tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post327895823569573471..comments2024-01-06T10:36:04.084-05:00Comments on A Commonplace Blog: Dialogue in the novelD. G. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10659136455045567825noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-44206821280818743892014-03-13T10:37:48.258-04:002014-03-13T10:37:48.258-04:00I came to see how you had used Puttenham--I do lov...I came to see how you had used Puttenham--I do love him!--but found the post and thread interesting as well. No doubt it's a particular ailment of our time in the West that many novelists find it repugnant to "enter in" to the mind of someone with thoughts and worldview alien to their own. I like your answer by way of William James. And the Dew-Ford exchange is curious...Marly Youmanshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02377938366750387442noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-85882243563850694362011-01-15T18:31:10.084-05:002011-01-15T18:31:10.084-05:00Fabio,
An excellent question: “What makes one cha...Fabio,<br /><br />An excellent question: “What makes one character’s ‘voice’ fit, and the other’s fake?”<br /><br />I need to ponder the question, and answer at greater length a little later, but for now perhaps this sentence from William James will do. I happened upon it while reading desultorily on Shabbes.<br /><br />Writing in 1905, James is discussing the cultural skirmish between humanists and anti-humanists. The trouble is knowing exactly what the anti-humanists think. He complains that, in their “reticences,” they have “perplexed the humanists” (little has changed in one hundred plus years). Much of the disagreement, as a consequence, is unproductive. And why?<br /><br />“It is always good in debate to know your adversary’s point of view authentically.”<br /><br />For James’s “debate” substitute the word <i>dialogue</i>, and the outlines of an answer to your question begin to emerge.D. G. Myershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10659136455045567825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-38306319566643937192011-01-15T09:36:29.213-05:002011-01-15T09:36:29.213-05:00"the most sharply individualized speech."..."the most sharply individualized speech." <br /><br />"fit and natural speech"<br /><br />Prof. Myers,<br /><br />This is a great post and one of the reasons I keep coming back here. One question: how can we (you) tell when the speech is right? Is it just intuition? What makes one character's "voice" fit, and the other's fake?<br /><br />Thank you.Fabiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09700598057503097520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-40019261966768704732011-01-13T11:39:15.938-05:002011-01-13T11:39:15.938-05:00The transcript of our interview speaks for itself....The transcript of our interview speaks for itself. Robb realized this was an interview. I said nothing about focusing on homosexuality and I never said anything about wrestling with my sexuality.<br /><br />It is not unusual that people give an interview and then regret it and as a consequence make up all sorts of things.<br /><br />Luke FordLuke Fordhttp://lukeford.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-3785709316386213612011-01-13T07:20:14.006-05:002011-01-13T07:20:14.006-05:00Theoretically speaking, chit-chat in novels assume...Theoretically speaking, chit-chat in novels assumes people are exactly what they say. Wink wink, we know, which is what gets on my nerves too. A conservative tends to think, "I know what I think. I don't need to qualify everything with babbling nonsense." A liberal tends to think, "But I love the shades of gray. I live for the shades of gray. Why remove the fruit from the table," each, in part, losing out on the whole that holds any narrative together. It's truly astonishing how much psychological depth even Shakespeare's walk on parts have, as he appears to have handed them out as favors for a successful theater. Great post, D.G., as always.Stephen Cahalyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08685010365929686988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-75522793547227645752011-01-12T18:11:28.871-05:002011-01-12T18:11:28.871-05:00Just to be clear about my comment to Luke Ford, he...Just to be clear about my comment to Luke Ford, he had telephoned me out of the blue some years ago to discuss homosexuality, because I was a member of PFLAG at the time, and he said he was wrestling with his sexuality. I had no idea I was being interviewed, although I agreed to do an interview with him at some time.<br /><br />But let me assure you that I can well imagine a person who believes the decision to use atomic weapons to end the War in the Pacific was the only choice to be made--I haven't decided what I think about it myself.<br /><br />Sincerely,<br />Robb Forman DewRobb Dewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16021581129120884422noreply@blogger.com