This is a static snapshot of hwslash.net, taken Tuesday, March 5th, 2013.
A Guide to Victorian Diction, or, How to Write like Watson

Introduction

The title says it all! A very good stylistic guide for H/W slash writers, and quite funny, too. For further specific help on a lot of grammar, your Editor Cress recommends, ironically, consulting an edition of the American Heritage Dictionary. I have found this lexicon to be invaluable in pointing out British spellings and meanings (to contrast with American English). It also features many Usage notes scattered among its entries, such as explanations for the shall vs. will usage that Irene notes here. I personally have a 1991 edition of this AH dictionary, and learn quite a lot from it. (Of course, there's no substitute for a good old-fashioned British dictionary if you can get it, especially the Oxford.)

Also useful, as I noted on my What is Slash page, are the grammar lessons on Joan the English Chick's site.


A Guide to Victorian Diction,
or, How To Write Like Watson

by Irene Adler

Some wag once said that England and America are two countries divided by a common language. Well, so are the 19th and 20th centuries. For instance, you are probably wondering right now what the hell "wag" means in that context, whereas if you had been born in the 1860s like Watson was, you would know that it referred to a person who likes making clever, witty jokes at the expense of other people. We cannot go back in time and there are no Berlitz tapes for this kind of thing, but Doyle's style is distinctive (although in many ways it is also entirely typical of Victorian writing) and it can be copied. Here are some hopefully helpful tips.

* Try to remember where the world was in 1882 (the date of Study in Scarlet). This affects not only what your characters can do, but the language you can use. For instance, you know damn well that you can't have Holmes checking his voicemail. However, it also means that you can't have him putting their relationship "on hold," because this is a phrase that only came into being after the invention of the hold button. It's amazing how many of our everyday idioms have incorporated inventions, events or social conditions that were unknown in Watson's time. Rooting those out will help you avoid spoiling the "atmosphere."

* Victorians like long sentences with a lot of clauses. They're a long-winded and sort of pompous lot, really. Especially in the narration, subordinate, subordinate, subordinate.

* Victorians also use verbs and prepositions that we consider stilted or unnatural. "Shall" is often used in place of "will" (i.e., "If you do not take me now, Watson, I shall become very vexed indeed"), and "should" used where we would use "would," (i.e., "I should think Moriarty will have a rough time getting himself out of that waterfall, shouldn't you?" or "If you had not informed me that you wanted me badly, I should never have had the courage to make a pass at you"). Other examples include the pronoun "One," which we basically have no use for (i.e., "One may produce a startling, though possibly a meretricious...Watson, stop looking at me that way").

WARNING: When overdone, the shall/should thing can become very distracting. Have a look at the stories to get a sense of where and how often to substitute.

* Contractions: Doyle does use them--but primarily in spoken dialogue, not in the narration. In other words, Holmes might say, "Don't marry Mary, Watson," but Watson wouldn't then write, "I decided I wouldn't listen to him." Even back then, speech was more informal than written English.

* Victorians introduce dialogue a little bit differently. For instance, I had a creative writing teacher who spent a long time trying to break me of coming up with synonyms for "he said," because it gave the story an archaic feel. Doyle, however, is writing at a time when the verb used was supposed to convey something about the speaker's emotional state, which means Watson is slinging synonyms like there's no tomorrow. So instead of "he said," try these fun Victorian alternatives:

...he cried
...he murmured
...he breathed
...he exclaimed
...he interjected
...he protested
...he averred
...he insisted
...he retorted
...he ejaculated

Yes, ejaculated. Way back in the day, "ejaculate" was used as a synonym for "exclaim." Of course, we here in the post-Monica era know different...

* Which brings me to another point: Many Victorian writers seem to share an innocence and ignorance about double-entendres that is absolutely frightening. Essentially, they were so sexually repressed that not only did they load their ordinary speech with sexual imagery, but they didn't even realize they were doing it. Thus, for instance, Watson can talk about Holmes "thrusting" something at him without seeing this as in any way suggestive. As a slash writer, one can have a lot of fun with this.

* Vocabulary. Many words used regularly in the Victorian era are now obsolete. Too many to list, really. But here are some guidelines:

--When you have a choice, use the Latin-derived term. (for instance, "ruminating" instead of "pondering")

--It's worth going back to the stories to get a handle on the terms used for the items commonly found either on their persons or in 221B. For instance, H&W wear dressing gowns and not bathrobes; waistcoats and not vests; they use revolvers or pistols and not guns; boots and not shoes; they have a sitting room and not a living room; and so forth.

--Holmes's vocabulary is more exotic than Watson's, or at least he's less shy about showing it off.


Comments

Now there's a guestbook from which I will copy the comments. Sample comments would look like this:

  1. Kuolema Nox; Guide to Victorian Diction; 13 May 2006
    About when to use "shall/will" and "should/would":
          I'm pretty sure that you use "shall" and "should" in the first person and "will" and "would in the second and third person. So you'd have phrases like, "Shall we retire to our chambers, Watson?" and "Would you like a fifth glass of wine?" etc.
          Confusingly enough, they swap around sometimes; if you're saying something really "strongly", it'd change, so you might say, "I shall accompany you to the Turkish baths" because you're saying it calmly, but you'd say, "I won't let you marry Mary, Watson!" because there's a greater emphasis on it.
          The example my great-aunt always taught me was this: a drowning man would say "I shan't be saved and I will drown". You see, if he'd said "I won't be saved and I shall drown", that'd mean "I WON'T let myself be saved and I'll end up drowning", which'd be silly.

Back to Sacrilege! or email the Editor.