Hackneyed Phrases Sometimes Work
I just finished reading a riveting mystery—”The Guilt Trip,” by Sandie Jones. The story centers on three British couples who fly to Portugal for a wedding. They all have secrets, and one of those secrets causes a death and a surprising act of vengeance. Jones, who is British, writes with a mixture of British and North American terms—spanner for wrench, but truck for lorry. It interests me that she scatters hackneyed phrases throughout the novel, as in “at each other’s throats,” and “treading on eggshells,” and “put through the wringer,” and “all guns blazing,” which critics, particularly in writing groups, have always urged me not to do. But Jones uses them and they work, for the reader glides through the novel with a keen sense of reality. You feel you know the characters. Real people do use those hackneyed phrases in speech, so perhaps writing critics should rethink their stance on overworked phrases. How do you feel about it? I invite discussion on the issue.
I agree that if it makes sense for your character to be using such phrases, then you ought to be able to include them . . . we all know people who talk like this and I think it makes a character more real when this is part of their quirky nature.
Thanks for your response. You’ll get no argument from me.
I find the literary critics don’t really understand what the vast majority of readers like in a story. They don’t get out with non-literary people often enough to know what real dialogue sounds like!
I suppose you’re right in saying writers don’t get out with non-literary people enough to know what real dialogue sounds like or if they do, they don’t think it is sufficiently erudite to record those sayings on paper. Authors wrack their brains for original metaphors. Can’t beat the Bible or Shakespeare, though.
This was so great ! Thanks for sharing this!