Skip to main content

Writing Dialogue

 


What makes dialogue effective? I consider dialogue to be one of my strengths as a writer. It helps that I have done a bit of theater over the years and have written a number of plays, which of course, are almost all dialogue. Sometimes I hear people asking how to write good dialogue.

I say, listen to how real people talk. Pay attention when you are out among people. But, and this is a big ‘but’, written dialogue won’t sound exactly like real speech. If it did, it would sound rather boring and unimaginative. I say to listen to real talk to use as a governor. A governor is a device that keeps an engine from going too fast. Your dialogue governor should keep you from going too far into the realm that no speaking person would ever go. For example, real people (other than politicians) tend not use flowery, over elaborate descriptions when they talk. That doesn’t mean you can’t use beautiful descriptive word now and then, but be judicious with their use. You can choose to make a character bombastic and given to purple prose. That can be a valid choice for a character. But you had better only have one character like that in your story, and even then, you probably want to reign them in somewhat to keep them from being too ridiculous (unless ridiculous is what you are going for).

Consider Aldous Huxley’s character, Coleman in Antic Hay:

“Interesting mangle!” Coleman smiled his thanks. “But Bishop Odo, I fear, wouldn’t even have spared you; not even for your good works. Still less for your good looks, which would only have provoked him to dwell with the more insistency on the visceral secrets which they conceal.”

No one speaks like this in the real world. And yet, Coleman does and it works for his larger than life character. Coleman speaks like this consistently throughout the book which is another thing you should strive for. Be consistent. The way your character speaks in Chapter One should be the way they speak throughout the story. Even if they have grown as a person through the story, their manner of speaking shouldn’t change much.

There needs to be a reason for the character to be saying something, otherwise you are just wasting the reader’s time. It’s just like how you don’t need to tell us every detail of the husband’s clothing, bathroom, and breakfast routines between getting out of bed and going to work. That would be needlessly tedious. The same is true with dialogue. Cut out what doesn’t need to be there to move the story forward. Dialogue is used to develop the scene, to tell us something about the character, or to give the reader information they need to know.

When you are writing a scene, you should have goals for that scene. Your characters should have goals. The dialogue should reflect those goals. A character shouldn’t state the obvious, unless they are supposed to be dense. Good use of dialogue can tell us the education level of the character, their cultural background, show us their relationship with the other characters, show us their motivation, and emotional state.  This goes some way towards “show versus tell.” The narrator doesn’t have to tell us that Joe is hungry if Joe says, “let’s get something to eat.” This is particularly useful when writing in first person, where the narrator can not get inside the head of, say, the main character’s mother, but we can see what she is feeling through her actions or her words.  

What makes dialogue really sing is wit. Wit makes dialogue crisp and memorable. But wit is a hard thing to quantify and a hard thing to teach. It is a little like saying ‘be funny here’. Easier said than done. Wit can be overdone as well. I remember some scenes from the television show “The West Wing” that were just a little too witty. Aaron Sorkin is a witty guy, and I enjoyed his dialogue, but sometimes I would see a character come back with a snappy rejoinder that was just a bit too witty to be believed, especially if it had followed another one, which had followed another one . . .

So, the best way I can describe good dialogue is that it is heightened realism. That is, it is elevated a bit above what you might hear in a normal conversation, but not so elevated as to sound phony.  A good test for this is to read your dialogue out loud, or listen to others read it. Your ear will help to tell if it passes the B.S. meter.

(My science fiction novel Star Liner, is now available in paperback or as an e-book through Amazon and other online sources).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Second Wind

  You have heard about athletes getting their second wind? It is not that they feel better, that they are warmed up and ready to run more easily. It is not psychological (at least, not all psychological). No. There is an actual physiological truth to a second wind. It all has to do with respiration. When I say respiration, I am not talking about breathing. Respiration is a biochemical process that happens at the cellular level. It is how the cell gets energy. There are lots of chemical processes that are constantly going on in each cell, and those processes require energy. Without a constant feed of energy, the cell will die. The more demands there are on a cell, the more energy it needs. For example, every one of your muscle cells need more energy when you are running.   In fact, you won’t be able to run if the cells don’t have sufficient energy for it. The energy currency of the cell is a molecule called ATP. You may have heard that sugar is how our bodies get energy, wh...

Roy Batty Figures it out

  This is written with the assumption that the reader has seen the film Blade Runner . If you haven’t, you may not get much out of it. In one of the last scenes in Blade Runner , the killer android Roy Batty, who holds Deckard’s life in his hands, has a remarkable speech: “I've seen things... seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments... will be lost in time like tears in the rain. Time to die.” I am told that the speech that was written was not working very well, and Rutger Hauer was told to just improvise something. Wow. He nailed it. At this point in the film Roy Batty has been the villain throughout. We have been rooting for Deckard (Harrison Ford) to take him out, but it is not going well, and it seems like Batty is about to kill him. At the last second, Roy Batty pulls Deckard up, to keep him from falling to his death. Then he delivers this...

The Outsider

  I am reading The Outsider by Stephen King. The first 150 pages or so I found disturbing. Not for the reason you might think. It is not scary, not creepy in a traditional horror way, but disturbing in a tragic way. The first hundred to 150 pages is tragedy on top of tragedy. The most disturbing thing to me (it is disturbing to me anytime I encounter it in any story) is a false accusation. A man is falsely accused and may well be convicted of a horrific crime. That kind of thing disturbs my soul. It makes the whole world seem wrong. I have always been disturbed by stories with that kind of thing. And why not? It happens in real life too. That makes it all the more horrific. In the Jim Crow South, all you had to do was make an accusation against a black man to set the lynch mob in action. No need to bother with a trial. But even if there was a trial, the outcome was a foregone conclusion, innocent or not. We see Vladimir Putin inventing charges against people and they get locked up...