Thursday, August 10, 2006

Avoiding Cliches Like the Plague (or Why I Never Met a Cliche I Didn't Like)

Yesterday, I stopped obsessing and sent my entry for the Rose City Romance Writers' Golden Rose contest to the coordinator. I'd spent the better part of three weeks getting one critique after another on the first three chapters of Living In Sin and polishing and repolishing the thing in the hope of making it shine like a newborn baby's butt. (Actually, I've never seen a shiny newborn baby's butt and I've had three of them, but they--the babies, not their butts, LOL!--do have a really nice smell, sort of reminiscent of the famous new car smell.) Fortunately, most of the suggestions were on the order of pretty small potatoes, which may bode well for my entry. I'll find out at the end of September, I guess!

But one of the things that came out of the critiques I received had to do with a single sentence in Chapter Three. It read like this:

By the time Patrick arrived at the tavern after church, he knew the cat was out of the bag.
Now, I knew "cat out of the bag" is a cliche when I wrote it, but I had a good reason for using that cliche. Or thought I did, anyway.

You see, that expression is straight out of the lingo of the con game (it refers to an actual scam that goes back to medeival times). And a few pages later in this story, the reader is going to discover that Patrick has some serious con artist tendencies. In fact, in this chapter, Patrick actually hatches a "pig in a poke" scam (another very old one) against a couple of crooked characters who've injured his friends.

So I thought with that "cat in the bag" phrase, I was doing a nice, subtle job of foreshadowing. Except, darn it all, no one else saw it.

Well, I take that back. One of my CPs actually said it was a cliche but that it was "darn near perfect" in the context, so I think she got it. But most of my readers just saw a cliche and suggested I remove it.

I hemmed and hawed. I impugned (in my own mind) my readers' intelligence for not seeing the beauty of it as a foreshadowing device. I waved my artistic license.

And then I took it out. In my contest entry, the sentence reads:

By the time Patrick arrived at the tavern after church, he knew his former anonymity was a thing of the past.
Okay, good, it doesn't use a cliche. Or does it? What about "thing of the past"? Shit! I tried "he knew he was in trouble" before that, but decided that was a cliche, too.

Which brings me to the crux of the problem: it's nearly impossible to write without occasionally dropping a cliche or hackneyed phrase into your narrative. In fact, I'd wager a guess that it is impossible. That you'll never find a book, anywhere, by anyone, that doesn't include a single cliched phrase.

Go on, I dare you. I'll be here when you get back in about 40 years.

I'm told, however, that the editors whom you want to impress to publish your novel when you enter a contest or send in a partial/full hate cliches. That cliches will turn your manuscript into a wallbanger faster than you can say "you'll never be published in this town". Which is why I took it out of my contest entry. I didn't want to get pitched against the wall in a fit of pique.

But I'm hard-pressed to understand how this actually works in real life. Given that I just said I don't believe there's a single book in the English language that doesn't have a cliche in it, how do writers get their cliches past these editors in the first place?

Of course, I'm not about to provide an answer to my rhetorical question. I have no idea how they do it. I imagine it has something to do with the overall ratio of cliche:not cliche, as well as the distinctiveness of the writer's voice and story. But it might also just have a little to do with luck and how much the cliches you do use jump off the page and announce themselves.

Which brings me full circle on my contest entry. Because I realized after I'd sent it that it also includes this sentence, toward the end of Chapter One:

If he’d had the first inkling that Lady Rosalind fell into that category, he would have avoided her like the plague.
Ouch! And yet, no one commented on that cliche. Nobody. Which I find utterly fascinating and completely inexplicable.

So, anyway, as of this morning, the cat went back in the bag. Yep, it's a cliche, but I firmly believe it works in the story. And if that one cliche (or the plague above) is the only thing that prevents my manuscript from being published...well, that would be a dream, wouldn't it?

10 comments:

lacey kaye said...

That cliches will turn your manuscript into a wallbanger faster than you can say "you'll never be published in this town".

HAHA that's great. You know, you're right. It's pretty much impossible to avoid hackneyed phrases ALL the time. I didn't see the foreshadowing myself, but I thought it fit in context in the sense that Patrick is from a lower-class origin. It seemed perfectly reasonable he would spout nonsense/in such a fashion.

Jackie Barbosa said...

Well, that was another part of my reason for deciding it belonged there. We're in his thoughts, for heaven's sake! Is there anyone in the world who doesn't think a cliche from time to time.

Sometimes, I think demands for "originality" can go too far!

Ann Aguirre said...

I don't see anything wrong with using a familiar phrase now and then. Just be careful, especially in historicals, that the phrase you choose had actually been coined by that point in history. Otherwise you wind up with anachronistic language.

Jackie Barbosa said...

Hi Annie!

/me waves

Nice to "see" you.

One of the things that I find most fun about writing historicals is that I occasionally use a word or phrase that I absolutely assume is anacronistic, only to discover it goes back much further than i thought. And then, of course, the reverse happens a lot, as well--something that sounds like it must have been part of the language absolutely forever winds up being a very recent coinage.

Lacey and I have cried on each other's shoulders quite a bit in the recent past about this. For example, the word "sex" to mean "genitalia" is early 20th century. (By contrast, "muff" to mean that portion of the female anatomy goes back to 1699, but you're not exactly going to use that word in a love scene, are ya?) Of course, that doesn't stop a lot of historical writers from using "sex" in just this sense, anyway, especially for women!

My hero uses the word "shag" (meaning to have sex, of course) in his inner dialogue in chapter one. Someone pointed out that it seemed too modern. Nope! Goes back to 1788, my friends!

God, I'm SUCH a geek!

lacey kaye said...

Yeah that gets very frustrating and also way fun. I totally agree. I had one the other day...darn. Can't remember. Anyway, I still love the muff comment!

Ann Aguirre said...

*giggles*

"Please, m'lady, I am thirsting for the sweet dewy juices of your..." (Muff?)

Perfect, no?

Jackie Barbosa said...

Annie wrote:
"Please, m'lady, I am thirsting for the sweet dewy juices of your..." (Muff?)

Puzzled, she retrieved the white wooly muff from her wardobe, fashioned of one hundred percent pure scintilla fur, and handed it to him, wondering whence he would extract the liquid.

/snerk...snort...dies laughing

lacey kaye said...

OMG you girls are getting nasty!

Jackie Barbosa said...

What? It's a hand muff, Lacey! Ohhhhhhh...

/slinks off to try to expunge the alarming images *that* phrase just engendered!

Ann Aguirre said...

I think you just invented a new fetish subgenre, involving manual pleasure and fur...