Approaching Dialogue in Historical Fiction

Cristin_B · Jan 23, 2012

About a month ago an agent contacted me, asking to read a partial of my ms. (She had read my pitch paragraphs on a writer's website). I sent her the first chapter, but let her know that the manuscript isn't finished, and I'm not yet looking for representation. She wrote me back a couple of days later: thanked me for the look, offered to look at the full when it is ready, and she made a couple of suggestions for improvement.

One of her suggestions was that my dialogue sounded too contemporary. It isn't a big fix, just rewording a few things and altering the structure of some of the sentences.

I wonder though, how you all approach dialogue. Do you try to make your characters' words sound old-fashioned? Like Lord of the Rings, etc.? Even in ancient times, people would have spoken in the common vernacular, not in formal language (at least in the case of commoners).

Thoughts?

ULTRAGOTHA · Jan 23, 2012

I don't like contemporary sounding dialogue and words in an historical. But I don't insist on purely historical dialogue either. I want a flavor of the time period without having to plow my way through Middle English.

But please don't have Marie Antoinette saying "Look, they can just eat cake, right?"

I want an author to give me enough periodness to the dialogue that I feel I'm in that period and not reading a bunch of modern people dressed up in period clothes.

Hope that helps.

Puma · Jan 23, 2012

Rather than making them sound old-fashioned, the trick is to not make them sound modern. It's a matter of word choice, but it can also involve making sure you're properly handling the etiquette of the day in address, not using cliches that weren't common yet, not using words that weren't around, etc. My suggestion would be to find a good, well-known work covering your time period and take a look at the dialogue in it.

Very often when AWers post portions of work in Share Your Work here someone will say it sounds too modern - so you're not alone.

Modern readers want things written so they're easily understandable, so you don't want to bog your manuscript down with a lot of words that have gone out of use since your time period. But you want flavor of the period, the sound. I didn't notice where you're from, but think of it sort of like an American writing a story set in England. Same language, but there are expressions and manners of saying things that are very different. You wouldn't want to write such a manuscript with a lot of Cockney spellings, but you'd want a little bit - just enough to make it obvious there is a difference. Puma

gothicangel · Jan 23, 2012

ULTRAGOTHA said:
I don't like contemporary sounding dialogue and words in an historical. But I don't insist on purely historical dialogue either. I want a flavor of the time period without having to plow my way through Middle English.

Seconded.

I love writing the dialogue in historicals, playing with syntax. Rosemary Sutcliff was a genius at this. I read a quote of hers that she was inspired by Rudyard Kipling.

I think reading Shakespeare and his contemporaries would also be useful [just don't use thee and thou in the Classical World, I hate that!]

EngineerTiger · Jan 23, 2012

I try to capture the "flavor" of an era but don't slave over it. The one time I did, it came out so stilted that it was embarrassing. I do try to keep my 19th Century people from saying something too modern or obvious slang that didn't exist. One technique is to avoid contractions. By using cannot instead of can't, for example, you get a slightly more formal cadence that might suit an upper class character from New England. I think that has always been the trial for historical fiction writers. Keeping their characters tied to their centuries but still keep them comprehensible to the reader.

Mark W. · Jan 23, 2012

I think a blend is best. While you must write to make things readabl eby today's audience, you don't want Modern phrases and word usage to creep into your historical novel. Otherwise, it snaps the reader out of the moment. Conversely, you don't want to try and write in Middle English or even King James style. It would be too difficult for modern casual readers.

Shakesbear · Jan 23, 2012

Reading books that were written in the period your work is set in can be a great help with slang and such like.

Anne Lyle · Jan 23, 2012

I agree with Puma - avoid both modern phrases and archaicisms. You don't say when your book is set, so it's hard to generalise, but I think if you read some Jane Austen or similar, you will get a feel for the kind of language that sounds old-fashioned to modern readers but isn't full of thees and thous either.

When I'm editing, I refer regularly to my OED and/or Etymology Online, to avoid words that weren't in use at the time I'm writing about (16th century England). I'll sometimes fudge things a little if there isn't an easily comprehensible 16th-century word for it - I don't like having to do it, but I think reader comprehension is more important than rigid historical accuracy. OTOH I'm writing alternate history fantasy so I get a bit more flexibility

Belle_91 · Jan 23, 2012

Try to also pepper in words that they would have used then.

For example, in my 1770s Revolutionary War novel, I have them use words like 'tis, 'twas, good morrow, dolt, doesn't give a fig,

For my 1850s settings I used works like capital, fellow, doughface, copperhead.

I find that helps give my dialouge some flavor.

Anne Lyle · Jan 23, 2012

Ah yes - Shakespeare is full of wonderful words that still make sense to a modern reader, particularly insults like "clotpole" (which seems to have been adopted by the BBC series Merlin as well)

Belle_91 · Jan 23, 2012

In Regency times they used the word "leaky" to describe someone who can't keep secrets well. I would like to see that word come back. Also "dupe" because I think it's fun to say.

Carmy · Jan 23, 2012

Try watching a few videos set in earlier time periods. Some are very good. Pay special attention to how they say things, and try to apply that type of wording to your book.

As others said, please avoid things like thus and verily.

Cristin_B · Jan 24, 2012

Thanks for all your replies. My ms is set in the 3rd century AD in Armenia, the Roman Empire, and Persia.

Looking at your responses, I think I'm on the right track.

"I don't know how to write dialogue that sounds old." becomes...
"I know not how to pen the speech of antiquity."

Or something like that.

I'll post in SYW when I reach my 50 posts and see if I'm finding the right balance.

Thanks all

Macca · Jan 24, 2012

Puma said:
Rather than making them sound old-fashioned, the trick is to not make them sound modern. It's a matter of word choice, but it can also involve making sure you're properly handling the etiquette of the day in address, not using cliches that weren't common yet, not using words that weren't around, etc. My suggestion would be to find a good, well-known work covering your time period and take a look at the dialogue in it...

Modern readers want things written so they're easily understandable, so you don't want to bog your manuscript down with a lot of words that have gone out of use since your time period. Puma

That pretty much sums up my position too. Writing a novel set in the 1840s, I wanted to avoid something which sounded like an outright parody of Dickens - especially as much of it is set in London's poorest districts. I think, as Puma suggests, the trick is that you have got to make the dialogue sound sufficiently not of our own time, but not so of the past that you alienate the reader.

KayEn78 · Jan 24, 2012

When I wrote my stories that were sent in 1967, I found quite a few books that were published at that time. I picked up on a few things--the term "gay" still meant "fun" or "happy". At that time, they spelled the word teenage like this "teen-age." A description of a dress made of brocade material was also used. Some slang from that time, spoken by teenagers, at least in these books that I have, are: "Well, natch..." or "My goodness!" Reading these books gives you an idea of what the time was like, at least for some. Even though the world was changing rapidly at that time, there was still an innocence in the air yet it was disapating rather quickly. Yes, even reading fiction books from the era or decade your writing about, can be a nice help.

-Kristi

Macca · Jan 25, 2012

Incidentally, I have just completed Anthony Horowitz's take on Sherlock Holmes, The House of Silk. At the end of the novel, he presents a short essay in which he explains the 10 rules he set himself when he took up the challenge to resurrect Conan Doyle’s most famous character.

Number 7 is interesting in regards to this thread:

7. Use the right language. It’s quite difficult to pastiche nineteenth century English in a way that won’t put off twenty-first century readers, particularly younger ones. I have to say that I plucked quite a few words out of the original stories to act as guideposts, to give the text a sense of authenticity. My favourites are: ‘snibbed’, ‘foeman’, ‘sickish’ (used by Lestrade) and ‘passementerie’. That said, the book is actually being written in around 1916 and I would imagine that by this time Watson’s own language and writing style would have become more modern.

http://www.mulhollandbooks.com/2011/11/01/1557/

Hip-Hop-a-potamus · Jan 25, 2012

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Everybody writing historical, get yourselves one of these:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0304366366/?tag=absowrit-20

I refer to mine THROUGHOUT the day, in addition to watching old movies from the 20s and 30s, to give the language a little "oomph" from that time.

Anne Lyle · Jan 25, 2012

Of course you can't please all of the people all of the time. I took a chance in my book, of playing a little fast and loose with the dialogue - and not everyone likes that. My feeling was that to the people of the 16th century, the English language was changing fast (like it is today) and I wanted to capture that feeling of modernity in the younger characters' language.

pdr · Jan 26, 2012

Keep it...

plain and simple. Good English with a flavour of the age via word use and sentence structure. But just a touch, like seasoning.

Try writing with the online http://www.etymonline.com/ on call and check finally with the Oxford re the time words were used. That's the advice which editors and agents give.

gothicangel · Jan 26, 2012

Cristin_B said:
Thanks for all your replies. My ms is set in the 3rd century AD in Armenia, the Roman Empire, and Persia.

I'm writing a spy thriller set in Ancient Rome. I like sprinkling my MSS with metaphors, etc. My MC is refered to in a few ways [he's a spy for the Praetorian Guard]

- 'A nest of scorpions.'
- 'A snake in long grass.'
- 'The emperor's hunting hound.'

I love that kind of writing.

Cristin_B · Jan 26, 2012

pdr said:
Try writing with the online http://www.etymonline.com/ on call and check finally with the Oxford re the time words were used. That's the advice which editors and agents give.

Brilliant. I've never seen that, so thanks for sharing.

gothicangel said:
I'm writing a spy thriller set in Ancient Rome. I like sprinkling my MSS with metaphors, etc. My MC is refered to in a few ways [he's a spy for the Praetorian Guard]

- 'A nest of scorpions.'
- 'A snake in long grass.'
- 'The emperor's hunting hound.'

I love that kind of writing.

I love that too. I try to use metaphors that are reflective of the culture, yet still understandable today.

I recently watched both seasons of the TV series ROME. They did a brilliant job of bringing the era to life. I think I might watch some of it a second time, just listening to the way the characters speak.

angeliz2k · Jan 26, 2012

I'm working on the mid-19th century in a border state.

This can be a bit tricky, because this was a period in which a lot of modern ways of speaking were emerging. Thomas Jefferson's language doesn't sound like how we speak today. But by around the 1830's, the language began to sound a lot more like how we talk today. There were a lot of people who spoke in "earthy" ways (Davy Crockett) and a lot of people who spoke in very tedious, "Victorian" language (Edward Everett). It's a hard mix to get a hold of. Huck Finn and his dialect haunt me.

In my previous work, I could hide behind the thought, "Well, they were all speaking French anyway; this is like a translation." Nope. The folks in this WIP spoke English in a time and place that is well-trodden by writers.

There's also the temptation to get hokey because some of the characters are Southerners or consider themselves such. I don't want it to seem ridiculous.

MTP · Jan 26, 2012

Samuel Johnson's dictionary is a great resource for anyone writing in 18th century anglophone settings.

gothicangel · Jan 28, 2012

While on the subject, I just caught myself out while editing. One of my Romans came out with 'cocky.' I thought Hmmm, checked my etymology and yep it's 18th century.

:flag:

Anne Lyle · Jan 28, 2012

18th century English, though. The problem is that you're translating from Latin anyway, so all bets are off

You can't restrict yourself to contemporary English, because it didn't exist...

Approaching Dialogue in Historical Fiction

Merovingian Superhero

Retired and loving it!

Toughen up.

Writing HF Again, Thank God

knows a hawk from a handsaw

Fantastic historian

With her nose stuck in a book

Fantastic historian

With her nose stuck in a book

My rhymes are bottomless

Fantastic historian

Toughen up.

never mind the shorty

Toughen up.

Fantastic historian