Whatever. The theme of this thread is outlined in the first post and is more to do with particular cliched words and phrases, with the aim of helping the more inexperienced writer avoid incurring the wrath of literary agents and publishers.
That's quite rude, and unnecessary. Also, that entire passage is talking about cliche and ways around it. I really don't see what your problem is.
And we're not 'allowed' to go into any detail on any particular aspect of it? To discuss it at a secondary level? I'm not being facetious, I just genuinely find it odd that people talking in-depth on the subject you prompted us to talk about is a problem.
...and looking himself in the mirror, because the author can't find another way of letting the reader know what he looks like.
If someone takes the time to give you a considered response, it's pretty rude to answer them with 'Whatever'. I find that rude, personally.
"You digressed. I was pointing this out." In which case I shall self-flagellate until the demons be gone. "Modern English, that's all. Millions use it every day." No wonder. I don't speak English. Not a word.
Whatever A word, now cliche, used as a response to express ambivalence to a given state of affairs. I'm nothing if not subtle .
Lots of character-description cliches: rippling hair, silky hair, sparkling eyes, liquid eyes, eyes that are limpid pools of anything, alabaster skin, silky skin, baby-soft skin. There is the question of when an image becomes a cliche and when that cliche simply becomes a standard way to say things. For example "silky hair" doesn't really call attention to itself in a cliche sort of way, at least to me. It's only a fraction more self-conscious than "black hair". Which leads me to more cliches like ebony hair, midnight hair, carrot-red hair, flaming-red hair... OK, I've run down. ChickenFreak
Congratulations, ChickenFreak! On two counts! An excellent post! Your thousandth post! A double-whammy of forum excellence! The verbal garbage you highlight should serve as a reminder that all writers need to think. Deeply. Carefully. Well. As in music, the goal should be to produce material which leaves one sighing in awe, and not groaning in despair.
Lets take "sparkling eyes".... The task ahead is to ditch this in favour of something better. If we begin with cliche: He was captivated by her sparkling eyes. (Utter nonsense or what!) The sparkle in her eyes left him feeling weak at the knees. There is a slight improvement in the first part of the sentence, but the rest is gross cliche. So, how can we express that original sentiment? He'd never felt so humbled. All the wonders of the known universe paled into insignificance in comparison to her eyes. Don't think so! Her eyes were those of a woman who knew what she wanted. Pulp! Which is okay sometimes. But so far, nothing found as an alternative to "sparkling". "You know the way the sea looks in the evening, when the last of the light starts flickering about on the waves? When you've had a couple of beers and a smoke, and you sit down and start thinking about everything. And your thoughts keep stopping short of going anywhere, because all you are aware of is the light, in greens and blues and all the colours you've ever seen, dropping specks of rainbow tinsel on the crests of the waves, and suddenly nothing else matters. "I feel the same way when she looks at me. Every time. It's so sweet it hurts." Bingo! Not a cliche in sight! Well...........very nearly . The last sentence.................but it's monologue...............
As for sparkling eyes. Ditch the 'sparkling' and it's flat description, which is fine. I think it's the word sparkling that's the cliche in and of itself. "He was captivated by her eyes; through them she was using her demon-powers to beam a small forcefield around him. He was trapped." Teehee.
Her eyes excited him. He felt helpless under their spell. First sentence - normal, "I'll scrape t' butter off me toast and give it t' dog" English. Second sentence - nasty! You are right about the use of "eyes" without a preceding adjective, Slinkywizard. Much better! (Where do we get these usernames from?)
In my current novel, my main character has them plucked out in the first chapter, so there are exceptions. But, oddly, I find myself agreeing with you on that one. Unless vital to the story, talk of eyes is rather redundant.
If we were to avoid all the things that previous generations of writers has already dealt with we would soon run out of topics to write about. there would be no more romance stories, thrillers or even vampire stories. How boring! some things are worth repeating, because they're pleasant to read about. Maybe just try and refresh the old phrases by adding a new touch to them or finding new adjectives to describe them with is enough to make it seem less clichée-y.
One might indeed! Or to any other part of the body. Porn does well on it, so they would have me believe. I think we need to accept that there will always be stories involving love and sexuality, even in gruesome tales. The eyes are the window of the soul ....... ........excuse me, could you pass me that guillotine, please? Okay, thanks. I'll just kneel down here, and you pull on that rope.........
