Admittedly, we might be a bit biased,
but we won’t apologize (and we certainly won’t use parentheses to apologize!).
In fiction writing, parentheses are used
mainly to provide additional, nonessential details to the narrative and for
satire. They work very similarly to em dashes—if you aren’t familiar with this
type of punctuation, then please review the article entitled, Dashes—They’re Like M&M’s.
However, parentheses are different from em dashes, as an entire sentence can be
contained in parentheses—not just a word or phrase.
Case 1, word:
Holding a soda in one hand (right) and
a bag of chips in the other (left), Stephen couldn’t ask for a better treat
after a hard day’s work.
Case 2, phrase:
Lindsey sat at the bar (the Hungry
Henry had been her go-to spot for over twenty years) and drank away her
sorrows until the sun came up.
Case 3, sentence:
None of the Lions’ alumni knew what the
score was. (44-22, Bears over Lions.) They were too excited to reunite with old
friends to notice.
However, the problem with parentheses is
that they are intentionally designed to be abrupt and break the momentum of the
narrative. Worse, information contained within parentheses is nonessential to
the sentence, and the longer the parenthetical expression, the further the
reader is pulled from the heart of the story.
Case 1, word:
Holding a soda in his right hand and a
bag of chips in his left, Stephen couldn’t ask for a better treat after a hard
day’s work.
Case 2, phrase:
Lindsey sat at the bar of the Hungry
Henry, which had been her go-to spot for over twenty years, and
drank away her sorrows until the sun came up.
Case 3, sentence:
The Lions were losing to the Bears,
22-44, but the Lions’ alumni didn’t notice—they were too excited to reunite
with old friends.
Now, we know it’s easy to make a few
examples just to prove our own point. We also know that we’re hypocrites,
considering that we use parentheses in these articles. Important caveat:
non-fiction, wherein the writing tends to be more formal and informative, is a
good place to use parentheses, especially when offering clarifying details and
examples with i.e. and e.g. parenthetical phrases.
Side note: ever wondered what i.e. and
e.g. mean? I.e. is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase id est, which
means “that is.” E.g. is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase exempli gratia,
which means “for example.” Is that difficult for you to remember? Here’s a
better way to think about it. I.e. means in essence. E.g. means examples
given. Important punctuation note: use a comma after the abbreviation, as
both i.e. and e.g. are acting as introductory clauses—which are dependent—for
whatever proceeding information you offer the reader.
Many breakfast foods (e.g., cereal,
orange juice, and pancakes) probably aren’t as healthy as you think.
Cereal, orange juice, and pancakes
(i.e., breakfast foods) probably aren’t as healthy as you think.
Get the picture? Good. Let’s get back to
fiction writing. Time to use some real-world, well-known examples to further
exemplify the fact that fiction stories are better served without the use of
parentheses.
Excerpt from Stephen King’s Under the
Dome:
When Nora Robichaud and Elsa Andrews
rounded the bend just to the south (they had been animatedly discussing the
smoke rising to the northeast for several minutes now, and congratulating
themselves on having taken the lesser traveled highway this forenoon), Wanda
Debec was dragging herself up the white line on her elbows. Blood gushed down
her face, almost obscuring it.
While the parenthetical sentence is
informative, the parentheses slow down the sentence and may even force the
reader to reread the sentence just to understand what is happening—as it did
for us. Perhaps it’s better to rewrite the sentence to be more engaging for an
audience.
While animatedly discussing the smoke
rising to the northeast, Nora Robichaud and Elsa Andrews rounded the bend just
to the south as Wanda Debec was dragging herself up the white line on her
elbows. Blood gushed down her face, almost obscuring it.
Smaller sentence with action that’s
easier to follow. What, still don’t like it? Well, we can rephrase this a
different way:
When Nora Robichaud and Elsa Andrews
rounded the bend just to the south—having animatedly discussing the smoke
rising to the northeast—Wanda Debec was dragging herself up the white line on
her elbows. Blood gushed down her face, almost obscuring it.
Here, we’re using em dashes instead of
parentheses. While feeling a little less formal, which we prefer in fiction, we
also change the parenthetical phrase from there had been to having in
order to create our dependent phrase necessary for the em dashes.
Still too wordy? Eliminate the
parentheses altogether, and the sentence can just as easily be read as follows:
When Nora Robichaud and Elsa Andrews
rounded the bend just to the south, Wanda Debec was dragging herself up the
white line on her elbows. Blood gushed down her face, almost obscuring it.
So, what has been lost by removing the
parentheses? A gossiping conversation between two old women? Considering that
the action is regarding Wanda Debec, this is very little lost while gaining
much in the way of translation.
Still not convinced? Let’s rewrite
without losing any information.
Nora Robichaud and Elsa Andrews had
been animatedly discussing the smoke rising to the northeast for several
minutes now, congratulating themselves on having taken the lesser traveled
highway this forenoon. When they rounded the bend just to the south, Wanda
Debec was dragging herself up the white line on her elbows. Blood gushed down
her face, almost obscuring it.
By moving the parenthetical information
to the sentence above, we can keep all of the information while creating a
smoother transition between Nora and Elsa’s conversation to Wanda’s bloody
condition.
Excerpt from Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita:
My very photogenic mother died in a
freak accident (picnic, lightning) when I was three, and, save for a pocket of
warmth in the darkest past, nothing of her subsists within the hollows and
dells of memory, over which, if you can still stand my style (I am writing
under observation), the sun of my infancy had set…
While the narrator’s flippant disregard
for his mother’s death is humorous, the use of parentheses slows down this
sentence and makes it even more difficult to comprehend, despite being a
complex style to begin with. This overcomplexity can easily pull a reader out
of the story.
Now, without the parentheses:
My very photogenic mother died in a
freak accident when I was three, and, save for a pocket of warmth in the
darkest past, nothing of her subsists within the hollows and dells of memory,
over which, if you can still stand my style, the sun of my infancy had set…
This looks better and is far easier to
read, in our opinion. While we understand that some literature purists would be
outraged from removing the famous “(picnic, lightning)” line, we don’t
understand why this information can’t just be moved to a different part of the
paragraph to provide a better transition. Like this:
My very photogenic mother died in a
freak accident when I was three—picnic, lightning. Save for a pocket of warmth
in the darkest past, nothing of her subsists within the hollows and dells of
memory, over which, if you can still stand my style, the sun of my infancy had
set…
Here, using an em dash allows us to save
the narrator’s humor while also placing picnic, lightning in a spot of
the writing that doesn’t disturb the flow of the story. Yet again, em dashes
can do everything that parentheses can do, but better.
