Welcome to Writers Talkback. If you are a new user, your account will have to be approved manually to prevent spam. Please bear with us in the meantime
Cliche Queries In Contemporary Fiction
I think an update on cliches and the use of them could be helpful. Language evolves and popular phrases harden into cliches all the time.
Can I use the word 'mouthwatering' in my novel or is it now totally sodden in cliche status and unusable? I am aware it is cliched in menus, recipes and restaurant reviews but is it okay in fiction?
Would any of you care to comment please?
Comments
Bleugh (gagging sound)
I wanted to say,
"the mouthwatering star anise"
At the moment I have "the scrumptious star anise" and I think actually that sounds better. (Mostly FMC finds things "delicious" and really, I have to give her a wider vocabulary.)
*delves into inner confines of grey matter to find aniseedy adjective*
If you google it and pick the wikipedia link it will tell you all about it.
It really does have the most mouthwatering aroma.
Aha - mouthwatering aroma - verging on oxymoron here. I like that. Would I get away with it?
It does depend on context though and on the style of novel.
Funnily enough I love the word 'munch'. In the right context it can be very effective.
but I don't not like it :D
But if someone's mouth starts watering - surely that IS an actual sensation? Their mouth is producing saliva in response to an aroma, no? And 'mouthwatering' exactly describes that sensation - whether you consider it 'overused' or not.
...bit long maybe ;)
I wasn't allowed to leave this box blank and if I'd left a full stop there would have been an interrogation.
That was my logic, too.
IMHO "Don't get me wrong." has become cliched. It was witty when writers started to use it a few years ago but now it's definitely overused.
I meant rather then putting mouthwatering I would describe the exact taste, smell etc. so instead of I bit into a mouthwatering peach, I would put, I sank my teeth through the soft skin, breathing in the musky scent as the sweet flesh, dripping juice, filled my mouth. This is just a hasty example though, so don't pull me up on grammer or re-write it to improve it! If mouthwatering is used to describe the exact physical sensation of your mouth filling with saliva, then it can also be described in a way that paints a picture, or used just as it is! It fits that way, but I wouldn't personally describe an item of food or a smell as mouthwatering, I think more colour can be added in the description to convey the exact taste. But since the item in PBW example has already been described once, it could be a good way of reminding the reader of it a second time without repeating a description! Either way, we all write differently!
Forgive any errors here, I'm writing on my phone.
As ones senses of smell and taste are physically inter-linked I don't see a problem with this.
[quote=polar bear]Forgive any errors here, I'm writing on my phone.[/quote]
.... and this, only a few years ago, would have been an oxymoron - or at least impossible.
Edited to add - should 'ones' be 'one's'?
Times change.
:)
I think you can get too bogged down in flowery description. Surely readers just want you to get on with the story?
It's the difference between telling and showing, not so much description but putting the reader in the head of your character, so they feel, taste and touch everything the character does. I like to pretend my reader is blind and I am painting the world of the book for them. You don't want purple prose, but by showing the world of your book it brings the story both to life and makes it believable.
I really learnt this when reading a published book where the author had written that the character walked into the room and stared at the beautifully decorated room. Well, I couldn't picture it because she never told me what it looked like. How was it beautifully decorated? It jarred me right out of the story - just that one line and I wasn't following some-one's life anymore, I was reading a book.
It isnt just in descriptions either, its in the speech and the prose, the actions of the characters. I think it was Poe (might be wrong!) who said dont tell me its a hot day, show me sunlight glinting from broken glass. It can just be tiny touches but the difference between showing and telling is vital. It wasn't until I stopped any 'telling,' in my stories, that I started getting acceptances. I used to read slush pile manuscripts for a publishing company and telling, stood out a mile. It made the book flat and uninteresting. For me it wasnt whether mouth watering, was a cliché, but was it telling? I think it is, unless it done as PBW did, as a second reference after the description. This is just me though, and other people might do things differently.
Hope this helps, but if not, feel free to ignore it!
[quote=polar bear]I think it was Poe (might be wrong!) who said dont tell me its a hot day, show me sunlight glinting from broken glass. It can just be tiny touches but the difference between showing and telling is vital.[/quote]
. . . which is why I don't think you need every detail about eating something, unless it is relevant to the plot.
I'm not saying ignore descriptions, but some writers go over the top and add too many. It's like getting your legs caught up in all the pond weed as you're trying to swim to the island in the middle of the lake!
A good writer will give just enough and hand over to the reader's imagination from thereon in. I don't want to be spoon-fed and told everything as a reader.
But maybe that's just me.
That's exactly it. I've learned it the hard way but I think I'm beginning to understand the 'showing' business on a deeper level these days.
She's seventeen, she runs hot - over-emotional. She's a little too immature for her age (over-protective Dad) until she goes through the turning point of her character arc, when she realises how savage the world of adults can be and she grows up. She's more likely to use a word like 'scrumptious'.
Her mentor, and the nominated mentor for 'mentor role as defined in The Writer's Journey', who is a much older woman, sophisticated and worldly-wise, would use the word 'delectable'.
But thanks anyway, neil. it's a valid observation.
Not sure about Poe, but that sounds like Chekhov.
[quote=Tiny Nell]Surely readers just want you to get on with the story? [/quote]
Description (the right kind) which is devoid of cliche, is vital. I loathe, detest and cringe at dialogue-heavy books and threadbare narrative. They get tossed to one side because I want the writer to at least invest the time and effort to SHOW me the scene, the aromas, the colours, the sounds, the background. I want to feel the scene, I want to be part of it, and I want to get wrapped up in the descriptions and the words. I don't want the writer to rely on 'telling' me everything.
It was Chekhov, but this is the exact quote: Don't tell me the moon is shining; show me the glint of light on broken glass.
Without a doubt - description - the right description - makes writing sing on the page. The Chekhov quote is so perfect. Here's a pic I took recently of moonlight over my bay. Go on... see how inventively you can describe it.
http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj89/ClaudiaTraveller/Moonlight-in-Fiji.jpg
The location is Fiji - the tree is a species of mangrove. When we cleaned up the beach after a cyclone a couple of years ago, we cleared out most of the mangrove which was badly damaged, but left this one because it's a beautiful feature of our little beach. I could post a daytime pic if it would help - just let me know.
As for the rest - I hope I haven't killed this thread by inviting descriptions of the picture?
Here's a description I have already used:
The moonlight glimmered over the water like spilled mercury.
Have just found this thread. How about "mouth-pleasing" or "palate-pleasing"? No? Oh, well.
That would be great, Claudia!
I like your description as well.
http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj89/ClaudiaTraveller/Mangrove.jpg