How to write a character misinterpreting Four Candles as Fork Handles
English is full of homophones that can cause confusion when speaking, but if the two similar sounding words are spelled differently they can be clarified as soon as they are written down. However, this causes an issue when attempting to deliberately write about someone hearing the incorrect words, because as soon as they are put onto the page Schrodinger's box is opened and the reader knows exactly which version is actually being said aloud.
From a limited perspective, it can be written as the POV character hears the words, but I feel that as soon as the misunderstanding is revealed it can completely jar the reader as they realize that they have deliberately been misled. For example, written from the perspective of the shopkeeper:
A man entered the shop and approached the counter, "good day sir, I would like four candles please."
"Of course, not a problem," the shopkeeper fetched four candles from the shelf and placed them on the counter.
"No, I asked for fork handles. Handles for forks."
As soon as the reader sees this they will realize that, whilst the listener could have easily misinterpreted the speaker accidentally, the writer purposefully decided to choose the opposite way to write it than was intended by the speaker, which means that the reader doesn't get the same chance to have their own interpretation of the phrase spoken.
I did think about the possibility of sewing an element of doubt into the writing, for example:
A man entered the shop and approached the counter, "good day sir, I would like four candles please."
"Of course, not a problem," the shopkeeper was quite sure that he had heard the customer correctly, so he went to fetch four candles from the shelf, and then placed them on the counter.
"No, I asked for fork handles. Handles for forks."
The issue with this is that as soon as the writing focuses on the opportunity for the character to misinterpret what he hears, it almost certainly means that he has heard incorrectly. If he hadn't misheard, there would be no reason for the writer to mention it, which means the surprise is taken from the reader when it is revealed.
Is there any good way to write down a homophone that still leaves the correct (and incorrect) interpretation open to the reader?
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/25301. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
1 answer
The fork handles sketch was one of the most brilliant things The Two Ronnies ever did. And it depends for its success not simply on homophones, but on the manipulation of point of view. You can't write down a homophone (by definition, they are things that sound alike but are not written alike). But you can manipulate point of view.
You could do it by reporting what Ronnie Corbett hears in the sketch (the conversation from his POV), and Ronnie Barker's response when he puts those things on the counter.
You could do it by reporting what Ronnie Barker says (the conversation from his POV) and the things that Ronnie Corbett puts on the counter in response.
You could do it by putting the story in a frame and having either character relate the incident to his friends in the pub afterwards.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads