Thread: 'That's what he/she/they/it said...'

I wanted to start a new post to discuss an area of prose writing I think get's generally overlooked (or perhaps just underestimated) by many writers and especially those seeking to improve their own writing. The issue of dialogue. Or, more specifically, writing coherent, well executed and -above all- convincing dialogue.

To start, I would like to point out that I do not consider myself to be any kind of expert in this field, nor is this intended to be any kind of a tutorial. Actually quite the opposite. I use dialogue a lot but actually its the one aspect of my writing I worry about the most, mainly because it seems such a crucial area to 'get right' and yet, at the same time, one with so few 'rules' associated with it. So please treat this as merely a forum (or a forum within a forum) for those of us who might like to discuss the following fundamental questions when injecting the spoken word into your narrative:

- What aspects of a character are best expressed through dialogue, as opposed to through standard narrative? How might we express these aspects?
- What is the best way to illustrate emotion, volume and/or suspense in dialogue? For example, is the only way to give the impression of anger to write '...Jim said, angrily'? What are the functions of different verbs in dialogue attribution? Are '...Jim snarled', '...growled Jim', etc better than adverb use? What kinds of words/phrases could one use within the speech to portray a certain emotion, such as anger, without actually bearing it out in the rest of the writing?
- Is it possible for certain words and phrases to 'lose power' by heavy usage? Does a character who uses the F-Bomb every other word have the same impact as the same basic character who uses is just once or twice, or even never at all?
- Can you write a short-story using ONLY dialogue? I recommend trying it, it's great practice!

This ought to be an interesting discussion, since there are so many facets of dialogue and effective use of dialogue. So, to start 'er off:

For me, I don't use a lot of dialogue tags. I like using actions or gestures to illustrate emotions - slamming a fist into the wall, hand trembling, pacing back and forth - that sort of thing. Facial expressions, too, although those get complicated to describe with becoming cliché. Or occasionally showing the reaction of others to what's said ('surprised at his vehemence' type of thing), though I'm not fond of that. Swearing or foul language isn't uncommon in my dialogues, either, although those can be used to show a great number of emotions, not just anger or frustration, so that kind of goes back to the first two.

I definitely think that one has to be careful about over-using certain words or phrases. In other discussions about swearing, for example, I've maintained that just because real people use f*** every other word doesn't mean it works in fiction. Other phrases or indicators can be used to replace those words and still let the readers know that, yes, this character swears a lot. I also think characters can have 'pet phrases' or words, but one has to be careful not to abuse them either. Readers will learn to recognize the speaker via that pet phrase without being hit over the head with it.

Lastly, I think it's possible to write a dialogue-only short story - however, without beats, it would have to be very, very short to maintain interest. Otherwise, I think one would just be having the characters tell the reader what's going on, which is just as boring as the author telling constantly.

Originally Posted by luckyscars

- Can you write a short-story using ONLY dialogue? I recommend trying it, it's great practice!

It's called a play.

Originally Posted by qwertyman

It's called a play.

i disagree. to me a play is formatted in a script form, almost always with some 'stage directions' and written for the purpose of performance.

"I suck at writing dialogue," she said with a sideways glance, as if hoping to be ignored.

Well, yes the formatting would be different, that doesn't affect the contents. Stage directions? Okay, what about a radio play?

I wrote this as a radio play and a screenplay. This is the screenplay, (I've lost the radio play) but I think you could see how the stage directions could be dispensed with. Leaving a chapter heading, even that could be done away with if you wanted and establish the time of day and location in dialogue.

http://www.writingforums.com/scripts...-language.html

Originally Posted by luckyscars

- What aspects of a character are best expressed through dialogue, as opposed to through standard narrative? How might we express these aspects?

Character interaction. If you have to move the scene along through dialogue, that's fine, but it really shines as a literary tool when two or more people are holding a conversation. Everyone has their own point of view, and the contrasting (and possible conflicting) dialogue among them can really reveal and develop who the characters are.

Originally Posted by luckyscars

- What is the best way to illustrate emotion, volume and/or suspense in dialogue? For example, is the only way to give the impression of anger to write '...Jim said, angrily'? What are the functions of different verbs in dialogue attribution? Are '...Jim snarled', '...growled Jim', etc better than adverb use? What kinds of words/phrases could one use within the speech to portray a certain emotion, such as anger, without actually bearing it out in the rest of the writing?

"Jim snarled" is almost always better than "Jim said angrily." Never use a longer phrase when a shorter one will do, after all. As far as using the spoken words to convey emotion, just listen to how people talk in real life. When someone is angry, they're going to accentuate the negative. When they're happy, just the opposite will happen. Nervous people will struggle with their words, and somber people will speak slowly with lots of pauses. Dialogue presentation is just as important as dialogue content.

Originally Posted by luckyscars

- Is it possible for certain words and phrases to 'lose power' by heavy usage? Does a character who uses the F-Bomb every other word have the same impact as the same basic character who uses is just once or twice, or even never at all?

Of course not, but that's the whole point. It's just like how showing a normally happy person be upset is a lot more striking than showing a moody person with the same emotion.

Dialog is simple. You put people in your head, listen to them, and write what they say.

Once I figured that out, it wasn't a struggle anymore.

I'm naturally charismatic and among other things have a silver tongue. I'm also a lier to the extent of prowess where I can detect other peoples lies(ever watched lie to me?). So when I want to write dialogue, I speak it out to an invisible/imagined audience and more often than not it comes out realistic and convincing.

Lets go through your list.

For the first, whatever you want basically. Remember however that actions speak louder than words. It's not a matter of dialogue or narrative, it's a matter of showing a part of a character rather than saying it. For example, let's say I have a character likes a certain color. I'd rather repeatedly show his affection for that color in his choices/observations than say it through narrative.

Best way to illustrate emotion is by showing it, yet again. I could write "You've got to be joking, we went all this way for that fucking thing?" and leave it there, naturally you know the person is angry. I could also, however, add "Jake snarled, slamming his fist on the table, at the injustice of it all." this doesn't only now solidify his anger, but adds another level of depth to it. Nothing is removed because I showed his anger, and then went on to embelish it.

Also vocabulary is used for wealth of text and variation. Your question is odd, becausen naturally we are all programmed to know emotions by their natural reactions. No one snarls happily just like no one growls reassuringly. You can show emotions without giving it away, but thats an art of subtelty and practise.

Yes, repeated use of certain things tires them out.

Best way to illustrate emotion is by showing it, yet again. I could write "You've got to be joking, we went all this way for that fucking thing?" and leave it there, naturally you know the person is angry. I could also, however, add "Jake snarled, slamming his fist on the table, at the injustice of it all."

When you place things after the event people have to adjust their 'headset' after the event as well, I would prefer,

Jake snarled, slamming his fist on the table, at the injustice of it all. "You've got to be joking, we went all this way for that f***ing thing?"

And please leave swear words out of posts.

- What is the best way to illustrate emotion, volume and/or suspense in dialogue? For example, is the only way to give the impression of anger to write '...Jim said, angrily'? What are the functions of different verbs in dialogue attribution? Are '...Jim snarled', '...growled Jim', etc better than adverb use? What kinds of words/phrases could one use within the speech to portray a certain emotion, such as anger, without actually bearing it out in the rest of the writing?

Sometimes dialogue is just the moment when the pot boils over. Through much of the narrative, the author should be setting up a characters anger so that when he finally does speak, his anger is so obvious that there is no need for the kind of (atrocious) dialogue tags you mention.

As for what kinds of words/phrases to use -- impossible to answer. This is all character-based, or should be. What one does or says should come from who they are. Maybe the character rubs his hands on his pantlegs when he's red in the face with anger. Maybe he does it over and over. Maybe because he likes the warm feeling of friction on his palms.

My mentor has an allergy to adverbs because "you shouldn't tell us, but show us"

"I'm sick of this!" he said angrily, then hung up the phone.

vs.

"I'm sick of this!" He slammed down the receiver.

Originally Posted by Olly Buckle

When you place things after the event people have to adjust their 'headset' after the event as well, I would prefer,

Jake snarled, slamming his fist on the table, at the injustice of it all. "You've got to be joking, we went all this way for that f***ing thing?"

i see your logic, but actually i don't find it makes much of a difference whether the action is before the dialogue or after. even if there is a difference in effect, both types of use may be equally useful in different ways. in my opinion whether one should begin with the dialogue or action depends on which has more impact, so the stronger should come first. so while 'Jake snarled, slamming his fist on the table, at the injustice of it all. "You've got to be joking, we went all this way for that f***ing thing?"' could be more powerful, in that a 'slamming' action probably has greater impact than the question that follows, what about a line such as ''Prepare to die,' said the Captain as he rubbed his hands together hungrily'. don't you think that order is more powerful than the one you advocate? 'The Captain rubbed his hands together hungrily. "Prepare to die," he said.'

And please leave swear words out of posts.

Why?

Originally Posted by luckyscars

Why?

Easy answer: read the Rules of this site.

Ox is right, but in more detail. Please leave swear words out of posts, they are allowed in creative writing, where appropriate and with a warning, but we reckon ourselves a family friendly site. This means we are available in public institutions, like schools and hospitals where we used to be banned.