From: mdhangton@gmail.com   
      
   > I think the most severe situation is to make secondary or tertiary    
   > characters' dialog seem distinct, when they have the same rank or place    
   > in society, same gender and age, same ethnic speech pattern, and so on.    
   > Probably, their personality traits need to be chosen specifically to    
   > make their dialog distinct,    
      
   But that in and of itself tends to feel contrived after a bit, doesn't    
   it?    
      
   I would like to put forward the possibility that there may not actually    
   be a reason to make two tertiary characters of similar rank, place in    
   society, gender, age, etc, sound different.   (Emphasizing that we are    
   talking about "tertiary" characters.,so, by definition, they're not    
   important to the story.)   
      
   That is what Prof Friedman was getting criticized for, I think.  Maybe that's   
   only my perception.   
      
   You could argue that, in the Medieval world, the only thing important was who   
   a person served, so only the nobles ought to be characterized.   
      
   People write books where the soldiers' purpose is to beam down in a red shirt,   
   and they still get published.  There are maybe better situations to discuss as   
   examples than the one I mentioned above, but I don't like to talk about the   
   better ideas on    
   internet.   
      
   John the alcoholic is what I would call a tertiary character.  Lost cat flyers   
   cannot seem alike, but they must be progressively more desperate.   
      
   Of course, you can do what you want.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)