If you wrote a novel where characters talk like this would it inevitably be doomed to fail or can such literary inflection be explained by the need for realism?
>>7659954
talking and writing on facebook are not the same
clarify what you mean
would they speak this way out loud?
(do people now speak this way out loud?)
>>7659978
Talking and writing dialogue are not the same
>>7659978
>do people now speak this way out loud?
the internet has had a great impact on spoken language. i'm not talking about the people who autistically reference memes irl either, they are part of a wider transformation that it's hard to measure right now. but yeah writers gotta deal with it somehow, though it's hard to pull off.
>>7660000
Checked
>>7660008
It's a good point. If someone now communicates 60% via text, facebook etc writers have to involve it somehow.
Thing is I've seen so many horrible attempts at this. Authors who try and mimick the format of an online chat / text session are cringey, and the ones who writer - "c u later" texted John - are also pretty cringry IMO.
It's a more serious version of the argument between reflecting real-life speech patterns (dialects etc) in writing or simply converting the content of that speech into a readable form.
I know if I was reading a book about some depressed person I was expected to sympathize with, I'd feel far more emotional and empathetic if they said "Goodbye June, I guess I'll see you again sometime" than someone who says "ok bbz c u ltr [cryingfaceemoji.jpg]".
Tao Lin does it well in Richard Yates, though the way they talk is pretty much standard English with correct spelling and so on. "said on Gmail chat" really is a watershed moment or whatever for contemporary writing. I mean letters can "say" things, so why not text messages and emails and so on?
I think it'll be a case of a writer saying "he said" and then giving the reader enough credit to be able to work out whether they're just talking online or whatever.
I hate it when writers write "he typed" or "he texted", it sounds false and tryhard.
>>7660025
This is true however I remember when that Giantbomb fat facecam fuck died from being fat, his wife went on a twitter teardrop tour and used CAPS LOCK TO EMPHASIZE their love, it was aptly grotesque considering the man himself. I guess there might be ways but I think it would work far better in a comic book medium where drawings would give context to words.
>>7660037
I have no idea what your post means and I can only assume you're schizophrenic.
Who wants to bet these whores were wearing 5+ inch heels? Lautner is 5'9, which is still manlet status but not by that much.
>>7660208
Lmao nanlet detected
Gb2fit
>>7659954
Isn't that dude like 5'9"? Those are some huge bitches, man. I mean, like, physically. They're huge.
>>7660025
If need be, I don't see a reason why an author couldn't say "wrote" while referring to a text message, in the same way they would a letter. Just establish the medium and continue the dialogue as if it was a letter.
>>7660218
I'm 5'11, which I still consider to be manlet status but its not as bad living in Cajun country (the french heritage makes our whites pretty short). I just hate when a women wants to wear huge slut stilettos and then complains that she's taller than a guy. Youre basically on stilts you dumb broad.
>>7660229
Manlet pls go
>>7659954
I would sooner remain obscure as a writer for the entirety of my life than conform to that style of speech. If I were to incorporate it, it would only be as a subject of ridicule by attaching it to a somehow contemptible character.
>>7660235
Wish granted you pseudofuck
>>7660219
t. manlet
>>7660246
Witness how the imbecile responds to a post that doesn't contain 'faggot' or a simple expression, the kind to which he is limited. Witness how all that extends beyond the simplicity he is accustomed to from consuming simple entertainment in excess qualifies as 'pseudo.'
>>7660296
*Ephoric manlet tip*
*teleports back to the serious discussions*
>>7659954
>179cm
poor guy
>>7660246
Kek
>>7659954
8/8 bait for unexpected location
>>7660356
>179cm
He wishes.
>>7659954
If you make it realistic then yes it can be good
The same goes for anything. You can use any words you want in your writing as long as it's believable. I've seen writing like this used in books but there's a sort of uncanny valley that's present. You fall out of the reading trance and look up and see the puppeteer moving his strings or whatever
>>7660296
wow dude u r so intelligent! write some more words for us
