How much dialog is too much? I find I have a lot of dialog. I go back, try to see what I can remove or summarize in narrative, but more often than not I find what I've written needs to stay. My beta says my dialog is very good and the relationship between the characters is very good, but he has also commented on occasion that there was a lot of dialog. Suggestions?
- Status
It really has to be seen in context. Do you use it appropriately? What genre do you write in? I think this sort of question probably works better as a workshop rather than in the abstract.
dialog
I recently read a book by Iain Banks in which the opening chapter had precisely one sentence that wasn't dialogue. It worked quite well, although if the entire book was like that it would have got annoying quickly.
I think the answer is "somewhere between none and all of it" -- but it's best to stay clear of extremes unless you know what you're doing.
I recently read a book by Iain Banks in which the opening chapter had precisely one sentence that wasn't dialogue. It worked quite well, although if the entire book was like that it would have got annoying quickly.
I think the answer is "somewhere between none and all of it" -- but it's best to stay clear of extremes unless you know what you're doing.
Re: dialog
Dialogue makes for a snappy read and quick pace. If you want your story to move along quickly, use dialogue. If you want to slow it down, use narration. The bottom line is: Is it good? Good dialogue or narrative must "show, not tell" and move the story along. If you're doing that, then it's just a matter of pace and style.
The script of "When Harry Met Sally" is entirely dialogue. It reads excellently.
Dialogue makes for a snappy read and quick pace. If you want your story to move along quickly, use dialogue. If you want to slow it down, use narration. The bottom line is: Is it good? Good dialogue or narrative must "show, not tell" and move the story along. If you're doing that, then it's just a matter of pace and style.
The script of "When Harry Met Sally" is entirely dialogue. It reads excellently.
Re: dialog
There is not a set amount for "to much" or "to little" dialogue. You can just use it to good effect, or you can botch it. A good book for this is James Smith's "You can Write a Novel"
It has a lot of information on the subject (as well a many others)
There is not a set amount for "to much" or "to little" dialogue. You can just use it to good effect, or you can botch it. A good book for this is James Smith's "You can Write a Novel"
It has a lot of information on the subject (as well a many others)
If your characters are reduced to talking about the weather, and you aren't writing The Day After Tomorrow, you probably have too much dialogue.
Remember Uncle Jim's mantra: every sentence in your novel should advance the plot, establish character, or develop the theme. Really good sentences do two of those; the best do all three.
As long as your dialogue is meeting one or more of those requirements, you should be good.
Have Fun,
- Steve Eley
Remember Uncle Jim's mantra: every sentence in your novel should advance the plot, establish character, or develop the theme. Really good sentences do two of those; the best do all three.
As long as your dialogue is meeting one or more of those requirements, you should be good.
Have Fun,
- Steve Eley
Here's something you can try:
Take ten consecutive pages of you book and pin them up, side by side, on one of your living room walls.
Step over to the other side of the room and look at the pages as grey on white -- just shapes, not works.
If the shapes are all short and jagged, break them up with blocks of description.
If the shapes are all big square blocks break them up with some dialog.
Take ten consecutive pages of you book and pin them up, side by side, on one of your living room walls.
Step over to the other side of the room and look at the pages as grey on white -- just shapes, not works.
If the shapes are all short and jagged, break them up with blocks of description.
If the shapes are all big square blocks break them up with some dialog.
dialogue
If a character has something to say that's pertinent to the story, he should say it. If he has nothing to say that's pertinent to the story, he should be quiet.
It isn;t the amount of dialogue that matters, it's whether or not it moves the story forward.
If a character has something to say that's pertinent to the story, he should say it. If he has nothing to say that's pertinent to the story, he should be quiet.
It isn;t the amount of dialogue that matters, it's whether or not it moves the story forward.
Re: dialogue
I recently read "Inversions" by Iain Banks, and, though there's a lot of dialogue in general, he actually goes into script-mode twice, reducing the characters to initials.
I think that dialogue can definitely be good, too much is better than too little, IMO.
I think so long as it isn't redundant or irrelevant it's bearable, and likely enjoyable. I like to see the characters interact.
I recently read "Inversions" by Iain Banks, and, though there's a lot of dialogue in general, he actually goes into script-mode twice, reducing the characters to initials.
I think that dialogue can definitely be good, too much is better than too little, IMO.
I think so long as it isn't redundant or irrelevant it's bearable, and likely enjoyable. I like to see the characters interact.
Iain Banks
Banks does weird things. I didn't mention in my post about him above, but the dialogue in the chapter in question had no attributions at all. They weren't necessary -- it was obvious from the very beginning that it was a conversation between two people, a phone call in fact, and there was no chance of confusing them.
Banks does weird things. I didn't mention in my post about him above, but the dialogue in the chapter in question had no attributions at all. They weren't necessary -- it was obvious from the very beginning that it was a conversation between two people, a phone call in fact, and there was no chance of confusing them.
How much dialogue?
I've heard that as a (very, very) general rule of thumb, about one third of a novel should be dialogue. Although it varies according to genre - romance might have more, action less.
While such generalisations may seem ludicrous given the plethora of factors we need to consider when writing, to test the theorem I've looked through a few novels that I like, and they all roughly conform to it.
It seems that as readers most of us have expectations for the 'feel' of a story, its balance in the way it unfolds. Dialogue supplies the personal, living, direct connection component that keeps it moving along, while narrative provides us with "need to know" information, and description gives us "nice to know" flourishes that add richness.
At least, Julie, if you have erred on the side of too much dialogue, you are unusual. One of the commonest mistakes of beginning writers is the tendency to overwrite narrative and description at the expense of dialogue, presumably in an attempt to be literary or poetic. I call it the 'trembling leaf' syndrome, because a perfectly ordinary tree that plays no part in the book may be given its own page to be a 'dew-dripping, slippery-barked, silent sentinel of the night, looking down on the voles that frolic in furry ignorance of their incipient fate at the claws of the wise and watchful owl that calls it home'.
I've noticed that when I flick through a book I instinctively react to the shape of the text on the page. When I see nothing but ink for page after page I think 'Warning - Trembling Leaf', and long to see some white space. Like music, written prose needs rhythm, and pauses.
On the other hand, one of the dangers of too much dialogue is that it can have a ping-pong effect as ideas are batted back and forth. If something is important enough to be said, it is sometimes important to incorporate how it is said - with appropriate facial expressions, actions, reactions etc (rationing your adverbs) - the walk and chew gum syndrome.
I think Jim McD's suggestion is an excellent one. Looking at printed copy from a distance gives you a proper perspective on the shape of your text. Then you can make it more appealing (and buyable) by reshaping it to reduce or break up the forbidding density of too much narrative, and by adding texture to your dialogue to make it more meaningful and 'felt'.
I've heard that as a (very, very) general rule of thumb, about one third of a novel should be dialogue. Although it varies according to genre - romance might have more, action less.
While such generalisations may seem ludicrous given the plethora of factors we need to consider when writing, to test the theorem I've looked through a few novels that I like, and they all roughly conform to it.
It seems that as readers most of us have expectations for the 'feel' of a story, its balance in the way it unfolds. Dialogue supplies the personal, living, direct connection component that keeps it moving along, while narrative provides us with "need to know" information, and description gives us "nice to know" flourishes that add richness.
At least, Julie, if you have erred on the side of too much dialogue, you are unusual. One of the commonest mistakes of beginning writers is the tendency to overwrite narrative and description at the expense of dialogue, presumably in an attempt to be literary or poetic. I call it the 'trembling leaf' syndrome, because a perfectly ordinary tree that plays no part in the book may be given its own page to be a 'dew-dripping, slippery-barked, silent sentinel of the night, looking down on the voles that frolic in furry ignorance of their incipient fate at the claws of the wise and watchful owl that calls it home'.
I've noticed that when I flick through a book I instinctively react to the shape of the text on the page. When I see nothing but ink for page after page I think 'Warning - Trembling Leaf', and long to see some white space. Like music, written prose needs rhythm, and pauses.
On the other hand, one of the dangers of too much dialogue is that it can have a ping-pong effect as ideas are batted back and forth. If something is important enough to be said, it is sometimes important to incorporate how it is said - with appropriate facial expressions, actions, reactions etc (rationing your adverbs) - the walk and chew gum syndrome.
I think Jim McD's suggestion is an excellent one. Looking at printed copy from a distance gives you a proper perspective on the shape of your text. Then you can make it more appealing (and buyable) by reshaping it to reduce or break up the forbidding density of too much narrative, and by adding texture to your dialogue to make it more meaningful and 'felt'.
Re: How much dialogue?
Those rules of thumb come from what the dialogue the average book of a given type usually has, not from anything saying they should or shouldn't have it. There's always going to be an average and a median, no matter how writers write.
If the dialogue doesn't move the story forward, it should be cut. If it does move the story forward, it should be kept. This is the rule that matters, and if you follow it, the pages will look just fine.
White space matters, but you should never add unnecessary dialogue to get white space, or remove dialogue to cut white space. Nor does dialogue automatically add white space. And it ain't the white space the editor buys, it's the ink between the white spaces.
If you have a feel for telling a story, the dialogue will come out fine. But you can't measure it, can't say you should have a third or a half or two thirds dialogue. That's a formula sure to fail. Even two books in the same genre should have varying amounts of dialogue, often widely different amounts. It depends on the story and on the characters and on how the writer tells the story.
If you tell a good story, people it with real characters, the dialogue is going to come out fine. If you don't do these things, the dialogue won't matter.
Those rules of thumb come from what the dialogue the average book of a given type usually has, not from anything saying they should or shouldn't have it. There's always going to be an average and a median, no matter how writers write.
If the dialogue doesn't move the story forward, it should be cut. If it does move the story forward, it should be kept. This is the rule that matters, and if you follow it, the pages will look just fine.
White space matters, but you should never add unnecessary dialogue to get white space, or remove dialogue to cut white space. Nor does dialogue automatically add white space. And it ain't the white space the editor buys, it's the ink between the white spaces.
If you have a feel for telling a story, the dialogue will come out fine. But you can't measure it, can't say you should have a third or a half or two thirds dialogue. That's a formula sure to fail. Even two books in the same genre should have varying amounts of dialogue, often widely different amounts. It depends on the story and on the characters and on how the writer tells the story.
If you tell a good story, people it with real characters, the dialogue is going to come out fine. If you don't do these things, the dialogue won't matter.
- Status