[ SECRET POST #3853 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3853 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 43 secrets from Secret Submission Post #551.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

04. http://i.imgur.com/pmp1lk1.png

[(Anonymous)]

Epithets aren't bad in moderation.

And I mean, ultimately, it's just writing. If you really want to use epithets all the time, it's certainly not a moral fault of any kind, it just makes your writing really hard to parse and understand.

[(Anonymous)]

Oh, I agree that in moderation, it's fine. I was pretty bad with them back in the day but I've gotten better at balancing the use of epithets. I just look back and laugh.

[(Anonymous)]

Great writers use epithets. There is zero wrong with the practice. Over use is another kettle of fish.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't understand the hate for epithets. I get not to just use them and not names. But people who say never to use them just seem weird to me. I can't imagine just saying Bob, Bob, he, he, Bob all the time.

[(Anonymous)]

Epithets greatly increase the difficulty of parsing a particular piece of writing, without adding much to the quality of the writing.

[(Anonymous)]

Sure, if you are a shit writer it may make the story harder to understand. But then, if you are a shit writer you got other problems.

[(Anonymous)]

Okay, shit-for-brains.

[(Anonymous)]

Good to know your sense of humor isn't broken.

[(Anonymous)]

LOL! You do what feels good to you, OP. It's your story.

[(Anonymous)]

honestly, the use of epithets (much like the use of a thesaurus) has just become one of these pseudo-literary boogeymen. there are thousands of essays/articles/blog posts/whatever on the matter, they're all saying the same thing, and that thing is echoed by a bunch of people who may or may not be writers, who may or may not have practical experience, and who may or may not be fun and interesting to read.

by which i'm not saying everything needs to be replaced with incomprehensibly complicated terminology and a dozen vague descriptors –– but "hemingway didn't do it" is always really funny to hear from someone who's distinctly not hemingway.

[(Anonymous)]

I have no problem with epithets when used appropriately. There are times when they're pretty much necessary. People just have a kneejerk reaction to them because so many fic writers pick ridiculous epithets and use them excessively.

A lot of advice given to beginner writers isn't meant to be followed for the rest of your life.

[(Anonymous)]

because so many fic writers pick ridiculous epithets and use them excessively

Yes, THIS is the problem, not the use of epithets, but how they're used.

How-to

[(Anonymous)]

dreamflower2 did a good job explaining the difference of good and bad use of epithets over on fanficrants recently:

"I am not against epithets, but I always feel that they should be used in limited circumstances: if the POV character does not know the person's actual name; if the name has already been used in the same paragraph or several times on the same page; or if it is needed to remind the reader of the character's role.

In any case, only the first circumstance should use the physical descriptions of hair color, height, etc. and only for as long as the observer remains in ignorance of the name. So, if you had an OC meeting the team for the first time, he/she might mentally size them up by their hair color, skin, height and gender. But once introduced, he/she would think of them by their names.

In the latter two circumstances, it should refer to some role the character holds in addition to his/her name. For example, to stay in the fandom you mention: Hotch could be called "the leader" or Penelope could be called "the techie" or Reid could be "the genius". If it was appropriate to the situation, Rossi could be called "the author"--for example, if the case involved his knowledge of publishing, but not if he was in the middle of a chase scene.

In other words, epithets need to be relevant as well as descriptive."
http://fanficrants.livejournal.com/11703361.html#comments

[(Anonymous)]

I'm sorry, this is completely besides the point, but I can't see the phrase 'doe-eyed' without thinking of Nobby Nobbs going "Oh? Pastry-faced, am I?". Thank you, Terry Pratchett.

[(Anonymous)]

Ehehehe

[(Anonymous)]

LOL

[(Anonymous)]

LOL!! Right on, sister!

[vethica]

There's nothing wrong with using them. It's overusing them or using them in inappropriate ways that people get annoyed about.

[(Anonymous)]

No apologies needed. I just won't read your stories because I hate being distracted every two seconds by trying to figure out WHO THE FUCK YOU'RE REFERRING TO AT THIS MOMENT. Wait who is older??? Who is taller??? By two inches??? WHy does it matter that he's an ex-army-assassin???? Is he going to shoot someone??? In bed?

Just use their names jesus christ what is wrong with you? One easy step to being a better writer.

[(Anonymous)]

Lol. I remember being about 11 and reading Gundam slash fic and reaching for a dictionary because the author kept using "cobalt" and "cornflower" and "prussian" for eye colour.

[(Anonymous)]

hahah "cerulean" wat? or like when "the genius" sucks on his dick, does it really take a genius to do that right? bwah.

[(Anonymous)]

I will pretty much just retype what I did the last time the subject came up. A good epithet reminds the viewer of something.

Joe tilted his face up to kiss the taller man.

"You nearly killed us!" Sue yelled at the flustered pilot.

Those both, at least to me, sound more natural than -

Joe tilted his face up to kiss Bob because Bob's taller than him.

"You nearly killed us!" Sue yelled at Joe who was currently piloting the plane.

But they don't sound as awkward as -

Joe tilted his face up to kiss the cobalt eyed gunslinger because the cobalt eyed gunslinger was taller than him.

"You nearly killed us!" Sue yelled at the cobalt eyed gunslinger currently piloting the plane.

In both cases, the fact that Bob is a cobalt eyed gunslinger doesn't have anything to do with what's going on. But if it is something worth drawing attention to?

Joe took careful aim at the sniper, but because he could squeeze the trigger his target collapsed. He glanced over in exasperation and the cobalt eyed gunslinger just grinned back at him. Bob had outshot him again.

[(Anonymous)]

But why do you need to say he's a taller man at all? If he's tilting his face up to kiss him, that's obvious. And we should already know who's piloting the plane; you could have stopped at 'yelled'.

This is why editors are crucial for people who want to be taken seriously as authors.

[(Anonymous)]

I use them myself, but just in moderation. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯