using generic terms....

preyer · Jan 25, 2006

i was critiquing someone's story recently and they used the generic terms 'blaster' and 'credits.' my advice was to change those, that by not doing so could be perceived as just being lazy. there was some debate and i essentially said something along the lines of 'a professional would do it.' and, were i to read a professional's story, i'd expect more for my money than those generic terms. well, my argument didn't impress this writer in the least, it seems, but that's besides the point, that point being, is using these terms acceptible in a professional quality story?

(an old question i thought i'd bring back up and update a bit.)

zornhau · Jan 25, 2006

Well, for a start, (I think it was Orson Scott Card who said that) when we get hyperdrive, everybody will call it "hyperdrive" since that's the established term. Same thing happened with "robots", the name preceding the actual robots by several decades.

What do you think the popular name would for exotic energy weapons that shot explosive bolts?

As for Credits - it's that or Dollars, really

Then, you might also consider than we're reading far future SF in translation.

Takvah · Jan 25, 2006

I think you're pushing it with this argument. While you might expect more I don't think that readers in general really care. Blaster and credit in scifi are like gun and money in general literature. I really don't need to be beat over the head with trivial names, etc that do nothing to enhance the story. Do I need to know that the character paid with a "Qubit", with the face of "Admiral Tarkon IV", on it? That would get my eyes to rolling unless Admiral Tarkon IV was somehow relevant to the story, and upon seeing the image it brought about a reaction. I also have no need to know that the character was being fired on by a man using a Corellian sidearm. For me, it's a matter of who the hell cares... and further if it is relevant enough to name in this way I would then require explanation as to what makes the Corellian sidearm so "special". I can't imagine slowing down action for explanations of such things.

If this guy was the first cat to write science fiction of this nature, then so be it. I just think that we're all familiar enough with these terms through exposure to make the generic terms acceptable.

DaveKuzminski · Jan 25, 2006

In one instance, I used a fictitious brand name in order to poke fun at a movie cliche used in a Dirty Harry movie. I had my character state that he carried two Gold Klaw 6300s the most powerful handguns in the universe. I think in a situation like that, you want to make a distinction so that it sounds more real. I'm certain that there are other situations where it's appropriate to give details since those are what will make a scene more realistic. It doesn't always matter whether anyone receives an explanation always about those details as those are primarily for the effect of filling in background. However, if those can be later linked into providing clues for some mystery or toward uncovering the bad guy's identity, then all the better because they can do both at the same time.

zornhau · Jan 25, 2006

Yeah. There'd be branding too. It would depend on whether the POV character could make the distinction. To Joe Public, any energy weapon is a Blaster, but to a soldier, they'd all be distinct.

Actually, chances are that Blaster would get snapped up as a brand name.

brokenfingers · Jan 25, 2006

I think I agree with preyer here. But it may be a matter of personal taste. I like fully fleshed out worlds when I read. And those words would throw me out since I know there's no way a future society is gonna have "credits" or "blasters". It's a matter of verisimilitude - the little details that make the world real to your reader.

Dune is one of my favorite sf novels becuase Herbert created a whole world that seemed real.

If you notice, he didn't use "credits" or blaster" or any generic terms. His world was complete and that's part of the reason it's considered a classic to this day.

Like I said, it could just be matter of taste, but that's my opinion. If you're gonna write a story with those terms, might as well call your characters Hero and Bad Guy and have them on Earth-Type Planet.

MadScientistMatt · Jan 25, 2006

I like using the term "blaster." It gets the point across that it's some sort of long-distance weapon, not a gun, but it's wonderfully ambiguous. It doesn't actually say how the thing works, and I see that as a plus. If the reader doesn't know the operating principle, you can describe its effects any way you please and the reader can take your word for it. If you say it's a plasma gun instead of a blaster, though, botching the details about how plasmoids behave could get get you into trouble with physics-minded readers.

The term "credit," on the other hand, carries a bit of baggage with it. There's a bit of an implication that it's not really money, but something like "store credit" or another medium that in theory represents real money but in practice has some limits that currency may not have.

Sage · Jan 25, 2006

MadScientistMatt said:
I like using the term "blaster." It gets the point across that it's some sort of long-distance weapon, not a gun, but it's wonderfully ambiguous. It doesn't actually say how the thing works, and I see that as a plus. If the reader doesn't know the operating principle, you can describe its effects any way you please and the reader can take your word for it. If you say it's a plasma gun instead of a blaster, though, botching the details about how plasmoids behave could get get you into trouble with physics-minded readers.

The term "credit," on the other hand, carries a bit of baggage with it. There's a bit of an implication that it's not really money, but something like "store credit" or another medium that in theory represents real money but in practice has some limits that currency may not have.

Personally, I'm the opposite on these terms. "Credit" has more meaning to me as a generic form of future currency (we use credit cards already, why not just have "credit" be issued automatically through banks of the future).

When I hear "blaster" though, I am automatically connecting it to specific examples of fiction where that term was used. To me, it's actually less generic, which makes it sound more like they were "borrowing" the term from another sci-fi work.

That's just me, though.

silentpoet · Jan 25, 2006

Tim Allen the 63rd picked up the Binford 6000 long range ionic disrupting blaster.

I would say in a novel I would use a specific name at least a few times. In a short story it might not matter as much. Then again it might add a bit of flair to an otherwise bland scene.

For example I don't just carry a pistol. I carry a colt 1991 .45. I use Wilson Combat 47D magazines. My duty rig(when I was a cop and hope to be again) is a safariland 070 level 3 holster. It requires 3 distinct movements to draw the pistol for safety. That tells you specifically what I carry. Now if you were to write a police story, those details may or may not come into play, but they might be very important. For example a situation where a bad guy grabs for the gun. I think you can really improve a story with specifics.

azbikergirl · Jan 25, 2006

For my own story, I'd come up with different terms because 'credit' and 'blaster' are too generic and cliche-sounding to me. It wouldn't bother me to read them in someone else's story, but I might smirk and make some comment under my breath about being lazy or lacking imagination.

preyer · Jan 25, 2006

i think the context of the story has something to do with it, too. in this particular instance, the blaster is being aimed at someone else and it's a comedic story. the author didn't want to clutter things up and add extra words (to which i argued he spared no words when he tried to be funny). his other descriptions were okay as far as i was concerned. one of my main points, though, was that the blaster could have been a great tool for characterization. he disagreed.

he also disagreed about credits. granted, a new term for that is harder, but hardly difficult. pick a word, any word.

the thing about a hyperdrive is, well, it's a piece of vague machinery that even when you see it in a show or movie, it's rarely more than a prop (that's why i didn't say argue about the 'hoverbus') and it doesn't characterize much unless it's broken, whereas a blaster can actually mean something. my thing is i feel it's a missed opportunity and readers certainly won't be impressed with generic terms, that's for sure. i don't know about anyone else, but i sure as hell don't want people glossing over *any* part of my story, lol. i don't want to bore people, either.

further, a few words about the terms wouldn't be breaking into the story any more than the author's intrustions already do, what with having footnotes and all. it's fairly evident to me that was a story about getting humour across more than anything else, but i thought it brought a good discussion back to life.

i don't read as much as i used to, so y'all tell me: do you find these terms in books you pay full retail for? personally, since we're supposed to be creative people, i find there to be few reasons for using too many generic terms. i guess i could accept 'blaster' before any of the others (though, particularly in this case, i find 'heater' to be pretty appropriate, too), but, egh, it wouldn't impress me in and of itself with no other descriptors.

i don't think 'blasters' will automatically assume that term when they're eventually made (to be honest, those sci-fi blasters don't seem to much of an improvement over modern guns in killing power) any more than when they legalize marijuana they'll have a name brand 'joints'. i guess it's possible, hard to predict, that. i certainly wouldn't bet the farm on that being a foregone conclusion, lol.

in my mind, we're just supposed to be better than using stock names but for a few instances (btw, the crit was the first chapter of a novel, not a short story, where i wouldn't have argued so vehemonantly against the terms). just when you rely on generic terms to describe your world you wind-up with a generic world, no?

Fahim · Jan 25, 2006

preyer said:
just when you rely on generic terms to describe your world you wind-up with a generic world, no?

Or you create a world that the reader is already familiar with without cluttering it with lots of new fancy terms that you have to explain or leave the reader guessing about

Just let it go Preyer, it's all POV and that's what makes the world so interesting. You think one way. As the other comments show, most of the others think in different ways and I think in another way. You just can't please everybody

Jarsto · Jan 25, 2006

Sage said:
Personally, I'm the opposite on these terms. "Credit" has more meaning to me as a generic form of future currency (we use credit cards already, why not just have "credit" be issued automatically through banks of the future).

When I hear "blaster" though, I am automatically connecting it to specific examples of fiction where that term was used. To me, it's actually less generic, which makes it sound more like they were "borrowing" the term from another sci-fi work.

That's just me, though.

I had exactly the same reaction. Credit is pretty generic, I wouldn't find it terribly orginal, but I wouldn't have a problem with it either. In some cases it may actually better to go with this. If character A promises character B "I'll give you thirty thingimies" for something then I may just spend a few minutes wondering whether the thingimy is a unit of currency or a small plant found on a remote planet. One way I sort of get around this myself when writing science fiction is using real currencies, either present or historical.

I'd have more of a problem with blaster, since my first reaction reading it was "Star Wars". I'm pretty sure I'd have exactly the same reaction if I read it in a story or novel. And my mind yelling "Star Wars" in the middle of reading something is one sure way to yank me right out of the story. On the other hand that may just be because I haven't read or seen enough other things with blaster to think of it as a generic term.

Sage · Jan 25, 2006

Fahim said:
You think one way. As the other comments show, most of the others think in different ways and I think in another way. You just can't please everybody

While you can't please everyone, I don't think you can say that "most of the others" disagree with preyer. Seemed people were pretty divided on the issue. I only saw a couple who said that it would distract them to have more description & even some who said that it wouldn't bother them to read these "generic" terms, said they'd think the author lacked imagination (which suggests that they are still thrown out of the story by it). It's a matter of balancing the detail with the familiar. As some suggested, if you're going to be so "generic" as to use "blaster," why not be completely generic & use "gun," a term that sci-fi fans & non-sci-fi fans alike will recognize & which probably won't throw anybody out of the work to consider whether you're borrowing it from some other work, lacking imagination, or what exactly a blaster does anyway. How detailed you get about what kind of gun/blaster might depend on how your character thinks about it (if first person or third person limited. If in third person omniscient, you can be as detailed as will help the audience separate this from today's guns or Star War's blasters).

But in the end, it's up to you. Suggestions are just suggestions, but they are usually what the critiquer thinks is best for you. I've seen good points in both directions, so don't completely dismiss one side because it isn't what you wanted to hear.

Fahim · Jan 25, 2006

Sage said:
While you can't please everyone, I don't think you can say that "most of the others" disagree with preyer.

Umm ... Sage, I think you're jumping to conclusions here and putting words in my mouth

Go back and read what I said. I didn't say that anybody disagreed with Peryer, I said, and I quote, "most of the others think in another way". I simply meant that opinion seemed to be all over the place - not as polarized as Preyer seems to think it is.

Just in case you're not clear about it, this is not about the crit, I agree with the comments as it pertains to my own work though I might not take the suggestions - as I said, you just can't please everybody. This discussion here was started by Preyer after the discussion we had on the Share your work forum and I simply responded in the spirit of debate. So let's not put word's in people's mouth, eh?

Mike Coombes · Jan 25, 2006

You guys sweat it too much. Blaster and credit have been used in pro work as much as non-pro. If the rest or your writing is exceptional, you can call them squiddlies and woobars and you'll carry it off. If your writing isn't any good, you can call them squiddlies and woobars and nobody will care.

Write. Call them what you want. If you get to publication, if your editor says "Blaster? Are you kidding? All the kids are calling them squidlies these days!" or vice versa, you say "OK Dude" and change it.

But please... and this is me begging, from the heart; Never use the word plastisteel, or any such made-up word. Dated, clunky, horrible.

Sage · Jan 26, 2006

Fahim said:
Umm ... Sage, I think you're jumping to conclusions here and putting words in my mouth Go back and read what I said. I didn't say that anybody disagreed with Peryer, I said, and I quote, "most of the others think in another way". I simply meant that opinion seemed to be all over the place - not as polarized as Preyer seems to think it is.

Just in case you're not clear about it, this is not about the crit, I agree with the comments as it pertains to my own work though I might not take the suggestions - as I said, you just can't please everybody. This discussion here was started by Preyer after the discussion we had on the Share your work forum and I simply responded in the spirit of debate. So let's not put word's in people's mouth, eh?

Whether you meant it or not, it did sound pretty much like you were saying, "Hey, preyer, give up on his debate you & I started back in SYW." Before you responded so directly to preyer, "

Just let it go Preyer," I wouldn't have known what excerpt in SYW preyer had been talking about. (Though, had I critted it, as I was tempted to by the title, I would have figured it out pretty fast.)

Since this was a discussion that extended beyond the SYW forum, we can consider it a topic for that: discussion. It is a perfectly valid topic of discussion regarding sci-fi (and fantasy by extension) novels. When do terms become generic for that genre, & do you avoid them at that point or have complete freedom to use them without needing to explain? Preyer has his opinion. I have mine. You have yours. Mike Coombes, Jarsto, azbikergirl, & everyone else who has responded here (probably more that haven't) have theirs. Either you were offended that preyer brought the question here & was telling him to "let it go" for that reason, or you were trying to restrict the civil discussion that was going on here. I didn't think either was necessary.

Fahim · Jan 26, 2006

Sage said:
Whether you meant it or not, it did sound pretty much like you were saying, "Hey, preyer, give up on his debate you & I started back in SYW."

You're missing two very important points here, Sage

One, I was telling Preyer to give up on the subject - not the rest of the group. If you can point to a line me saying (or implying) "All of you had better quit talking about this right now!" then, I'd say your response was warranted. Preyer and I had gone back and forth on this topic enough over on SYW and I didn't see the point to beating a dead horse *as far as the terms applying to my work goes*.

Two, my direct response to you was about you implying that I'd said that everybody had disagreed with Preyer's POV. I quoted the exact line in question in my response to you to show you that that was what I was talking about. You seemed to take umbrage at the fact that I had misrepresented the general concensus in this thread and I was simply correcting your misapprehension. If you go back to what I said, you would note that I was simply saying that opinion was divided - that Preyer had one opinion, that the thread opinions were varied and that I had another opinion. Nothing in that sentence would suggest (at least to me) any hint that I thought everybody disagreed with Preyer. In fact, as I've said to Preyer myself, I know where he is coming from. My objections to what he said was based on principle rather than his comments as they applied to my own story.

Of course, you can discuss the usage of generic terms as long as you want - it is a free world after all. I just don't want what I said misrepresented

preyer · Jan 27, 2006

fahim, just let it go....

zing!

lol, sorry, just thought i'd slip that in.

the idea that genericism lends itself towards familiarity is a good one, but like most everything, that's a balancing act. the old saying 'familiarity breeds contempt' is very much true. it's nice to have some basis for conceptualizing the words into images for ease's sake, but at the same time if everywhere you look inside your mind's eye is something you've seen a thousand times before, what's the use of visiting yet the same ground yet again? so, i can agree... up to a point. once you've crossed the line into *pure* generic territory, you start recognizing your own footprints. worst case scenario is you start to become a hack in your writing, like me.

i'd stopped reading fantasy for a long time. the problem was all these trilogies were the same damn thing regurgitated endlessly, mindlessly... only the names were changed. same world, same characters, same plot, same crappy song lyrics supposed to give their world 'depth,' same feel, same hero's journey crap, same maps, same goofy made up an inpronouncible names... blech! granted, the surface stuff in fantasy can be very limiting, but it was like the writers were like, 'well, if the publishers are dumb enough to print it, the readers dumb enough to buy it, then i'll be smart enough to take their money. ha! suckers.' and, yeah, i started to feel like a sucker for reading junk some jerk-weed hit the 'rote' button for and kicked-back to enjoy auto-pilot. that is, after all, how these 'enter your parameters and our computer programme will write a story for you' programmes work, from pure cliche and generics, no?

this isn't about the blaster thing anymore (although, yes, i do envision han solo's blastech when i see the term, and i really wonder how many professional author's *today* published by a respected firm *still* use that any more than they're likely to *still* use 'plastisteel'). i think i've made my main points there. no, i think generic terms in general have to be used with caution.

hyperdrive. well, okay, besides it being a vague item substantially removed from other generic terms that have potentially character-building advantages, people over-use that one, too. at the same time, there are by FAR fewer replacement terms one could use. warp core drive. well, anything with 'warp' in it is generic. (funny how space vessals are usually propelled by 'drives' and not 'engines', lol.)

'plastisteel' is another great term. agreed, waaay over-used. 'glass' simply doesn't convey the required strength and as everyone knows *everything* in the future is made out of plastic. (why this term is so forbidden yet 'blaster' is okey-dokey, smokie, i don't quite get.) 'space glass' just sounds too fourth grade. how about 'microglass'? nah, that doesn't sound right, either. besides, if plastisteel is so damn great, why don't they build the entire ship out of it? (then again, i've always wondered how a lazer beam in space caused any damage whatsoever, lol.) how about 'duraglass'? i mean, come on, this is stuff right off the top of my head here, so it can't be *that* difficult with a little thought, can it? hell, 'glassteel' is better. crap, 'plasticite.' well, sh!tfire, i must be a creative genius to be able to jam parts of two whole words together, huh? lol.

you could call these things just about anything and the context clues will tell you what it is. if you have to stop and wonder if a 'heater' is a gun or a strange race of space gerbil, what can i say, you're an idiot. i never even said every item has to have a new term, either, all i mean is that not *every* item should have a generic term, particularly those which are over-used, particularly those which can be used to better effect.

artificial gravity, well, is artificial gravity. what else can you say about it? it's generic. i think the best i could do is instead of, 'oh, crap, our artificial gravity unit is busted!' to have 'shucks, the gravity's out... *again*.'

oo, i have an idea for a great game. see ya on another thread.

Fahim · Jan 27, 2006

preyer said:
fahim, just let it go....

zing!

lol, sorry, just thought i'd slip that in.

LOL. Now all we need is for Sage to come in and think you're trying to stop this conversation and the circle would be complete

preyer · Jan 27, 2006

go play my game! uh, damnit.

Sage · Jan 27, 2006

Fahim said:
You're missing two very important points here, Sage One, I was telling Preyer to give up on the subject - not the rest of the group. If you can point to a line me saying (or implying) "All of you had better quit talking about this right now!" then, I'd say your response was warranted. Preyer and I had gone back and forth on this topic enough over on SYW and I didn't see the point to beating a dead horse *as far as the terms applying to my work goes*.

Two, my direct response to you was about you implying that I'd said that everybody had disagreed with Preyer's POV. I quoted the exact line in question in my response to you to show you that that was what I was talking about. You seemed to take umbrage at the fact that I had misrepresented the general concensus in this thread and I was simply correcting your misapprehension. If you go back to what I said, you would note that I was simply saying that opinion was divided - that Preyer had one opinion, that the thread opinions were varied and that I had another opinion. Nothing in that sentence would suggest (at least to me) any hint that I thought everybody disagreed with Preyer. In fact, as I've said to Preyer myself, I know where he is coming from. My objections to what he said was based on principle rather than his comments as they applied to my own story.

Of course, you can discuss the usage of generic terms as long as you want - it is a free world after all. I just don't want what I said misrepresented

Preyer started this topic. He did not reference your work, although he used specific terms that you & he had been discussing as examples. When you came in to this thread, the majority of your post was that Preyer should give up on the subject because people had different opinions. Either you were referencing your conversation in SYW when you told him to give it up (unnecessary, since this discussion was not directly connected to your excerpt & therefore, the "spirit of the debate" that you were using on that thread has no meaning to those who read this thread here), or you were saying that the conversation was not worth discussing (since Preyer brought up the topic. If you don't think it's worth discussing for preyer, why would it be for anyone else). Either way, I felt it was uncalled for. That's my opinion, & I'm sticking to it.

BTW, I was referring to the whole of your post. I quoted the bit I quoted because I made reference to a phrase you used in there, & because my first line was a direct response to the last line I quoted there. I'm sorry if this caused some confusion as to what I was talking about, but I assumed that you would understand that the response to your post would be about the entire post.

Anyway, I stand by my opinion that if you're going to be generic, you might as well be generic enough that any reader could get it, not just those who grew up on sci-fi. "Blaster" loses out to some sci-fi fans who envision Star Wars & think you're stealing the term & loses out to non-sci-fi fans who are wondering what this blaster thing is (I'm sure most will figure it out, but why not say "gun" if you're being generic anyway). Hyperdrive vs. warp drive vs. something you made up yourself, what's the difference? Add a "drive" in there & we'll probably figure out what a Superfast Drive engine does, at least as far as we need to know for the novel. Does it kill you to be creative? I would hope not, being writers & all. If you seriously can't come up w/ any way to show the audience what these futuristic terms/objects are w/out detracting from the flow, go for the generic. Just don't be surprised if someone mentions the lack of imagination :Shrug:

Sage · Jan 27, 2006

Fahim said:
LOL. Now all we need is for Sage to come in and think you're trying to stop this conversation and the circle would be complete

Stop it, preyer. Fahim can think what he wants!

Fahim · Jan 27, 2006

... and the circle closes

My-Immortal · Jan 27, 2006

preyer said:
i'd stopped reading fantasy for a long time. the problem was all these trilogies were the same damn thing regurgitated endlessly, mindlessly... only the names were changed. same world, same characters, same plot, same crappy song lyrics supposed to give their world 'depth,' same feel, same hero's journey crap, same maps, same goofy made up an inpronouncible names... blech! granted, the surface stuff in fantasy can be very limiting, but it was like the writers were like, 'well, if the publishers are dumb enough to print it, the readers dumb enough to buy it, then i'll be smart enough to take their money. ha! suckers.' and, yeah, i started to feel like a sucker for reading junk some jerk-weed hit the 'rote' button for and kicked-back to enjoy auto-pilot. that is, after all, how these 'enter your parameters and our computer programme will write a story for you' programmes work, from pure cliche and generics, no?

This part struck me as interesting....

Who is to blame for the lack of originality in fantasy/sci fi? Is it buying public who keep buying the latest book of some big name writer? Is it the editor for wanting to publish these books because they sell? Is it the writer who realizes he/she doesn't have to produce anything new because rehashing the old still sells?

What happens to the writers that WANT to write something different? Some will claim that if it is good and different an editor will buy it....but will they really? Has 'different' shown that it can sell as much as 'same-o, same-o'?

Just some thoughts....feel free to offer comments, I'm truly curious.

take care all -

using generic terms....

excessively spartan

Swordsman

Not a D list ego massager...

Preditors & Editors

Swordsman

Walkin' That Road

Empirical Storm Trooper

Our Lady of Parentheticals

practical experience, FTW

I really do look like this.

excessively spartan

Mad coder, lazy writer

Our Lady of Parentheticals

Mad coder, lazy writer

Guru

Our Lady of Parentheticals

Mad coder, lazy writer

excessively spartan

Mad coder, lazy writer

excessively spartan

Our Lady of Parentheticals

Our Lady of Parentheticals

Mad coder, lazy writer

Mr. Invisible