Talk, talk and more talk but no scenery!

Mike Martyn · Mar 24, 2005

I have no problem writing diologue. In fact I'll find I've written two or three pages at furious pace only to find it's all talk ie ; no waving of hands, no one seeking solace in the soft evening light, sinster noises but not from behind the oak wainscoting of the study in the deserted mansion.

I go back and paint in the scenery so to speak but I'm a better talker than a painter. Perhaps not surprising since I'm a lawyer.

Anyone have this problem? If so, how do you get around other than the obvious butt in chair?

maestrowork · Mar 24, 2005

Zip through it. Add in settings and action in rewrites. Visualize the scene as you would a movie -- you won't see characters just sit there and be talking heads. What do you visualize them doing? Move around? Shrugging? Waving their hands? Frowning? Sipping coffee? You don't want to put action in every line of dialogue, but there are places where you can use action/expression to strengthen a point or tell us how the characters react.

Also, don't forget silence.

Azure Skye · Mar 24, 2005

Yeah, I do it all the time. In fact, I thought maybe I should start writing plays instead of books.

Dru · Mar 24, 2005

One of mine as well

I tend towards "talking head"-itis as well. I just go back and add in what my mind envisioned but did not make it to the page in the first "core dump". I might have minimal action but very rarely emotive context or descriptive action. Just know that it is something you need to follow-up in your revision process, like removing extraneous adverbs or leading dependant clauses, etc.

Usually the re-writes also make the dialogue much more meaningful, as the subtext of how people interact with their surroundings while having a conversation is a great way to show insight into a character.

James D. Macdonald · Mar 24, 2005

That's what I call "blue screen writing," where the actors are doing their thing in front of a blue screen and the special-effects guys will add the dinosaurs or the spaceships later.

So -- add the scenery when you know what the dialog is doing.

KTC · Mar 24, 2005

I do this all the time. I thought I was the only one. I used to think of it as the JD Salinger syndrome...chat chat chat. But I love James' definition. I will use it from now on...blue screen writing! It's perfect. I wish the special-effects guys in my attic were better at their job though!

CindyBidar · Mar 24, 2005

I thought it was just me...good to know that others share my peculiarities!

Fillanzea · Mar 24, 2005

I do this.

I think it's a situation where different things will work best for different people. My current strategy is to concentrate very hard on putting myself in the scenery mentally, when I can, and not worry about the lack of scenery too much at the other times; I'll go back and put it in later.

If I zip through it without worrying about it at all, the rewrites are hellish.

The other thing I try to do is figure out something for the characters to DO while they're talking at each other. Doing laundry, cooking, whatever. It helps flesh out the world a little, it forces me to think harder about the scenery, and sometimes it can unexpectedly give me plot ideas.

Mistook · Mar 24, 2005

Draw a quick sketch of the setting before the conversation starts, give it a paragraph or so.

Establish the various props the characters are using as the dialogue begins, nothing fancy, just a sentence or two.

Now you can float for a while, even drop the dialogue tags and just let the conversation roll.

Sprinkle in descriptions where necessary, to indicate reactions or lack of interest. Natural pauses are where you might want to take a sentence or two to update the setting - something visual or auditory going on - a waitress coming to refill the coffee.

You don't need much, just enough to give the reader a sense of orientation.

Mark · Mar 24, 2005

I'll join the club, too. My writing is usually dialogue heavy. I like to think the readers have enough imagination to paint the pictures themselves. I mean if two characters are in a bar, all the readers are going to picture a bar they know in their head, right?

I know this depends on what you write, though. A bar may not need too much description, but a whole new world (sci-fi or fantasy) might need a lot of description. So it's different for each writer.

I like to keep the scenery description to a minimum, a few lines at most. But, it also has to do with the fact that I like writing dialogue better. It just comes into my mind a lot easier.

Julian Black · Mar 24, 2005

I do this all the time. The conversation between two characters is flowing right along, and stopping to put in anything more than the occasional dialogue tags would break the flow of the writing, bringing the conversation to a screeching halt. So I get the dialogue down while the conversation is really cooking, and save description for later. For me, writing dialogue is usually hot and fast, while writing description is cool and slow. I have a lot of days where I can do both, but usually one predominates on any given day.

Uncle Jim's term--"blue screen writing"--describes those hot dialogue days perfectly.

Not only will you end up adding the dinosaurs and explosions and rocketships to that blank blue-screen background, you will also go back in and get rid of all the stray wires and other bits of necessary rigging that don't belong in the picture. Part of creating an illusion is hiding the means you used to create it. In other words, if you're a capable writer your readers won't see how you put the scene together--they will simply enjoy it.

Whatever means you use to get the words on the page are irrelevant, as long as the reader is hooked in by them.

alaskamatt17 · Mar 24, 2005

Dinosaurs, explosions, and rocket ships

I've had a good laugh following this thread about "blue screen writing." I, too, have a problem with going heavy on dialogue and light on scenery. The reason for the laugh, however, is that in the case of my most recent novel I actually have been adding dinosaurs and spaceships. It sounds ridiculous, but I think they actually fit together quite well (in the same story, I mean; the dinosaurs aren't on the spaceships).

zornhau · Mar 25, 2005

One way of making the scenery - the set - vivid, is to make it important.

As I recall, Robin Hobb establish key sets early, in situations which make the description important to the POV character, e.g. when Fitz first sees Chade's workroom and wonder's what's going on.

Whenever Fitz revisits the room, he notes changes in its layout which give him clues about what's going on.

Jamesaritchie · Mar 25, 2005

Dialogue

Am I the only one with the reverse problem? The narrative flows right along, and so does the descripion, and it's the dialogue that's sparse.

arrowqueen · Mar 25, 2005

I think I read somewhere about there being a 'Golden Mean' as far as dialogue was concerned. Unfortunately I can't remember what is was, though one third dialogue to two thirds narrative rings a distant bell.

Not the most helpful of posts. Sorry. I'll go away and be quiet now.

maestrowork · Mar 25, 2005

Mark said:
I'll join the club, too. My writing is usually dialogue heavy. I like to think the readers have enough imagination to paint the pictures themselves...
I like to keep the scenery description to a minimum, a few lines at most. But, it also has to do with the fact that I like writing dialogue better. It just comes into my mind a lot easier.

But novels are not just about dialogue. You might do better with a screenplay if you enjoy writing dialogue better. It's not to say you can't write novels -- but with a novel, you DO need to paint the picture for the readers because, unlike scripts (which will turn into a movie or TV show), there are no actors to act out the scenes. Frex, if two guys are talking in the bar, they're not just going to sit there and stare at each other and yack yack yack. They'll be sipping a beer, or smoking a cig or glancing at the overhead TV once in a while. With a script, the actors can fill in all those blanks, but in a book, you need to act them out for the readers. Describing these actions would add authenticity to the scene (fortunately, all of that can be added in rewrites -- so you don't have to worry about that too much during first draft).

Like UJ said, do the blue screen version in first draft first, then you can fill in all the CGI stuff in post-production.

I don't think you need a lot of description during a dialogue scene, just enough to paint a good picture. It's also about pace. Zippy dialogue with no description gives us a fast-paced novel. Sometimes you do want to slow it down with narrative. Action can also break the "zip-zip-zip" pace, and you can use action to add "silence" which is important in dialogue. Rarely you see people talk and talk and talk and talk without a break.

Do describe your bar, at least a bit, before the dialogue starts.

Torin · Mar 25, 2005

You might also try throwing in description via dialogue tags, or brief passages between moments of conversation. I find I bounce back and forth between heavy description and lots of chatting. There has to be a balance there somewhere.

hoyateach · Mar 25, 2005

I've managed to strike a reasonable balance between dialogue and narrative as I write. When I edit, however, I often find that I add narrative to fill in the blanks while paring down the dialogue. The result is usually fairly smooth.

Anatole Ghio · Mar 25, 2005

Jamesaritchie said:
Am I the only one with the reverse problem? The narrative flows right along, and so does the descripion, and it's the dialogue that's sparse.

I kept reading this post thinking, I know I'm not the only one with the reverse problem. Then I found James saying he uses little dialogue and I thought, aha(!), I know there will be others!

I guess they got scared away by the thread title.

I find I can do soooo much without dialogue that often I will just sprinkle it in where it helps to develop character, move the plot, or it is needed to bring the reader in. Otherwise, I find it interferes with my voice, and I feel able to do sooo much more with description than with dialogue.

When I am writing in a more realist mode, I tend to use dialogue more.

- Anatole

azbikergirl · Mar 25, 2005

I do dialog better, also. When I come across long paragraphs of description as a reader, I tend to skim past it. It's not as interesting to me as the interactions between people. That's what I enjoy most about stories. And that's what I enjoy writing. When I'm evaluating a novel to read, I check to see whether it tends more toward dialog or narrative, and I put the narrative-heavy books back on the shelf. That's just my preference.

As far as setting description, I'm sparse, but I try to have my characters interact with the setting, if they can, so as to make it more an active part of the scene. Rather than describing a static room with nicknacks on the mantel, I make my MC fondle the nicknacks, and have the host follow him around and pluck them out of his hands.

One of the greatest benefits I've found so far with MRUs (Oh no! not that again!) is that they remind me to do this all the time, even with scenery the characters can't interact with directly (the sky, etc).

Dancre · Mar 25, 2005

I also had the same problem. So i started studying others' works that used alot of what i call gestures, scenery, the "Blue-screen" stuff etc. the best example i came across was "The Heart is a Lonely Hunter". This book helped me tremendously.

reph · Mar 25, 2005

Opening disclaimer: I am not a novelist.

Observation: In off-the-page reality, some of the significant or dramatic events in people's lives are made of spoken words, and some are made of physical events. Then there are the interior ones: thoughts, realizations, hopes, fears, and all like that. Conversations don't occur at regular intervals; they don't last for a fixed number of exchanges.

Inference from observation: To tell a complex story realistically, if it involves two or more characters and at least one of them talks, you'd have dialogue-y passages sometimes and description sometimes.

Closing disclaimer: The inference above is open to question. It hasn't been tested against real stories. I just now made it up.

JanaLanier · Mar 25, 2005

My writing is dialog heavy as well; I envision the scene and write down what those people are saying. But I need to be more careful to fill in some of the scene settings, so that the reader can have a backdrop to the action.

But -- as a reader, when I come to long descriptive paragraphs, I usually skim them. But I never skim dialog. As someone else said, you need a balance.

Ella · Mar 25, 2005

Oooh, blue screen.
I was reconciling myself to the same problem, but looking at it like theatre. The actors work out the general blocking, then rehearse many times, focusing on the nitty-gritty.

Mistook · Mar 25, 2005

Jamesaritchie said:
Am I the only one with the reverse problem? The narrative flows right along, and so does the descripion, and it's the dialogue that's sparse.

James, you've said you almost always write in first person. I'm just wondering if that makes it more natural to stick with narrative?

Talk, talk and more talk but no scenery!

Fear the Death Ray

Huh?

Professionally Paranoid

Your Genial Uncle

Stand in the Place Where You Live

Has nothing clever to say

Neverending WIP

Will Read Slush for Food.

Swordsman

RIP, our sarky besom

Fear the Death Ray

Wandering vaguely

Dancing with limbo sticks

Ironic Paranormal

I really do look like this.

Just have fun.

Fig of authority

Snarling Cur

Neverending WIP