Constant Content

I liked my sentence but the editor doesn't. I'm not getting what he's saying. Here is the edit

My sentence***Things that may have festered for years now demand a voice.

Editor's comment (This is a mixed metaphor. "Issues that nagged for years may not have their say.")

Not sure...maybe because things that fester (like sores) do not have a voice or speak? Alternatively, I guess you could say something to the effect of "things that fester for years demand healing..." Poor example I know...best I could come up with off the top of my head! Anyway...that is all I can figure out! Good luck!

Perhaps April, but the context was referring to feelings.

anyhow I've decided to leave the sentence out

Today's not going my way

When we refer to feelings as "festering', we are comparing them (metaphor) to sores. It has become such a common phrase that we often don't even realize it is a metaphor. So...since sores can't "speak" you are essentially using another metaphor by comparing feelings to something with a voice...thus...a mixed metaphor. That is all I can make of it. Then again, I may be way off base!

Here is an example from Langston Hughs "A Dream Deferred"

What happens to a dream deferred?

Does it dry up
like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore--
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over--
like a syrupy sweet?

Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.

Or does it explode?

and here is a UniSource definition:

fester : When bad or unpleasant feelings fester in you, they rankle, that is, you keep thinking about them, and they become more and more unpleasant, and make you feel very bad.

Don't know then...just what I thought the editor might be refering to as a mixed metaphor. I can't figure out what else they might be talking about.

I think the main mixed metaphor issue is along what April was saying. Festering is more of a visual word than one typically associated with speaking. When you think of something festering, you might think of it bubbling, blistering, oozing. So the metaphor linked with voice doesn't quite balance.

Things that may have festered for years * now demand to be seen / now demand center stage / now get our attention (visual/visual)

or
Things that may have * silently bothered us / nagged in the background / quietly murmured * now demand a voice (sound/sound)

Also, the reviewer suggested "issues" instead of things. I'm always in favor of finding a more specific word than "thing" whenever possible

But why does the editor say "not" have their say?

Issues that nagged for years may not have their say.

What I mean is after someone dies, issues that have been burried now rise to the surface, demanding to be heard.

you say it is a visual word and you might think of something bubbling, but obviously I thought of it as nagging feelings.

Merriam Webster cites these examples:

His feelings of resentment have festered for years.

We should deal with these problems now instead of allowing them to fester.

This is the type of reference I was making.

Still, the editor's note doesn't make any sense to me at all!

(kind of makes a bad day worse)

I had a lousy day myself. Here's to a better tomorrow for us both.

I think we all understand the meaning of the original sentence. We're just trying to interpret the mixed metaphor message from the editor. Unfortunately, the editors don't seem to visit the forums anymore, so it's up to us to do our best to figure it out.

It's hard to get your head around the concept of mixed metaphors and why you shouldn't use them until you have a grasp of the difference between literal and figurative usages. Issues that have caused emotional pain for years now would be a literal way of saying issues that have festered for years now. An issue doesn't literally fester. It festers in a figurative way. It festers like a sore, and the word like always indicates a metaphor. Similarly, an issue can't literally demand to be heard or to have a voice. An issue demands a voice like a person would demand to be heard (another metaphor).

It's perfectly acceptable and in fact desirable to say that an issue is festering. Figurative language such as metaphors make writing more lively and colourful, but you can't mix this metaphor with another metaphor in the same sentence or thought group (generally it will be in the same sentence, but in the case of an extended metaphor, the comparison can go on for a whole paragraph or page).

When you say that an issue is festering, you ask the reader to see things in a figurative as opposed to a literal way. As English as a language is packed with metaphors and idioms, the reader quickly adjusts, takes your meaning, and moves on with the sentence. However, when you immediately introduce another metaphor, it forces the reader to do a double take. As one metaphor follows so quickly on the heels of another, the reader will often confuse the two. I think that our usual reading speed just doesn't allow for us to process back-to-back figurative usages. Mixing your metaphors virtually guarantees that you will lose clarity--and the reader's interest. We just can't ask readers to work that hard. My mantra has always been that the best writers don't make their readers work. The best writers do the work for the reader so that she/he can glide effortlessly over the page.

To sum up, then, you can keep one of the metaphors in the sentence, but not both. If you want your issues to fester, you can't also have them making demands (because only people and not issues can literally make demands). If you want to have them making demands, you can't have them festering at the same time. In other words, you need to change one of the figurative statements into a literal statement.

An effective way of telling if a phrase is literal or figurative is to ask yourself if it's literally true. Does a company literally launch a new product or does it introduce the product to the marketplace? Introducing is literal and launching is figurative because the product is launched like a boat would be (nautical metaphor ).

I hope this helps... at least a little.

Thanks, webscribe!

Yes, great comment webscribe.

Very helpful Webscribe. When a reader has to do a double take whatever the issue may be, it's a signal that a sentence may need tweaking.