|
fatimati
|
|
|
|
Hi everyone, I'm being told much of my dialogue doesn't work for a couple of reviewers. They said it felt artificial and forced, as if my characters are reading their lines, rather than speaking them. My question is how could my dialogue be natural? Here are some instances:
1.'Oh my Lord,' said Khalti Icha when she caught sight of Moha popping olives into his mouth. 'You're still here?'
'Don't be furious, mamma,' giggled Mustapha. 'I'm going now.'
2.'I'm going to see what's happening out there,' said Salah.
'Wait!' Mustapha shouted. 'I shall come with you.'
Please help me, they say this is my only weakness.
|
|
Chuck Buckner
|
|
|
|
I read a little of your story, but I’m not the best person here to be making suggestions, but anyway. These are my opinions.
Dialogue should flow freely and unobstructed. Close to how it is in life as possible. I noticed that at times you add information as dialogue is being exchanged.
Example - 'All right, mamma.' Mustapha sat up in bed, yawning like a cat and stretching his arms as far as he could. 'Humm! Exquisite,' he said when the smell of couscous reached his nose. 'Don't forget to take the dough to the public oven,' reminded Khalti Icha. 'I want it back before midday, right?' At this point you add an entire paragraph before Mustapha answers his mother.As any other Algerian mother, Khalti Icha strongly hoped Mustapha would remain a child forever. He had always been a lively and lovable little boy, who never caused any problem. He was so careful not to disobey her that he would even avoid eating out of the same plate as her. She was determined the young boy must follow in the path of his deceased father, whose reputation as a wise town leader was well established, even after his death. 'All right, mamma,' replied Mustapha with a smile. I’ve rewritten this as mostly dialogue only. I’m not suggesting you do this but to show how much more natural it sounds.'Wake up, Mustapha,' Khalti Icha called her son. 'All right, mamma. Humm! Exquisite,' he said as the smell of couscous reached his nose. 'Don't forget to take the dough to the public oven; I want it back before midday, right?' 'All right, mamma,' The following is from a modern master at dialogue, Cormac McCarthy. From The Road.—At the top of the hill he turned and studied the town. Darkness coming fast. Darkness and cold. He put two of the coats over the boy’s shoulders, swallowing him up parka and all. I’m really hungry, Papa. I know. Will we be able to find our stuff? Yes. I know where it is. What if somebody finds it? They wont find it. I hope they dont. They wont. Come on. What was that? I didnt hear anything. Listen. I dont hear anything. They listened. Then in the distance he heard a dog bark. He turned and looked toward the darkening town. It’s a dog, he said. A dog? Yes. Where did it come from? I dont know. We’re not going to kill it, are we Papa? No. We’re not going to kill it. He looked down at the boy. Shivering in his coats. He bent over and kissed him on his gritty brow. We wont hurt the dog, he said. I promise — This is bare bones dialogue and writing, but it serves to show my point about dialogue flowing naturally with few obstructions. Sometimes, as practice as much as anything else I take two or three characters and write them through a dialogue exchange without any tags and try to make each differentiable from the other by the way they talk. It is also a good way to build characters. That’s mostly what characters do in writing anyway, they talk. Let them talk and don’t interrupt by writing while they are talking. Do that at other times. I hope this helps a little. thank you
...
|
|
Athene
|
|
|
|
That's brilliant advice (as always!) from Chuck. I would just add something that I only learned on YWO: it's almost always a bad idea to use anything other than "said" when indicating dialogue. So I would use, for example, "he said, giggling" rather than "he giggled." I used to do this a lot, and people were always picking up on it, and they were almost always right: "said" did sound more natural. If you want to indicate how s/he said whatever it was, then use a descriptive phrase or even a single word, like giggling for giggled in the example above.
Scias te fortasse Romanum esse si animal convivialissimum arbitreris esse caprum (Henricus Barbatus) my website
|
|
fatimati
|
|
|
|
Chuck and Ros, I'm mighty grateful for your help!  I am utterly thankful to you both for at least taking out time to reply to me. ANd I found your advice very helpful and reassuring at once.  As for Chuck, I do understand what you mean exactly, however I can't help inserting actions while dialogue is being exchanged. I wonder if there's a way to do this without obstructing my characters' speech.  As for you Ros, I think you're extremely right ("he said, giggling" rather than "he giggled.") I used to do this a lot, but some reviewers picked up on it, suggesting that using "ing" form after s/he said is not suitable in modern literature.  Again, thank you very much for your advice. I have found this extremely helpful.
|
|
erict
|
|
|
|
The advice above is spot on. Fatima, welcome to the world of writing “rules.” Reviewers pick up on –ly, -ing, was, were, action in dialogue tags etc. These rules aren’t always clear and if you read much, you realise they don’t apply to published authors. Old JK with harry potter breaks them all, Dan Brown, or even more respected literary writers dance all over them. Our problem is that we are at the whim of the agents / publisher readers who try to make a snap decision based upon the first couple of pages. If the dialogue contains action tags, or even said Ron, rather than Ron said, they dump it. It gets worse when things like, never open with the weather, or somebody waking up come in. These come from an agent becoming jaded by reading too many submissions that do start this way and throwing a tantrum on their blog/ twitter. (Poor lambs) -ly and –ing are both to be used sparingly, but really, Tommy said and threw the ball, or Tommy said throwing the ball. The “rule” is really that two actions that are mutually exclusive shouldn’t be combined by “-ing,” Now, I’m a man, but I can multi-task sufficiently to talk and throw a ball. There is a good book, Self Editing for fiction writers, Renni Brown, Dave King. This is a useful guide to these rules. “Try this!” Erict suggested. (How many rules did I get in that one!)
|
|
fatimati
|
|
|
|
Quote: erict, Monday, 13 Jun 2011 14:18The advice above is spot on. Fatima, welcome to the world of writing “rules.” Reviewers pick up on –ly, -ing, was, were, action in dialogue tags etc. These rules aren’t always clear and if you read much, you realise they don’t apply to published authors. Old JK with harry potter breaks them all, Dan Brown, or even more respected literary writers dance all over them. Our problem is that we are at the whim of the agents / publisher readers who try to make a snap decision based upon the first couple of pages. If the dialogue contains action tags, or even said Ron, rather than Ron said, they dump it. It gets worse when things like, never open with the weather, or somebody waking up come in. These come from an agent becoming jaded by reading too many submissions that do start this way and throwing a tantrum on their blog/ twitter. (Poor lambs) -ly and –ing are both to be used sparingly, but really, Tommy said and threw the ball, or Tommy said throwing the ball. The “rule” is really that two actions that are mutually exclusive shouldn’t be combined by “-ing,” Now, I’m a man, but I can multi-task sufficiently to talk and throw a ball. There is a good book, Self Editing for fiction writers, Renni Brown, Dave King. This is a useful guide to these rules. “Try this!” Erict suggested. (How many rules did I get in that one!)  Greetings Erict, Thanks for taking out time to reply to me, pal.  You've really hit the spot. This is what I think of very often. Even if i've reached the Betseller chart, but still receiving reviews like "your dialogue doesn't work for me"
This post was last edited by fatimati, 13 Jun 2011, 15:07
|
|
KLove
|
|
|
|
I think you've already been given great advice. I'd only add that you might try to stay away from exclamation marks (also known as 'screamers!!!') They're are widely disliked by the 'rules', because they really throw - an often - too heavy a punch. I've counted them in my novel (I don't get out alot) and have five. use them, but debate them first.
also, the speech patterns seems a little formal (although this might be right for your story / characters). People, when addressing people they know well, use shorthand for accepted mutual prior knowledge, eg: the communal oven, might just be 'the oven'. Also people are quite lazy, so: 'Oh my Lord,' might become 'oh Lord,' and, 'I shall come with you,' might become, 'I'll come too', and 'Don't be furious, mamma,' might become 'mamma, don't be cross', and 'I'm going to see what's happening out there,' could be I'm going to see what's happening,' because you might have already indicated the disturbance is 'out there'. just try and trim it a bit -- comes back to making every word count. good luck x
|
|
fatimati
|
|
|
|
Quote: KLove, Monday, 13 Jun 2011 20:00I think you've already been given great advice. I'd only add that you might try to stay away from exclamation marks (also known as 'screamers!!!') They're are widely disliked by the 'rules', because they really throw - an often - too heavy a punch. I've counted them in my novel (I don't get out alot) and have five. use them, but debate them first. also, the speech patterns seems a little formal (although this might be right for your story / characters). People, when addressing people they know well, use shorthand for accepted mutual prior knowledge, eg: the communal oven, might just be 'the oven'. Also people are quite lazy, so: 'Oh my Lord,' might become 'oh Lord,' and, 'I shall come with you,' might become, 'I'll come too', and 'Don't be furious, mamma,' might become 'mamma, don't be cross', and 'I'm going to see what's happening out there,' could be I'm going to see what's happening,' because you might have already indicated the disturbance is 'out there'. just try and trim it a bit -- comes back to making every word count. good luck x That's it, kate! Besides the advice offered by Chuck, Ros and Erict, yours seems clearer and more concise. Now, I'm beginning to understand how one should construct his dialogue. Thanks for you all
|
|