I've been thinking a lot about dialogue recently, since I feel I am decent at it but not great. Looking at writers who seem to always have fantastic dialogue, like John Scalzi, I wonder how they manage it. Is it just a natural gift? Do they write dialogue in their first drafts that is just as pedestrian as ours but then go back and edit it into a masterpiece? I wish I knew. I've left comments on Scalzi's blog a couple of times asking if he would do a post about how he so consistently manages brilliant dialogue, but he has ignored my requests. Who knows, perhaps he doesn't consciously know how he does it because it comes so naturally to him?
I have noticed one thing with dialogue lately while watching shows and movies or reading books, and it as starting to upset me. Writers are constantly creating false tension in their stories by purposely making their characters either not say enough when they can or by simply having them not say anything at all when they should. All the time there will be scenes when someone asks a question, and the other person could very easily just give a straight answer, but instead they don't, and that causes the tension to rise in the story. I know, I know, the writer wants the tension to rise, but to me this is a false way to do it, and it's maddening. Rather than have an actual plot point be the cause of the tension, the writer builds the tension by having one character simply not bother to provide key info to others. The more I have this in mind, the more often I see it happening in all the stories I'm watching and reading (but far more often when watching!).
As much as this pisses me off, it makes me wonder if this is a weakness of mine as a writer. Am I simply too forthcoming with my dialogue? Do I always just tell what seems common sense to tell and thus allow the potential tension to melt away in my stories?
Posts
More inexpensive ebook goodies!
11 hours ago
oh...Dialogue. How I love dialogue. Being a shy introvert, and not always finding it easy to start conversations or to come up with quick, witty banter, I have always struggled with dialogue. Trying to write about an out-going, bold sarcastic character and thinking 'what would they say', isn't always an easy thing to do. But I have found it easier these last few years. Maybe it's something that comes with age :) But I've not noticed the silent-tension technique. I'll be sure to keep an eye for that.
ReplyDelete*Little randomness here: At a quick glance, your profile picture looks like Rick Grimes from the Walking Dead :)
That's interesting, since it was while watching recent episodes of Walking Dead (which I love) that I was prodded to write this post, because characters kept not telling things that they knew and it kept causing problems!
ReplyDeleteAgree completely - I've noticed this more and more lately, and it bothers me a great deal. I keep wanting to shout at the screen "answer the *#$ question!" because in a real situation, even a zombie apocalypse, the question would have been answered or the pertinent information passed on.
ReplyDeleteImo, it's a device - and a lazy one at that - that ultimately has the opposite effect to what was intended. Instead of increasing tension, to me it's like seeing the mechanism at work behind the 'magic' show - and it totally destroys the magic and my abilit to suspend disbelief. As for the 'tension'....it's gone. Rant over.
Rant away! I love it, and I agree. They keep asking or saying things where we know the other person has the answer, and they don't spit it out...and it just pisses me off because it's so transparent what the writers are doing.
DeleteBut there are times, of course, in fiction as well as life, when someone doesn't ask the obvious question because they don't want to know the answer. They'd prefer to turn a blind eye. Now if a writer can portray that inner tension they're onto a winner! (going back a long way here, but an excellent example of this is Mallory in the Morte d'Arthur; much more recently Richard Morgan made good use of it).
ReplyDeleteThat's an excellent point. Makes me wish I would have worked something like that into my first novel, as I certainly had opportunities. Marcus with so many father issues would have been a good starting point.
DeleteEver watch Supernatural? In the early episodes the angel Cas does a lot of that lack of dialogue thing. Grunts a "ah" once in a while or has a deliberately blank look when Dean or Sam asks too many questions. Sometimes the tactic works for me in books, or shows, sometimes not. Better than rolled eyes, pursed lips, or shrugged shoulders though. And don't get me started on authors that feel the need to explain the meaning behind that act of silence. Ugh.
ReplyDeleteReading through the comments, I love how Rick and Daryl do the blank stare or fidgeting when not answering questions about their plans. Again, sometimes it works for me, sometimes not. I get it though; you can't always tell people what you are thinking, or planning, or suspect, if you need them to blindly follow your lead, your intuition. Sometimes tough decisions have to be made without discussion. As with last night's episode, with Rick so unsure of what to make of the situation with Aaron. Everyone in the group, including Rick, is desperate for a place to stop, at least for a while. The group seems divided into those who are almost blindly willing to believe in a safe haven, and those too afraid to even entertain the possibility. It seems the only reason Rick allowed debate over the details was because he was so unsure of what to do and needed some conflicting opinions. He still had many moments of keeping his intuitions to himself (like hiding the gun at the barn before going through the gates), and suffering the consequences.
I don't think silent-tension tactic works with all characters. Leaders can pull it off, as long as it is not overused (remember Rick did confide in Michone why he was fighting so hard against the direct, logical route). I disagree with you that the tactic would have worked for Marcus in Immortality Games however.
Marcus did not have a leadership role. He was like Glen, committed to the mission but not adept at long-term outcomes. Marcus was on auto-pilot through most of the novel, so his stoic silence would have just showed his lack of knowledge of the next steps as opposed to developing a plan or implementing steps that the others would follow, even after lengthy debate. Marcus' father, on the other hand, often employed the silence tactic with Marcus, as there were loads of details that would have distressed Marcus and he may not have continued on the quest if he know everything.
Well, my two cents worth. I think you write dialogue well, I've read your novel, and several excerpts from other writings, and I think you capture realistic exchanges. It is only natural to look at something that takes effort in ourselves and see it as easily accomplished by others. I have difficulty getting dialogue to express the emotions and actions of my characters too. I have to just word vomit it out, and then re-read it and revise later. I often wish I could do that in real life, during interviews or conversations. My best quips or comebacks happen when I am thinking over the events later, and I do a lot of "oh I wish I would have said . ." I want a do over.
Luckily in writing, I get that opportunity. You do to Ted. It may take a tad more effort on both of our skills, but we get there.