or to give you something to mull over. Are you curious about it? Do you wish I would just state it and move on?
That's the point I would make. I half-heartedly think we have to read too far into the story before we find out why Eve thinks Tros is insane. So by the time I get to it, I say to myself, "Oh, so that's what this is about." I'll admit this could be used as a tactic to keep me reading, intentionally or not, but there was a part of me that felt it was a bit cheating not to say it up front. Not expose it completely, but hint at it. What if the story started with some confrontational or challenging statement by Tros? By doing this, our dislike for Tros and his view starts to simmer immediately and then slowly builds as it becomes clearer just what he's about. And by the time we get to the full description of his "good works" we've built up a head of steam of real abhorrence.
A thought: The story starts with "The devil hath power to assume a pleasing form ..." As we read, we question if Tros could possibly be referring to Eve, as evidenced by his leer at her attire. We keep reading and decide that he's talking about Muslims, and yet as we continue to read to the end of the first part, we discover that in reality, he has defined himself.
Something to think about anyway.
Thank you very much, ellè, for wanting to take part in the FishTank and for giving us such a thought-provoking, hard-hitting, and powerful story. Wonderful.
Des
From: Tesseract
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: 21 Mar 2003 21:13:25 -0800
"Desdmona" <me@desdmona.com> wrote in message news:<v7mn6u8ppqqdfb@news.supernews.com> ...
Rumors of Glory
By ellè attend
she_waits@hotmail.com
ellè~
This story is filled with such vivid imagery that I swear my throat felt dry, and my face felt flushed from the heat. And the imagery is done in such a way that I feel it from the story and yet, it doesn't pull me from the story. Too many times a story can portray such vivid images that the images become more than the story. You've managed this fine balance superbly.
I think there are many messages in this story: it's not our religious differences that separate us, but the fanatics of those religions. It isn't good enough any more in this day and age to think fanatics are harmless - whoever they are, wherever they are. Complacency is just as dangerous as fanaticism.
I'm in awe of a talent that can write a story with this depth about fanaticism and yet, only use the word, fanatic in any form, just once. Wow! I had to use it two times just to make my point. It's just another testament to your fine writing.
It's very telling when a large percentage of FT comments have to do with typo's rather than substance. Sometimes the substance needs no improving.
I only have one suggestion. It's weak, and I make it only because of the forum this story is in. To be honest, I'm not even sure I feel strong enough about it to really recommend it. But I'm going to throw it out, if for no other reason than to be provocative, or to give you something to mull over. Are you curious about it? Do you wish I would just state it and move on?
That's the point I would make. I half-heartedly think we have to read too far into the story before we find out why Eve thinks Tros is insane. So by the time I get to it, I say to myself, "Oh, so that's what this is about." I'll admit this could be used as a tactic to keep me reading, intentionally or not, but there was a part of me that felt it was a bit cheating not to say it up front. Not expose it completely, but hint at it. What if the story started with some confrontational or challenging statement by Tros? By doing this, our dislike for Tros and his view starts to simmer immediately and then slowly builds as it becomes clearer just what he's about. And by the time we get to the full description of his "good works" we've built up a head of steam of real abhorrence.
A thought: The story starts with "The devil hath power to assume a pleasing form ..." As we read, we question if Tros could possibly be referring to Eve, as evidenced by his leer at her attire. We keep reading and decide that he's talking about Muslims, and yet as we continue to read to the end of the first part, we discover that in reality, he has defined himself.
Something to think about anyway.
Thank you very much, ellè, for wanting to take part in the FishTank and for giving us such a thought-provoking, hard-hitting, and powerful story. Wonderful.
Des
I haven't responded yet because I can't think of anything to say that hasn't been said. It's a great story and picking on typos seems a pathetic device that shows I'm not a sufficiently good critic to find something of substance to discuss.
Tesseract
From: PleaseCain
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: 22 Mar 2003 05:46:26 GMT
What a vivid piece of writing, all the striking imagery, like the sticky plastic straps of the chair that convey her discomfort, and the pinkish-red mist the consistency of sawdust. My suggestion then might seem contradictory, but I think you could cut many of the adverbs and consecutive adjectives, to clear up some wordiness. Probably sounds nitpicky, but your writing is strong enough that you can concentrate on streamlining and pacing.
You hit a home run with the intriguing uncle character. Thank you for contributing a fine story.
Cain
From: elle`attend
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: 22 Mar 2003 08:35:25 -0800
I am posting this separately from the FishTank discussion(s) connected with the story, ‘Rumors of Glory,' because I'm going to be addressing an ‘off-topic' issue or two in it, and I want to respect Desdemona's wishes about comments not related specifically to the literary aspects (if any!) of the piece being posted separately.
First, I want to thank everyone who took the time and trouble to read and comment on ‘Rumors of Glory.' I particularly want to express my deep appreciation to Desdemona, who took a bit of a chance, I think, in posting something so potentially controversial. I'm also very appreciative of the extremely thoughtful and intelligent response from the people who swim about here, which made my fears about flame-wars seem silly, in retrospect.
I must confess to feeling like a bit of a cheat offering this piece for posting in the FishTank at all, for a couple of reasons. First, the story is not really about sex, except in the most peripheral – and for me, as a mother of two small children, visceral – of ways. Although sex does underlie a LOT of the things that are going on in it, I believe.
Secondly, it is not really a rough, or even second- or sixth-draft. I spent a lot of time on this piece, putting it away when I couldn't bear to think about it any more, then taking it out later and having at it again. I did this for the best part of six months. This makes it more difficult to critique in the free-wheeling, hammer-and-tongs sort of way that is the real strength of the FishTank, and the people who participate in it. Again, my deepest thanks to Desdemona for ‘bending' the rules of the Tank a little to post a piece like this, and on such short notice. It was very important to me that I find some way to get it out of my system, and I'm very grateful for this opportunity.
My intention with this piece was never to take a position on either side of the current crisis, nor to anger or offend those who have such positions. Had it been a Christian nation in imminent danger of being invaded by an Islamic nation, the issue for me would have been precisely the same. My hope was rather to cause people on both sides of this issue, as well as those who are undecided, to stop and think for a moment about the consequences of war.
In any conflict, opposing parties almost invariably reach a point at which they begin to ‘demonize' their opponent. There are several reasons for adopting this sort of stance: anger, frustration, and a genuine belief that their opponent is motivated by ‘evil' intentions are but a few. It is also undoubtedly useful to governments to dehumanize their enemies in this way, in order to galvanize public opinion to their side, and to make war more palatable both for the public, and for the people who will ultimately have to fight it, and those who bear the brunt of the terrible costs of war.
This demonization is inevitable, and practiced by all sides when events reach an impasse such as this. At such times, I think it is incumbent upon us all to try and look past these stereotypes that are created on both sides, and try and see the human face behind these characterizations. See the real human beings behind the artificial masks created by politicians for their own ends; the men, women and children who share in common with us the same hopes, fears, and dreams for themselves and their children that we all cherish, and who will inevitably be the ones who suffer in any military conflict.
The sad but well-documented history of religious intolerance, fanaticism, and extremism, no matter on which side, is one of nothing but heartache and tragedy for humanity.
‘Statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that his war is just, and will thank his God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception.'
-Mark Twain
‘War is a very blunt tool with which to attempt to fashion the fragile sculpture of peace.'
-Anon.
Thank you all, once again.
elle`attend
From: Bradley Stoke
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: 24 Mar 2003 05:40:44 -0800
elle`attend
Your story, "Rumors of Glory", certainly highlights the nature of religious intolerance and how it can manifest itself.
However, the current conflict in the Gulf is not really a war of religious intolerance, although there may well be elements of religious intolerance associated with it. The government in Iraq is by no stretch of the imagination, an Islamic fundamentalist state. The Ba'athists are historically a secular party, but the whole movement has been hi-jacked by Saddam in Iraq and Assad in Syria. It suits Saddam to wave the Islamic banner and invoke the name of Allah when he wants to rally his people round a cause, but he is probably no Muslim himself.
Historically, Islam has actually been a rather more tolerant religion than, say, Christianity. This is why there are rather more ancient Christian churches surviving in Islamic territory, such as the Coptics, the Assyrians and the like, than were left in Europe before it splintered into pieces during the Reformation. However, intolerance is usually the evidence of a religion or faith under threat, and it is in our time, mostly as a response to perceived Western aggression in, for instance, Israel and Iran, that Islam has taken on a more intolerant character. The Taleban are as untypical of Islam as John McVeigh is of the Republican Right in America.
However, whether elle's story of religious intolerance is actually pertinent to the current conflict is beside the point. There are no doubt many people in the American mid-West, perhaps in Texas, who see this as an extension of the Crusades which Europe so spectacularly lost in the fourteenth century, and those in Islamic countries (and most likely in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Palstine, than in Iraq) who will see Western aggression as something which calls for a jihad in response.
And so it goes on, until all that's left is a bunch of cackling extremists raping and pillaging whoever happens to be remaining when they've got rid of everyone else. And who's to say whether the winners in some 21st Century Holy War (if the stupidity of the American administration brings it on) would be Muslims with crescents or Christians with crosses.
Personally, I don't think it'll come to it. My hope is that as America drags itself into the miasma of its own making, enthusiasm for more of these gung-ho Boy's Own capers will somewhat lessen and business as usual can return to the world.
Bradley Stoke
www.asstr.org/~Bradley_Stoke
From: elle`attend
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: 24 Mar 2003 11:01:31 -0800
Bradley,
However, the current conflict in the Gulf is not really a war of religious intolerance, although there may well be elements of religious intolerance associated with it. The government in Iraq is by no stretch of the imagination, an Islamic fundamentalist state.
I couldn't agree with you more. One of the greatest dangers in the policy we are currently pursuing is that we may create a vacuum into which the more radical elements of Islam will flow, creating just such an Islamist state, or states, in a shattered Iraq. I'm sure that our 'friend' Osama bin Laden, wherever he is, turns eastward six times a day, and thanks God for George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld.
Historically, Islam has actually been a rather more tolerant religion than, say, Christianity. This is why there are rather more ancient Christian churches surviving in Islamic territory, such as the Coptics, the Assyrians and the like, than were left in Europe before it splintered into pieces during the Reformation.
True, and brings another interesting factor into play. Following the expulsion of their Mohammedan conquerors, European Christians tried to expunge every trace of their occupiers, although it had been an almost entirely benign occupation. A sobering lesson for us in the pursuit of our current policies in the Middle East. And the newer and more radical elements of Islam may be the most intolerant in the history of that religion. That our actions only strengthen the hand of these zealots is the real tragedy of this entire heartbreaking situation.
There are no doubt many people in the American mid-West, perhaps in Texas, who see this as an extension of the Crusades which Europe so spectacularly lost in the fourteenth century, and those in Islamic countries (and most likely in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Palstine, than in Iraq) who will see Western aggression as something which calls for a jihad in response.
I am finding my husband's uncle's opinions and beliefs being echoed with depressing frequency throughout our society these days, in places that would surprise you. While initially couching their support for the administration's policies in the relatively uncontroversial terms of 'liberation' and 'weapons of mass destruction,' it doesn't take too much prompting to elicit these people's real feelings; that the people of Iraq, and indeed throughout much of Islam are 'evildoers,' and believe in the violent destruction of Christianity. Just this morning on CNN I saw the Rev. Paul Graham, Billy Graham's son, tiptoeing very carefully around his publicly avowed statements that Islam is a 'violent, evil religion,' and a 'tool of Satan.' This is a man who, along with his father, has almost unfettered access to the ear of this President of the United States.
I hope and pray that you are right in your conclusions about the situation we have put ourselves in, Bradley, but I'm very much afraid that we shall be a long, long time in repairing the damage that has been done to this wonderful country's reputation as a 'defender' of the weak, and a believer in international cooperation in the pursuit of peace throughout the world.
elle`attend
From: Tesseract
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: 22 Mar 2003 18:24:59 -0800
elle_attend@fuqme.com (elle`attend) wrote in message news:<c3754006.0303220835.f4b6fad@posting.google.com> ...
Just the curlies, ma'm
I am posting this separately from the FishTank discussion(s) connected with the story, ?Rumors of Glory,' because I'm going to be addressing an ?off-topic' issue or two in it, and I want to respect Desdemona's wishes about comments not related specifically to the literary aspects (if any!) of the piece being posted separately.
First, I want to thank everyone who took the time and trouble to read and comment on ?Rumors of Glory.' I particularly want to express my deep appreciation to Desdemona, who took a bit of a chance, I think, in posting something so potentially controversial. I'm also very appreciative of the extremely thoughtful and intelligent response from the people who swim about here, which made my fears about flame-wars seem silly, in retrospect.
I must confess to feeling like a bit of a cheat offering this piece for posting in the FishTank at all, for a couple of reasons. First, the story is not really about sex, except in the most peripheral ? and for me, as a mother of two small children, visceral ? of ways. Although sex does underlie a LOT of the things that are going on in it, I believe.
Secondly, it is not really a rough, or even second- or sixth-draft. I spent a lot of time on this piece, putting it away when I couldn't bear to think about it any more, then taking it out later and having at it again. I did this for the best part of six months. This makes it more difficult to critique in the free-wheeling, hammer-and-tongs sort of way that is the real strength of the FishTank, and the people who participate in it. Again, my deepest thanks to Desdemona for ?bending' the rules of the Tank a little to post a piece like this, and on such short notice. It was very important to me that I find some way to get it out of my system, and I'm very grateful for this opportunity.
My intention with this piece was never to take a position on either side of the current crisis, nor to anger or offend those who have such positions. Had it been a Christian nation in imminent danger of being invaded by an Islamic nation, the issue for me would have been precisely the same. My hope was rather to cause people on both sides of this issue, as well as those who are undecided, to stop and think for a moment about the consequences of war.
In any conflict, opposing parties almost invariably reach a point at which they begin to ?demonize' their opponent. There are several reasons for adopting this sort of stance: anger, frustration, and a genuine belief that their opponent is motivated by ?evil' intentions are but a few. It is also undoubtedly useful to governments to dehumanize their enemies in this way, in order to galvanize public opinion to their side, and to make war more palatable both for the public, and for the people who will ultimately have to fight it, and those who bear the brunt of the terrible costs of war.
This demonization is inevitable, and practiced by all sides when events reach an impasse such as this. At such times, I think it is incumbent upon us all to try and look past these stereotypes that are created on both sides, and try and see the human face behind these characterizations. See the real human beings behind the artificial masks created by politicians for their own ends; the men, women and children who share in common with us the same hopes, fears, and dreams for themselves and their children that we all cherish, and who will inevitably be the ones who suffer in any military conflict.
The sad but well-documented history of religious intolerance, fanaticism, and extremism, no matter on which side, is one of nothing but heartache and tragedy for humanity.
?Statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that his war is just, and will thank his God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception.'
-Mark Twain
?War is a very blunt tool with which to attempt to fashion the fragile sculpture of peace.'
-Anon.
Thank you all, once again.
elle`attend
Tesseract
Note that all the comments archived here were culled from active discussions occuring in the Usenet newsgroup alt.sex.stories.d. If you want to contribute to the discussion, please join us in ASSD and say your piece. Everyone is welcome.
If you do not know how to read Usenet newsgroups, there is a nice, free web interface on Google: http://groups.google.com/. If you have any problems, send us email. If we're lucky, we'll get you set up and contributing in no time!
If you have not done so, please read the Comment Guidelines. We ask that all comments include two positive remarks and two suggestions for improvement. Please, try not to repeat!
From: Katie McN
Re: Rumors of Glory, by elle`attend
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 16:17:48 GMT
Hi "Desdmona" <me@desdmona.com>,
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 08:35:20 -0500 I noticed your interesting post:
[ ... ]
elle'Attend is one of my favorite authors. I was pleasantly surprised and quite pleased to see her story in the Fishtank. Being familiar with her work, I knew I'd be surprised by her theme which is an understatement in this case. While the story was written eight months ago, it arrives at a most propitious time. I have a television set in my office and while I'm writing my comments, I'm waiting for the weapons inspectors to ask the UN to recall their teams from Iraq while I think about the ideas conveyed by the story.
I have a method I use when trying to offer comments on a story. It requires that I read the story several times while I take notes about likely positives and opportunities. In this case, I started by reading the story for pleasure before getting into my usual routine. I'm glad I did. The story is another example of elle'Attend's exceptional ability and the story is well worth reading in its current form.
There is so much to like about the story that I had to prioritize. Here are the two points that most stand out for me.
1. You told a real story in anticipation of your conclusion that is quite interesting and enjoyable to read on several levels. You stayed away from dropping into narrative summary to make sure the reader had enough information to understand your story points. Thank you for deciding that the reader was bringing enough to the table to understand your story without "explanations" getting in the way. A lesser author would probably fail on this point and conclude with a much inferior result.
2. Most stories with a religious theme end up being nothing more than disguised preaching. This is often true regardless of which side of street the writer decides to work. You did several things to avoid this trap. First, you told a story which kept my interest to the end. You also avoided giving the reader a clear-cut "good versus evil" example and instead made sure we learned about the good qualities of the person used as an example of a religious fanatic. Finally, you showed us how to us counter point when you had Jeff say,
"Jesus Christ, wake up, Eve!"
Here we have commonly used blasphemous phrase used in response to the reaction of your narrator's excitement. (I'm not going to ruin the story with too many details so please excuse my convoluted writing here.) This is a typical elle touch and a subtle example of your exceptional talent.
I had some difficulty trying to come up with two useful improvement suggestions. I continue to think the story is fine as it is so these opportunities fall into the category of minor issues.
1. I feel that an author should not do anything that detracts from his or her story telling. The use of non-standard formatting is an example of something that calls attention to itself at the expense of the story. Each time I encounter something out of the ordinary, I stop to think that I either don't like seeing it or I have to wonder it there is some purpose for using the technique that will be revealed later in the story. In this case, several formatting elements interfered with my enjoyment of the story.
I assume that the use of all caps for various words such as MY, WORLD and others was done to provide emphasis. I would have preferred to see this either not done at all or done in the more usual way for an ASCII text file which would look something like this: my and world.
I checked my reference book and verified that ellipses are not formatted correctly in the story. It stood out because these were used quite often, possibly approaching over-use. I realize that some people consciously avoid the first space in an ellipsis in order to make sure it stays on the same line as the last word in the preceding phrase. I don't consider this to be a good idea and feel that the author should format the story at a line length that is suitable for most browser such as 65 characters per line and include a carriage return and line feed at the end of each line. This is a better way to make sure the story structure remains in the form desired by the author and provides a means to correctly format the ellipsis. Here are some examples from the story and revision suggestions. Please excuse my lack of appropriate quotes and ellipsis to indicate I'm extracting phrases out of context:
I can't believe ... what -> I can't believe ... what
WORLD ...?" -> world ... ?"
" ...I'm -> " ... I'm
sort of a ...a ...that sort of a ... -> sort of a ...a ...that sort of a ...
I made sure the last ellipsis stayed with the 'a' by inserting a line feed and carriage return where I thought it would be appropriate.
By the way, the last snippet is taken from dialog and I would suggest that trying to simulate stammering in this way is not the strongest method available to the author. I hesitate to make suggestions other than to say that it might be possible to revise the section with some statement about her feelings, followed by an action that showed her confusion followed by a simplified version of the above dialog with less or no use of the ellipsis.
2. I think you used a few more adverbs that you normally do although none of them to detract a great deal except for this one:
"She gasped for breath convulsively, like a drowning swimmer being revived, ... "
It would be my opinion that phrase following the verb/adverb pair provides the reader with enough information to know what you have in mind and that the adverb is unnecessary if you make a slight modification to the sentence. If this is done, the sentence would be stronger and more effective in my opinion.
By the way, isn't:
sunblistered
two words?
Thank you elle for sharing you exceptional story with us. I couldn't imagine a better day for it to be in the Fishtank. I hope you find my suggestions useful.
It's Me! Katie McN
<katie@katie-mcnNOSPAM.com>
Read My Stories at:
www.katie-mcn.com