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
Hi all. I am perplexed about the construction of 'first person' speech during which the speech is interrupted. I am using em rules, but their positioning is confounding me. The passage goes thus:
Meredith bears the aggressive carriage of a lioness protecting her pride. 'Very well, Alexander. Come along--' Meredith looks to me-- 'What's your name again? Come and meet my sister, Roslyn.'
My problem is: Should the second dash actually be placed inside the speech, thus: '--What's your name again . . .
Any views would be appreciated. I have Hart's Rules, but it doesn't cover this particular annoyance!
Comments
'...Come along' - Meredith looks at me - 'What's your name again?...'
Not sure whether to include a full stop after 'Come along', however; it's a complete command rather than the first half of a sentence which is continued.
You're all correct. I was overdoing the illustration of interruption. The full stops do the job they're supposed to do, and so much neater.
Ta, P
"Come along—" Meredith looks to me. "What's your name again?"
I was just questioning the need for two pauses.
Em-dashes are more typically used when the speaker is interrupted:
Sarah studied the map. "I think we need to turn right at the church, and then left at the—"
"I know the way," Tom snapped.
Or when the speaker carries out some important action mid-sentence:
"Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you" — he whipped the velvet cover off, revealing the architect's model — "Talkback Towers!"
'Meredith bears the aggressive carriage of a lioness protecting her pride. 'Very well, Alexander. Come along--' Meredith looks to me-- 'What's your name again? Come and meet my sister, Roslyn.' '
The first line is odd. She's not bearing/carrying the carriage of a lioness - sounds like she staggers in under the weight of a massive cage. She 'has the aggressive mien of a lioness...' perhaps.
You don't need the second 'Meredith' as we know who is speaking.
Now for the serious stuff. This really is now a bag of worms because on re-reading, another problem surfaces. The 'come along' is not a directive to Alexander, as might appear, but is the words precipitating the look to Meredith with the directive following.
How I think I should handle it is thus:
Meredith bears the aggressive carriage (or mien *thanks*) of a lioness protecting her pride. 'Very well, Alexander.'
'Come along.' Meredith looks to me, 'What's your name again? Come and meet my sister, Roslyn.'
I think re-paragraphing makes the connections much clearer.
New thoughts?
Because she's a woman. We aren't rational.
In full context, the question, 'What's your name again?' shows arrogance. It's actually taken from my own personality. :-*
Personally, if I back myself into a confused corner, I rewrite the whole kit and caboodle.
...'Very well, Alexander.
'Come along.' Meredith looks to me, 'What's your name again? Come and meet my sister, Roslyn.'
Then there's the comma after 'me' - that's wrong too.
Actually, I'd lose 'Come along' altogether.
Meredith bears the aggressive carriage (or mien *thanks*) of a lioness protecting her pride. 'Very well, Alexander.' She looks to me. 'What's your name again?' She doesn't wait for a reply.* 'Come and meet my sister, Roslyn.'
If it's appropriate, 'She looks down at me.' That would set the authoritative tone. I'm assuming that at this point we know that the 'me' person is not Alexander, so there would be no confusion.
*'She waves away my reply' would also work.
Lizy, you are right bout the confusion. Sometimes though, we are so caught up with a certain piece that we perhaps don't consider all the alternatives. I can see that here: I want my way to work. That is not always the best way forward, but is, in reality, the proper way.
Perhaps this short snapshot does not sufficiently do the character, Meredith, justice. To put it crudely, she is a bitch. Roslyn and Alexander are siblings. The 'what's your name again' is a gate-crashing investigator.
It has been an interesting exercise seeing all these different perspectives. Thanks to all.
I knew exactly what you meant. I'm all for sharing friendship in many ways, but when it comes to a writers' forum, I would rather read about 'writing' than someone enjoying pumpkin scones and Jaffa cakes!
I don't set out to malign anyone; I guess this is yet another illustration of how this particular medium appeals to such a variety of interests.
I'll take my 'poke in the eye' now Mrs Bear!
I'm sorry to say I used to be pretty derisive of the 'light' threads - but these days I join in because I often find them entertaining and a nice way to relax with virtual friends.
Behind all those light, seemingly trivial threads runs a highly supportive group of writers.
Writers are more than the words we put onto the screen or page - we are human beings who need support. It's a lonely job, and the ability to talk to people who understand that, about any topic under the sun, whether writing related or not, is essential. TB provides the 'coffee-room' space for those who need it - it's not compulsory to enter it, and it's only a small corner of the site, but it's there for light relief or to ask for help, or to receive unasked-for support.
TB - the writing site that caters for all your needs.