[tweetmeme source=”jjdanz” only_single=false service=ht.ly]
Spelling is a tool many fantasy writers use to lend originality to their writing. Sometimes it works and sometimes it distracts the reader from the story. I find myself getting caught up in this device, wondering if I should spell a word as it is commonly spelled or give it a twist to increase the fantastic patina with which I coat my world.
You can see in the title of this post one of the more common words with which writers play in hopes of setting their work apart. I’m reminded of the variations on popular names: Tiffany & Tiffani, Julie & Juli, Steph & Stef and on an on.
There’s nothing wrong with the whole thing, but after all is said and done, how much of a difference does it really make?
The answer is, like most things in writing and in gas mileage, that your results may vary.
The use of word variations doesn’t mean squat if the story is stale and the characters are flat. In fact, I would argue the superficial stuff (odd spellings, two moons, green skin) not only doesn’t cover those shortcomings up, it calls attention to them.
The reality is you can always go back and word search and play with those things after the meat is on the bones. If the story is done well, then those little embellishments, those accessories can enhance the reader’s experience.
Exactly! I used the spelling Wyrm for a demon in my novel, not to be unique, but because I liked the medieval look of the name (it’s capitalized, because it’s used as a proper name). I like to use the Oxford English Dictionary to pull up different spellings from time to time, but the one point you make, Jonathan, is a good one: Cool spelling won’t save a bad story-line.
I like cool spellings, too. I just find myself thinking too much, sometimes, about how I might differentiate my work from others. Do I use their spellings or do I try to concoct some etymological mash-up of my own? And then I realize I need to get back to writing 😉
I am one of those readers who gets distracted by those sort of spellings or names that are very difficult to pronounce. Unless you’re willing to put the time and research into it (like Tolkien, who was an expert linguist), then it isn’t necessary. Story is priority, add flair once you’ve got something good. I agree!
So true. If the spellings work with the story and seem at home there, that’s one thing, but if there is no underlying reason for it or none of the words hang together as a whole (I’m thinking Eragon here), than it’s best left out.
Pingback: Did You Say Metropolitopoiesis? | urbangestalt.com: urban fantasy (new weird), photography, and thoughts
I like a little spelling weirdness. Someone mentioned wyrm, which is perfectly all right with me. But I think it can get out of hand. When you have ravvits and tibers instead of rabbits and tigers, I tend to raise an eyebrow, especially if they’re actually the same animal.
I’m with you there. I like the inventiveness when it is seamless. When it sticks out like a frog in a bowl of cheerios, then I close the book. Smeerp anyone?
Pingback: Link « Serial Distractions