|
|
Joined: 5/28/2011
Posts: 22
|
I read a warning the other day on an agent's blog to avoid having the dialog drive the plot. I've been much more careful since reading that, but I'd like to hear other people's thoughts.
I know the most common time I see this is in "World Building," where a character describes in detail how every little thing in this new world is different than our world. When else does this pop up? What is "the line" between long dialog and driving the plot?
|
|
Joined: 4/22/2012
Posts: 175
|
Hmm...I love dialogue. It's my favorite part of writing, and my favorite part of reading. I feel like it helps me get to know the characters - it's an opportunity for the characters' personalities to come through. You can get a good feel for how the story is going to unfold based on the words each character uses, the brevity of their communication, the pacing of their lines, and so forth.
That said, I think dialogue is a tool that can sometimes be overused. I don't care to read a story where it feels like the characters are going out of their way to describe the environment (especially if, say, they're native to the setting but they have an exchange between/among one another discussing details of the environment - that wouldn't happen in real life, and it comes across as cheesy and contrived in a story). I would rather the narration - the behind-the-scenes, as it were - fill in those gaps that need it, and that my imagination supply the rest from there. For example, the characters don't need to rap about how one of them is wearing a three-piece suit to work if this is a normal occurrence, but it might make sense to say, "So-and-So tugged at the hems of his sleeves and checked to be sure his tie was straight." From there, I can figure out that he's dressed up without needing further details about the outfit in question. On the other hand, if So-and-So doesn't normally wear a suit, and the fact that he is now wearing one is important to the plot/situation, it would make just as much sense to have another character notice and acknowledge the change as it would to supply this as background information in the course of the narrative.
My vote would be to use dialogue to bring to light those issues/facts that are important to the story but can't be divulged any other way (as in, when it's vital for one character to share information with another character) and to allow the characters to express their personalities while contributing to the plot. I think it would be disingenuous to say that dialogue can't or shouldn't contribute to the plot, because to just have a couple of characters sitting around chatting about nothing wouldn't make any sense and would be boring to read, but I do think that it needs to be applied in the interest of contributing to the plot rather than being the exclusive driver. I think plot should be driven by conflict that is primarily external to the dialogue itself - for example, in my own WIP, the characters have several disagreements that add conflict to the story, but the disagreements are secondary to the main conflict. In this case (as far as I can tell, at least, and as far as I intend), the dialogue is contributing to the existing conflict, and therefore to the plot, but the dialogue itself is not in charge of driving the plot - the primary conflict is, and that conflict has been established, for the most part, through narrative.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
Using dialogue for world building purposes can fall into the dreaded info-dump category. This should be avoided at all costs. It can come across as cheesy and contrived. As an example:
Marrion, his best friend, walked up. "Fall is coming soon to the land of Beep-meep. The leaves will be turning purple again."
"As they do every year." Marrion said. "And we will frolic under the boughs during the Shmickbop festival."
Uh, no. That was just painful to write, let alone read. The sad thing is, this is pretty common.
As a person who primarily uses third limited POV, I try to let the character's observations fill in the world building for me. If the character hasn't seen it or interacted with it, then I don't use it.
Now, if the characters are from different regions, worlds, or etc, then dialogue that points out certain aspects of the culture and such would be plausible. For example, in my WIP I have my MC and her suitor sitting on a fence discussing their family history since my MC is in an unusual position of being adopted into royalty. I have been complimented on that scene because it was a feasible way to introduce a political system without making it feel like I was trying to explain it to the audience, which could tear them out of the scene.
Dialogue itself could also be used for world building in how they speak. What are their profane words? How do they use them. What conversations are taboo? That kind of thing. For instance, I have a priest who has a mouth as foul as a sewer. She uses their god's name in vane constantly. Not once have I said outside of dialogue who the ruling god was in her religion or if she was devout. I let her words do all the talking. The only thing that the audience knows about her religious institution is what shows up in her dialogue. And, the most important thing, I never use it to tell the audience anything. (What?!) I use it to tell other characters things that they don't know.
Say that your MC has no idea what is going on, but the other characters do. Asses the situation. Does the audience know? No, then that may require a long dialogue session to relay this information, but make sure that it's broken up with questions and reactions from the MC. It can be used as a formative moment. Yes, then don't repeat the information. Find some way to skip that moment unless you have something else drastic that is planned. People don't like repetition. It's tiresome.
|
|
Joined: 10/20/2011
Posts: 350
|
I think I understand the warning, though I don't think it was worded properly. I know when I started writing, I realized I was good at writing dialogue. And I relied heavily on it to the point that people who were reading my stories said they were just reading scripts, not stories. I worked on description and slowly started to find a balance between the two.
And that's the key--finding balance. We have lots of mundane conversations everyday. You don't have to write those. The best advice I got was to think of it this way: dialogue exists to help the reader, not the character.
|
|
Joined: 4/6/2012
Posts: 12
|
This is an interesting conversation. I tend to enjoy dialogue but can think of several examples where it seems almost contrived because the author is using it to inform the reader. The results of doing this are awkward, to say the least.
But, if it's properly executed I don't understand why a writer can't use dialogue to help propel their story forward. Afterall, most stories have one or more characters that are central - it is those characters and their actions for which the story was written - so it makes sense that communication between them could drive the plot. Right?
Addy
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
I get what you're saying, Addy, but conversations to drive the plot have to be well done. It's like I said, it had to be used to develop something that isn't just the plot. Words effect people. How the lines are said means everything. Dialogue is not the characters talking to the audience. It is the characters talking to each other, as I have said. They are going to keep secrets, lie, form alliances, and manipulate. What they tell another depends on their relationship with that person. Are they good friends? Do they trust each other? Is their any fear involved? This all has to be considered when also writing plot driving dialogue. Characters are what people connect to.
Sorry, Alexandria, but I have disagree that dialogue helps the reader. I've read passages where no dialogue was more effective than those with dialogue. Dialogue, no matter how "plot driving" it's supposed to be can still be frivolous. Just because a character says something, doesn't mean they have conviction behind it. Internal dialogue, that which is unsaid, can be more effective.
|
|
Joined: 4/22/2012
Posts: 175
|
I have to take a stance between the both of you, LeeAnna and Alexandria. I think that in the majority of cases, dialogue needs to have something in it for the reader - otherwise, what's the point of including it? If it doesn't relay, whether through words or tone, something that gives the reader more information about either the plot or the characters, then it's (at best) superfluous. That said, dialogue shouldn't be used as an info-dump unless the story really, truly calls for it and it can be executed in a way that doesn't pull the reader out of the story or bore them to tears. All dialogue has to make sense in the context of the story, though, no doubt about that.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
I get what you're saying, Nicki. I think my point is getting lost somewhere in my spew. Dialogue does have to fit in the story. I don't like filler and fluff, but I was trying to say that the words must sound like the character would say them from one to another character. They are saying their words without knowing that the audience is there (unless they're Deadpool). It shouldn't sound like they're filling the audience in or info-dumping. The characters are having a conversation, and it should sound like a conversation. When I said dialogue can still be frivolous, I meant pointless and unnecessary.
Here, I'll try to be more clear. The dialogue must be relevant to the story or to the character's development. The dialogue must sound fluid, like a real conversation unless there is supposed to be an element of awkwardness involved. Assess what the audience knows, and try not to repeat. Dialogue should never be an info dump no matter the circumstances. Info dumping, period, is a no-no. The dialogue should sound like it is for the other character(s) sake, and not for the audience. Even though it is essentially for the audience because it must be relevant to the story, it cannot sound that way.
|
|
Joined: 4/6/2012
Posts: 12
|
I agree, LeeAnna. Dialogue needs to fit within the story and should not be used to fill up space or pad word count. If it doesn't add to the story, it doesn't belong. But that goes for every aspect of the text.
I'm still not sure why dialogue cannot be used to push the plot, though. In fact, I would go so far as to state the opposite: dialogue that doesn't drive the plot would be pretty pointless except for that which is used to help define the characters.
|
|
Joined: 4/22/2012
Posts: 175
|
I guess when I think of dialogue driving the plot, I think of the dialogue being the plot - like, the point of a conversation is to force or resolve a conflict (it may just be all in how we're defining "plot" itself, too - for me, the plot is the major conflict and the steps the characters go through to resolve it, which doesn't necessarily require dialogue). I think dialogue can throw a wrench into works already messed up by some other major conflict, and I think dialogue can provide part of a resolution, but I don't think you can or should rely on dialogue to create or be the plot itself. Dialogue is just a tool that contributes to the unfolding of the plot, but in my experience, it's not a driving force for it.
|
|
|
|
 if y'write well enough, you can make your own rules.
|
|
Joined: 10/20/2011
Posts: 350
|
@LeeAnna: "Sorry, Alexandria, but I have disagree that dialogue helps the reader. I've read passages where no dialogue was more effective than those with dialogue. Dialogue, no matter how "plot driving" it's supposed to be can still be frivolous. Just because a character says something, doesn't mean they have conviction behind it. Internal dialogue, that which is unsaid, can be more effective."
That's not at all what I meant! I had made a short post as I had to go someplace else. I agree that some information is better given in narrative or other ways that aren't dialogue.
What I meant was that dialogue, like everything else, needs to serve a purpose. It was advice for either writing dialogue or editing it. If the dialogue doesn't advance the plot or develop a character, it is unnecessary, in my opinion.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
Sorry, about the misunderstanding Alexandria. I agree that dialogue needs to have a purpose, whether for plot or character development.
|
|
Joined: 10/20/2011
Posts: 350
|
That's okay, LeeAnna, it was partly my fault. As I said, I was running off and therefore didn't really explain my statement.
|
|
Joined: 11/17/2011
Posts: 1016
|
I think that we should worry about writing what is appropriate and natural and necessary to the unfolding of the story, while also conveying a flavor, a distinctive voice.
Styles change. Lavish description, which was once generally acknowledged as bedrock preparation, is out of favor. Dialogue is in. I feel that it is overused, that it can be a crutch, but that it can work marvelously, (I can't lay hands on an example at the moment) to the point that I can't see the story handled any other way.
The genre also has a lot to do with it. A conspiratorial thriller, set in a familiar world, needs a lot less explaining, and, probably, more verbal interaction. Alien epics require a good deal of scene setting. Some can be conveyed in dialogue, but I favor old-fashioned exposition, a narrator's voice doing the shovel work.
Do what feels right to you. As GD says, if y'write well enough, you can make your own rules. He says it with a wink, or whatever that doo-dad means. I say it with a straight face.
I take Dylan's advice: Don't follow leaders. Watch the parking' meters. No one writes a masterpiece by following rules.
I read here, If the dialogue doesn't advance the plot or develop a character, it is unnecessary. Alexandria also says, We have lots of mundane conversations everyday. You don't have to write those. I take this to include material which does not appear to be relevant.
Much of my dialogue, hell!, much of what I write, period, would fall into this frivolous category. I think of my rambling as discovery, unearthing life stories which come in handy later on, often to my astonishment. If you grill me on any immediate usefulness, I will confess: It sounds good. And I like it.
My book, my rules.
My rule is: No Rules.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
I understand why you might want to ramble, Mimi, but I can't allow myself to do that. I have a tendency to run in 20 directions with my prose doing windmills, belly flops, and trying to fly only to fall off of cliffs. I need some form of order. Now, that doesn't mean I don't have fun with my dialogue. Read my stuff and you'll see.
|
|
Joined: 11/17/2011
Posts: 1016
|
LeeAnna,
I have meant to look at your work for some time. I have two or three promised reviews on my list, and my reviews take time, but I am certainly going to add you to my queue.
I write the way I've lived my life. I am one of the dwindling number of the acid-dropping, brown-rice gobbling, anti-establishment flower children of yore. I'm still thumbing my nose at convention.
I half expect a curator to show up at my door and cart me off to the Smithsonian, for an exhibit on The Hippies: A Colorful Period /The Last Hurrah. Maybe he'll set it up next to the dinosaurs.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
Nothing wrong with hippies. I'm part of group of people who write on typewriters. (No, I'm not one of those beanie wearing, iPhone toting hipsters. Something about screens makes my brain run in panic.) I understand bucking convention. There is nothing wrong with the occasional conversation that doesn't seem to belong. My point is that even if it isn't involved with the plot in the slightest, it should reveal some aspect of character.
I have a ton of works waiting patiently for my attention too, but my novel keeps calling my name. I think it's absorbed the question my family has asked me for years, "Is it done yet?" I do warn you, Hands of Ash is not a short work, and it will only get longer.
|
|
Joined: 11/17/2011
Posts: 1016
|
I'm trying to find my way, as are we all. Sometimes I get a little hyper.
I will definitely read Hands of Ash. I advise you not to read my thing until I post a new draft. And God knows when that will be. I've got a lot to think over.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
I'll remember to wait. Thanks for reading my work, Mimi.
|
|
Joined: 5/28/2011
Posts: 22
|
Wow, I go offline for a few days and the discussion I started explodes. Certainly some ideas to think about here.
It's interesting how different writers use different methods, but the more I've thought about it, if the dialog seems natural it's usually going to work. I've recently read the Mistborn series by Brandon Sanderson which had a lot of scheming dialog, more dialog than I'm used to seeing. And it worked. He snuck in some plot and some world building, but in an effective, natural way.
That being said, I imagine it can still go to far. And if it's really too far, with just a little bit of humor, then it's probably a Joss Wheden screenplay.
|
|
|
|
Personal opinion:
The advice that generated this thread was against talking heads, not against using dialog too much or too little. The minute you have two characters discussing a third you have shot yourself in the foot. That's true on film and in print. To quote David Mamet:
"HERE ARE THE DANGER SIGNALS. ANY TIME TWO CHARACTERS ARE TALKING ABOUT A THIRD, THE SCENE IS A CROCK OF SHIT."
His rant to the staff of The Unit (http://movieline.com/2010/03/23/david-mamets-memo-to-the-writers-of-the-unit) is well worth the time it takes to read it.
|
|
Joined: 5/28/2011
Posts: 22
|
Good rant. I also like the note about the phrase "as you know." It drives me crazy when someone talks to me about something even after I tell them I already know it. It's almost as bad when two characters do that in a story, though at least in that case I can skip that page or change the channel without being rude.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
Thank you for the link, Jay. I often wonder why people who can't write manage to get shows in Hollywood. It's good to know someone cares to make it good.
And I agree that too much or too little dialogue can be a deterrent. That said, it is also very hard to decide when to end, but that is what editing is for.
|
|
Joined: 5/22/2012
Posts: 4
|
Ah yes, the old "As you know, Bob..." trap. My wife (also a writer) and I regularly toss that out at each other in real life when things are getting boring. We'll get cut off in traffic, and I'll turn and say "As you know, Bob, people in this society often pull in front of cars to express sexual dissatisfaction."
To address the original post, I feel that dialogue and narrative ought to be balanced. I tend not to enjoy huge blocks of text and grow bored with huge hunks of expository granite. However, too much "white space" on the page can make the story watery and insipid.
I feel that dialogue may not drive the plot... but it does drive the pacing. It's the accelerator pedal of storytelling. I like to lead in with dialogue, first page, specifically because it sweeps the reader up immediately. But you have to let up on the pedal, or the reader will grow exasperated.
|
|
Joined: 5/28/2011
Posts: 22
|
As a side note, "let's go over the plan again" when its the first time for the reader is just one step down from "as you know." I just saw that in a book I've been reading and thought I would rant.
|
|
Joined: 6/14/2012
Posts: 194
|
Dialogue should be plot-relevant and character-revealing and situation-revealing. I would include in dialog all the interpersonal communication (much of it not verbal, but gestures, facial expressions, actions, etc.)
Even "As you know, Bob" can be used IF the character speaking is the prosy, obsessive compulsive control freak who tells everyone everything multiple times, especially if it's widely known and obvious.
"As you know, Bill, our policy here is for everyone to chip in at least $5 for birthdays--" "I know, Fred; I already have--" "--And then to sign the card by 10 am on the day of the birthday--" "Yes, Fred, I know: I signed it already." Not for the first time, Bill considered stuffing Fred's mouth with feathers and locking him in the broom closet, but losing this job would be only the start of it.
A character speaking in cliches conveys character, if the writer makes it clear (with other characters) that this one is intended to be boring and annoying (or surrounded by Faithful Followers who believe every cliche.)
As in real life, dialogue can--and should--convey much more about the situation and the speaker(s) than the dictionary meanings of the words used. The information the writer wants the reader to acquire from that conversation may not be in the quoted words themselves, but in the way they are said, the actions that accompany them, the surroundings in which they are said. More often, there's information for the reader in all of these, at more than one level.
Don't let characters sit around and chat idly (even when it's in character for them to do so.) Make sure that what they're talking about is plot-relevant and lasts only as long as needed to convey what the reader needs to know. (I have to cut conversations for this reason..garrulous characters can be fun to write, but they will run way with a chapter or several if you don't find ways to shut them down.) Garrulous characters work best as non-POV, so your point of view person can be called away, remember an appointment, or just get bored and walk off. Or have a another character interrupt, change the topic, whatever it takes. Be especially wary of garrulous characters who like what you like--your enthusiasms. (Or as someone once said to me "Not everybody is that interested in fly fishing in a military SF book...")
Understanding and use of "register" (how people change the way they speak when conversing with others in different categories) enriches dialogue and adds complexity to both character and plot. Does someone talk baby-talk to a six year old? Does someone talk in a job interview the same way as to friends in the bowling alley? (Not a good tactic...) Lee & Miller, in their Liaden books, make register explicit in the formality of Liaden culture, contrasting it with the less formal (but still complex) Terran cultures. But register doesn't have to be made explicit to work on readers...most readers have experienced enough change in register to pick up on it with only subtle cues.
|
|
|
|