too much dialog?

David Gonzalez · Apr 13, 2007

I haven't come around for a long time but that's because I don't have internet access. I'm wondering if having too much dialog affects the novel or something.

I've written a lot and still high spirited and going all for it, although I stepped into the grammar-mines ground but they don't worry me much for now since editing comes later, at least to polish its english later.

blacbird · Apr 13, 2007

The key issue with dialog is, much like everything else, relevance. Does each line advance the story in some useful way? Is anything just fluff, space-filler? The test is to take lines out, and see if they are missed. If not, leave them out. I know I tend to write dialog quickly, and inevitably wind up with fluff that can be edited. And trimming dialog is an effective way of reducing manuscript length, because so much of it is white space. I actually find the visual impression of white space a useful place to look for trimming. If there are a lot of short, one or two-word dialog lines, it makes for a lot of white space, and those tend to be the places that need trimming most, at least in my work.

caw

David Gonzalez · Apr 13, 2007

trimming is a good option of course but so far seeing it I really don't know what to trim...
except for expressions

It just annoyed me a bit that my friend said it looked more like a theathrical play...

Devil Ledbetter · Apr 13, 2007

You should have more going on than talking heads. Those people talking need to be engaged in some activity. As some smart person said here the other day "even if they're chopping beans."

Although preferably that activity would be plot related.

The_Grand_Duchess · Apr 13, 2007

You're dialouge shouldn't take the place of story. Like if you're using it to try to avoid telling and to take the place of actual action then yeah its probably too much. And as always, if it doesn't add to the story then there's no point in it

David Gonzalez · Apr 13, 2007

well it's more like this

There is this part that two secondary characters are talking about the past, so I don't know if thats good or bad. although i should put it in the workshop forum but I really don't want to yet till I have things moving in the story.

Just putting a half-baked draft woulnd´t do any good...
There are some mindless talk but its more like creating coversation then i rail it to the main point etc etc.

job · Apr 13, 2007

First off -- you can do any bloody thing you want,
and you can make it work.

Look at Middlemarch. There's paaages of dialog.

But you may end up with less dialog than you have now.

If you are in the first or second draft of your WIP
and the ms is dialog-heavy,
you may be 'writing from dialog'.
Lots of folks lay groundwork with dialog and layer on fron there.

One pulls back on dialog, not because there's something wrong with dialog ...
but because there are so many lovely things like narrative, description, internals, action ...

EDITED TO ADD:

>>There is this part that two secondary characters are talking about the past, so I don't know if thats good or bad. <<<

If you are in the first draft ... go to the head of the scene and write a note that says [this is backstory]
then skip the scene and move on and start telling the story. Don't look back.

Talking heads telling each other about the past is not 'story'.
The problem is not that it is dialog. The problem is that it is backstory and infodump.

Sometimes, in the first draft, we have to write out the backstory.
You now have that out of your system.
Get back to the realtime and tell the story.

blacbird · Apr 13, 2007

Hard to judge without a specific example.

caw

David I · Apr 14, 2007

blacbird said:
Hard to judge without a specific example.

Indeed.

Some folks have observed that plays are 80% verbal and 20% visual, movies are 80% visual and 20% verbal; and television, because of the small size of the screen, is 50/50.

The weird thing about writing is that though it is, logically speaking, 100% verbal, in practice the effects of the words stretch across the whole range, from largely visual (description) to largely verbal (dialogue, thoughts).

Being described as 'like a play' isn't necessarily bad, though it suggests that the problem is that the dialogue isn't properly grounded. The redoubtable Turkey City Lexicon (SF oreinted, but still useful to everyone) diagnoses this problem under the heading "Brenda Starr dialogue"', referring to the cartoon strip where the words often issued from nowhere in particular, oftwn appearing as words bubbles from some building. Of the writing problems one could have, that is the one of the easiest to fix once you understand what is wrong.

But, as Blacbird said, it's hard to tell without seeing the text. (He siad "Caw", too, but that's another issue.)

Bartholomew · Apr 14, 2007

blacbird said:
caw

moo

Prawn · Apr 14, 2007

Don't ever have people talking unless they are also doing something else that pushes the story forward. For example, two people could be talking in the car as they drive to an appointment. Three children could be discussing their parents' argument while they climb a tree. Both the action and the dialogue serve to either reveal the character or push the story forward.

JasonChirevas · Apr 14, 2007

Prawn said:
Don't ever have people talking unless they are also doing something else that pushes the story forward. For example, two people could be talking in the car as they drive to an appointment. Three children could be discussing their parents' argument while they climb a tree. Both the action and the dialogue serve to either reveal the character or push the story forward.

Agreed 100%.

-Jason

Judg · Apr 14, 2007

I will respectfully disagree. Dialogue can move the story forward in and of itself. I just reread A Canticle for Leibowitz (absolutely wonderful book, while we're at it) and there were great long passages of pure dialogue, with a short paragraph every page or two describing one of the characters' inner thoughts. It was absolutely riveting, lively, amusing, informative, just superb. There was no "action", no description, no tags (the voices were so well differentiated there was absolutely no need). Now, not many of us can pull it off that well, but it serves to illustrate that it is pretty hard to have too much of anything when it's well done.

blacbird · Apr 14, 2007

Bartholomew said:
moo

I hated that novel.

caw

David Gonzalez · Apr 21, 2007

6 days later... err sorry for the late answer.

Thanks everyone who responded to this thread, of course i'm the kind of person who always have to put a backstory. Being descriptive is something that bothers me, as you see in my profile(left column of this post) I'm spanish it's not something impossible nor I wish to be a "grammar nazi"(kinda crude)

nevertheless the point is to move the story forward from what I could gather from all of your messages.

Maryn · Apr 22, 2007

For what it's worth--perhaps nothing--the first really good creative writing teacher I had said that while there's no formula, no right or wrong way, etc., beginning writers might do well to aim for about a 50-50 mix of dialogue and exposition.

This forces the dialogue-heavy writers to make sure every line needs to be there, and forces those who'd rather tell in exposition than show in interaction to liven things up.

She did add that the ratio was not sacred, simply advisory, and that it applied not to drafts but to rewrites. In a first draft, she encouraged us to write it all, and in rewrite to remove the non-essential while aiming for the 50-50 ratio.

Maryn, who tries

maestrowork · Apr 22, 2007

Keep writing. If dialogue helps you get the story out and develop the characters, do it. But in rewrites, try to trim them back -- cut out the fat, and vary your pace by using narrative. Some dialogue might be summarized instead. But you can only do that when you're more objective about your work, not during first, or even second, draft.

johnzakour · Apr 22, 2007

Personally, being a gag writer I like dialog. It's the one thing you can't rely on the reader's imagination to fill in the gaps.

herdon · Apr 22, 2007

I think it is all too tightly wound up in the point of the story to have any general rule of thumb. The point might be as much to express the ideas in the conversations the characters have as they move through the story as anything else. Or, like johnzakour alluded to, the point could be humor and dialogue could be used as the device of that humor. The dialogue itself might not have much to do with moving the story forward, but it is central to the book itself because it provides the humor.

Etc.

Steve W · Apr 22, 2007

Hi,

Never have characters say anything unless they have something worth saying.

Some genres accept huge tracts of dialogue better than others. (My current novel is bursting with dialogue because of the themes and plot, so it fits.) But no matter what you are writing, if the dialogue advances the story and sparkles, you won't go wrong.

Cheers,
Steve

Elodie-Caroline · Apr 22, 2007

My novel has loads of dialogue to it, it also has the characters telling each other things that happened in the past. I don't class that as info-dumping; I class it as two people getting to know one another. You can't really know anything about anyone unless you know some of their past.
I actually love writing the dialogue, I find that the easiest thing to do in my work. I have been known to sit here and laugh to myself over funny parts that I've written in my dialogues too.

Elodie

Countess Olenska · Apr 22, 2007

My first few novels were far too dialogue-heavy. It can be a crutch and an excuse not to learn how to write exposition well; at least, I believe it was in my case.

Elodie-Caroline · Apr 22, 2007

I think that we all believe that we need action along with the dialogue; otherwise you don't have a story... Hmm, more like a play for voices, just like Under Milk wood by Dylan Thomas, that didn't do him any harm now, did it

TigerFire · Apr 22, 2007

I've always done a lot of dialogue myself, but I've been learing as I go to add in some action. And two people talking about their past, as long as it's relevent, is fine with me. Like somebody else said, it's character building. Sometimes you can actually throw in something that moves the story along. I like reading mysteries and I also write in that genre, so sometimes, one little line in a conversation could be the clue that breaks the mystery wide open. But sometimes it's hidden in the text of the conversation. Where you want to trim the conversation is sections like this:

Linda picked up the phone. "Hello."

"Hello." the voice said.

"Peter? How are you?"

"I'm doing great. How are you?"

"Doing good too."

"That's good. Did you need something?"

"Yes, I need you to me a favor and pick up my kid from school." Peter said.

That could easily be shortened to be just. Peter called asking if Linda could pick up the kids at school. (of course that would have to have some relevence to the story like something happens to Linda on her way to pick up the kids.) If not, then it needs to be cut completly.

janetbellinger · Apr 22, 2007

I have a problem with dialog. I first write the nvel with very little dialog then go back and add too much. One of these days I'm going to get it right.

too much dialog?

David Gonzalez

blacbird

David Gonzalez

Devil Ledbetter

Come on you stranger, you legend,

The_Grand_Duchess

I record everything.

David Gonzalez

job

In the end, it's just you and the manuscript

blacbird

David I

Bartholomew

Comic guy

Prawn

Writing is finite,revising infinite

JasonChirevas

Judg

DISENCHANTED coming soon

blacbird

David Gonzalez

Maryn

I Tried

maestrowork

Fear the Death Ray

johnzakour

Dangerous with a Keyboard

herdon

What's up?

Steve W

Elodie-Caroline

Countess Olenska

Elodie-Caroline

TigerFire

janetbellinger