Too much dialogue?

[starscape]

I did a search on this but couldn't find anything on this subject (the search function has never been particularly effective for me--anybody got any tricks?), so I hope I'm not being repetitious.

Can you have too much dialogue and too little narration in a story?

I'm in the process of writing the final chapter of a novel-length work which has a fairly complex plot. As a result I have a lot of loose ends to tie up.

Since I've been working on this for the past seven months, posting as I go, I've been reading through the How-To's, forums, etc., a lot to help me improve as a writer. On several occasions I've read that dialogue is an effective way of "showing" the action by allowing the characters to tell the story.

I frequently use it in my writing already, so it's a device with which I'm comfortable. Still, I made a conscious effort to "show" a bit more with dialogue this time around, in part because I have so much ground to cover but also because a major theme of this segment is confrontations.

The chapter is at about 9K words right now. Although it's probably only about halfway done (there's a lot of loose ends ), so far it's close to 75% dialogue (including the sex scene, but there's a good reason for it). While I was aiming for more dialogue, I really hadn't been writing with the intention of making it this much of the content. Each conversation does serve a purpose, revealing character and moving the plot forward.

I like what I've written thus far, but I'm concerned about throwing my readers off if the proportion stays this high; each of the other chapters are maybe 25-35% dialogue.

What's been your experience with reading or writing dialogue-heavy stories and/or chapters? I appreciate any insights anyone has to offer. Thanks!

 

[NoJo]

If you read a play or a movie script, you'll see that they're almost always close to 90% dialogue. And overuse of adverbial directions to the actors like "(surprised)" or "(angrily)" is considered amateurish and slightly offensive to the abilities of the actors to interpret the words.

I really like the spare style of film scripts, and I often try to apply that style to my stories, when appropriate.

 

[oggbashan]

A chapter or even a whole story can be all dialogue, if that's what you want to do.

Anything that works is acceptable. Increasing dialogue in the last chapter shouldn't be a problem. Getting the readers TO the last chapter might be difficult, but if they've got that far they'll probably stick with it.

The major sin for authors on Literotica is changing category during a story. If it starts as Romance and becomes BDSM, or worse still, Gay or Incest, then the readers will be annoyed.

Og

 

[driphoney]

You're such a fantastic writer, I'd trust my own instincts if I were you. If you think it's working, then it probably is.

Wow. I'd like to ask you about a hundred questions on writing!

But I won't.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Wouldn't worry about it...

I'm currently in the middle of a short story which is 95% dialog and only has three characters and one is a Artificial Intelligence.

 

[sr71plt]

Interesting that this topic came up. I received a criticism of not having enough dialogue in a Lit. story the other day, and I thought "ah, another half-educated knee-jerk reaction."

There's a mantra of those who've read self-help books on writing about short stories needing to be dominated by dialogue. Well, yes and no. There are good stories that are all dialogue and good stories that are all narrative. The nub of truth in that knee-jerk emphasis on dialogue is that there quite often is narrative that can better be presented as dialogue. It just depends on that particular story.

Good erotica, in fact, can very well have more narrative in relationship to dialogue than the mainstream short story does. Sex is more an act than a discussion. And good erotic is about instilling emotions and sensory experiences in the reader--more getting tuned in with what the characters feel, not so much in having the characters have a gab fest about how good it is. So if your story is heavily laced with sex scenes, it's somewhat more than the norm than not that the author is speaking directly to the reader through narrative and getting into the character's minds rather than the characters speaking to each other.

 

[Guest]

I've gotten the comment about too much dialogue.

I decided, if I ever start writing again, that I'd write a story where the characters barely speak at all. Kind of like a porno screenplay.

"You wanna?"

"Yep."

 

[Weird Harold]

Can you have too much dialogue and too little narration in a story?

Yes you can have too much dialogue and you don't even need to hit a high percentage of the text to get there.

Dialogue is both one of the easiest ways to make a story interesting and one of the hardest ways to make a story interesting and it all depends on how the dialogue is written.

I suspect that the question came to mind because you're trying to wrap up too many loose ends at once and the dialogue is sounding "forced" and beginning to sound like reading a court transcript -- essentially becoming just narration with dialogue tags.

One question to ask yourself: Do the loose ends really need to be wrapped up or can their resolution be left to implication and the readers' imagination?

 

[CharleyH]

If you read a play or a movie script, you'll see that they're almost always close to 90% dialogue. And overuse of adverbial directions to the actors like "(surprised)" or "(angrily)" is considered amateurish and slightly offensive to the abilities of the actors to interpret the words.

And so to is over-direction by describing close-ups, cuts and fades and dissolves and ... the like.

I really like the spare style of film scripts, and I often try to apply that style to my stories, when appropriate.

I like it as well, Joe.

Starscape: As humans, we spend more time talking than describing and talking is often part and parcel of description. I can only think of a film right now, but do check out, 'My Dinner With Andre' (1981, Louis Malle). The whole film is two guys talking over dinner and it's vivid and evocative. However, I must say that I feel a novel requires at least some direction/description, even if the description is merely, 'He leaned closer, and rested his chin on his hand.' Still, (just reminded by hubby) Nicholson Baker did write an entire erotic novel based on dialogue ... check out VOX.

 

[starscape]

Sorry I haven't replied to these sooner; in the process of moving (I have soooo much crap!) so haven't had time to check before now.

Lots of great insights!

If you read a play or a movie script, you'll see that they're almost always close to 90% dialogue. And overuse of adverbial directions to the actors like "(surprised)" or "(angrily)" is considered amateurish and slightly offensive to the abilities of the actors to interpret the words.

I hadn't thought of it like a script. Hmm, interesting.

One of the things I really like about writing dialogue is that you can reveal a lot about a character's personality as you're moving the plot along. I've got a new character who's powerful, handsome and vain, and I'm finding the way he converses with the other characters, along with little details like the way he smirks when people gape, turning their heads as he walks by, is a fun, effective way of telling the reader a lot about him without getting into a ton of backstory.

I really like the spare style of film scripts, and I often try to apply that style to my stories, when appropriate.

I'll have to check out your stuff. I'm really curious how a 90%-dialogue erotic story might work.

BTW, love your avatar; think I've hallucinated something like that before.

Anything that works is acceptable.

Thanks for the reassurance. As a reader I have enjoyed stories with unusual takes on the narrative, but they were also done by really skilled writers. Since I'm pretty new to this I'm still a little insecure about my own abilities.

Getting the readers TO the last chapter might be difficult, but if they've got that far they'll probably stick with it.

Don't I know it <sigh>. I don't have near the quantity of readers I'd like, but the ones I do have are very cool and loyal. I hardly ever get the "OMG!!!!!! UR story is soooo HAWT. Wanna chat?" kinds of feedback (not that there's anything necessarily wrong with that ). They're more likely to talk about the story, and if they say anything about the sex it's usually along the lines of "I find your writing quite arousing," so that's really nice.

The major sin for authors on Literotica is changing category during a story. If it starts as Romance and becomes BDSM, or worse still, Gay or Incest, then the readers will be annoyed.

I don't like to change category myself, though the erotic content can vary a lot within a single work. I probably push the boundaries of what's "appropriate" for a Romance, but so far there hasn't been a backlash. It's one of the advantages of toiling in obscurity. LOL

You're such a fantastic writer, I'd trust my own instincts if I were you. If you think it's working, then it probably is.

Wow. I'd like to ask you about a hundred questions on writing!

Aw shucks <kicks dirt>.

I do love storytelling, and I'd like to think I've got some fairly creative ideas rattling around in my noggin. Still, I make so many mistakes and have so much to learn. There's nothing like reading a post that says, "You know, whenever I see x in a story, I just cringe/roll my eyes/throw my shoe; it's such a newbie mistake" and knowing I've done exactly that in my own writing <gulp>. It's very humbling.

At the same time, thank you for the vote of confidence; it really means a lot to me!

BTW, I love "The Fuckin' Chair".

Wouldn't worry about it...

I'm currently in the middle of a short story which is 95% dialog and only has three characters and one is a Artificial Intelligence.

I love sci-fi (am I being presumptuous that's the genre?) and the thought of a 95%-dialogue story intrigues me; I'm going to have to keep an eye out for it.

There's a mantra of those who've read self-help books on writing about short stories needing to be dominated by dialogue. Well, yes and no. There are good stories that are all dialogue and good stories that are all narrative. The nub of truth in that knee-jerk emphasis on dialogue is that there quite often is narrative that can better be presented as dialogue. It just depends on that particular story.

I really appreciate this perspective. I'm more a lurker than a poster, but I've learned a lot from reading your posts. I struggle with wanting to do "the right things" in my writing, but then I chafe when the conventional wisdom goes against what I honestly feel is best serving the story I wish to tell. I know some of it is my ego getting in the way, but from reading your thoughts over the few months I'm also learning to appreciate (and trust) my own creative vision more. Thanks for that.

Good erotica, in fact, can very well have more narrative in relationship to dialogue than the mainstream short story does. Sex is more an act than a discussion. And good erotic is about instilling emotions and sensory experiences in the reader--more getting tuned in with what the characters feel, not so much in having the characters have a gab fest about how good it is. So if your story is heavily laced with sex scenes, it's somewhat more than the norm than not that the author is speaking directly to the reader through narrative and getting into the character's minds rather than the characters speaking to each other.

Other than the one sex scene I mentioned in my original post, which is done as primarily dialogue for plot reasons, most of the erotic content I write (and read) is indeed narrative "seasoned" with dialogue. When I write, I gauge my own response to the passages I've written; if I get aroused from it, I figure I'm doing something right. As the saying goes, "stick with what works."

I've gotten the comment about too much dialogue.

I decided, if I ever start writing again, that I'd write a story where the characters barely speak at all. Kind of like a porno screenplay.

"You wanna?"

"Yep."

LOL. Maybe you could do a two-parter where in one segment there's hardly any dialogue and in the other there's hardly any narrative. That'll drive 'em crazy.

Dialogue is both one of the easiest ways to make a story interesting and one of the hardest ways to make a story interesting and it all depends on how the dialogue is written.

How does the way dialogue is written make a story more or less interesting for you as a reader? I'd be interested in your perspective.

I suspect that the question came to mind because you're trying to wrap up too many loose ends at once and the dialogue is sounding "forced" and beginning to sound like reading a court transcript -- essentially becoming just narration with dialogue tags.

One question to ask yourself: Do the loose ends really need to be wrapped up or can their resolution be left to implication and the readers' imagination?

That hadn't occurred to me, but it's definitely something I'll need to consider.

I'd been writing for days and got to a good stopping point, so I decided to review what I'd written thus far. I was chugging along, reading it, and, to be honest, thinking to myself "hm, this is actually pretty good."

At one point I was scrolling up to the top of the document and my eye just happened to catch a bunch of dialogue tags in a row. It made me curious, so I scanned through the sections and noticed that while there were certainly a few scenes dominated by narrative, the majority were comprised primarily of dialogue. It wasn't until then I started worrying that maybe I'd used too much dialogue.

Still, you've really got me thinking about my desire to tie up all the loose ends. Part of it has to do with a fascination with complexity and interconnectedness. I wove this web (or at least tried/am trying to) where things which seem like minor details in previous installments end up coming into play later on in the story. It was/is done in the hopes that if a reader wanted to revisit it in the future, they might see things they'd missed before and make it, perhaps, even more enjoyable the second time around.

At the same time, I'm also terribly perfectionistic and can have difficulty knowing when to say, "It's good enough; let it go," so I will definitely keep your question in mind as I write this. I want it to be "good complex", not overbearingly so.

Starscape: As humans, we spend more time talking than describing and talking is often part and parcel of description. I can only think of a film right now, but do check out, 'My Dinner With Andre' (1981, Louis Malle). The whole film is two guys talking over dinner and it's vivid and evocative.

I've seen 'My Dinner With Andre' (many years ago) and really enjoyed it; think I might have to rent this again for a little inspiration on how dialogue can be done well.

However, I must say that I feel a novel requires at least some direction/description, even if the description is merely, 'He leaned closer, and rested his chin on his hand.'

I definitely do this in my writing, including this chapter. 'He snarled and took a step forward, only to find himself blocked by a thick muscular arm', that sort of thing. Everything that's happened in the story thus far is coming to a head, tensions are high and all hell's about to break loose. Hm, maybe I (subconsciously) wrote so much dialogue because of the characters' heightened emotions. Interesting.

Still, (just reminded by hubby) Nicholson Baker did write an entire erotic novel based on dialogue ... check out VOX.

Cool, thanks for the reference. Definitely something to check out.

 

[starscape]

Sorry for such a long fuckin' post. ^

LOL

 

[Weird Harold]

Dialogue is both one of the easiest ways to make a story interesting and one of the hardest ways to make a story interesting and it all depends on how the dialogue is written.

How does the way dialogue is written make a story more or less interesting for you as a reader? I'd be interested in your perspective.

"Dialogue is easy because you only need to transcribe the voice of the character you hear in your head"

If you hear interesting voices and transcribe them faithfully, it's easy to make the story interesting.

The reverse is true also; if the voices are pompous and preachy or are stilted and formal, they don't make very interesing reading -- especially in large blocks of dialogue. Sometimes it's better to stuff a sock in it and summarize a character's speech.

One of my early problems with dialogue was "over-tagging" which was part of a larger problem with over-controlling the action. Too many breaks in the dialogue -- to remind the reader who is speaking or describing how they are speaking or their facial expressions and nervous gestures -- tends to disrupt the flow and push readers out of the story. The editor that brought the problem to my attention called it "insulting the reader's inteligence."

I suspect that the question came to mind because you're trying to wrap up too many loose ends at once and the dialogue is sounding "forced" and beginning to sound like reading a court transcript -- essentially becoming just narration with dialogue tags.

One question to ask yourself: Do the loose ends really need to be wrapped up or can their resolution be left to implication and the readers' imagination?

That hadn't occurred to me, but it's definitely something I'll need to consider.

It's something that the late Robert Jordan always warned his fans about; he had no intention of resolving every little plot thread because, "real-life doesn't wrap things up in neat little packages with all questions answered."

Still, you've really got me thinking about my desire to tie up all the loose ends. Part of it has to do with a fascination with complexity and interconnectedness. I wove this web (or at least tried/am trying to) where things which seem like minor details in previous installments end up coming into play later on in the story. It was/is done in the hopes that if a reader wanted to revisit it in the future, they might see things they'd missed before and make it, perhaps, even more enjoyable the second time around.

At the same time, I'm also terribly perfectionistic and can have difficulty knowing when to say, "It's good enough; let it go," so I will definitely keep your question in mind as I write this. I want it to be "good complex", not overbearingly so.

It might be worthwhile to revisit an old discussion on "how to make a cup of tea" -- about how much detail needs to be described for any particular situation and why moe or less description might be desireable to achieve the desired mood/effect. I would link it, but it was a long time ago and past the limits of the search engine for a simple search.

I think that discussion (or a revisit) might help with deciding which plot threads can be left hanging and which need to be tied up; the factors that determine how much of routine actions need to be described are similar to those governing loose plot threads.

The point that made me think of the "cup of tea" thread is the over-controlling that was at the root of my over-tagging of dialogue; I was in essense, "writing a checklist for making tea properly" for every bit of dialogue and action without allowing any room for the readers' imagination (or intelligence).

It doesn't sound as if you're as bad about that as I was, but you did mentionthat it was noticing "a lot of dialogue tags" that made you concerned about the percentage of dialogue.

Perhaps the problem isn't 'too much dialogue,' but 'too many dialogue tags?'

 

[starscape]

"Dialogue is easy because you only need to transcribe the voice of the character you hear in your head"

If you hear interesting voices and transcribe them faithfully, it's easy to make the story interesting.

The reverse is true also; if the voices are pompous and preachy or are stilted and formal, they don't make very interesing reading -- especially in large blocks of dialogue. Sometimes it's better to stuff a sock in it and summarize a character's speech.

This makes a lot of sense; thank you for explaining.

One of my early problems with dialogue was "over-tagging" which was part of a larger problem with over-controlling the action. Too many breaks in the dialogue -- to remind the reader who is speaking or describing how they are speaking or their facial expressions and nervous gestures -- tends to disrupt the flow and push readers out of the story. The editor that brought the problem to my attention called it "insulting the reader's inteligence."

...

The point that made me think of the "cup of tea" thread is the over-controlling that was at the root of my over-tagging of dialogue; I was in essense, "writing a checklist for making tea properly" for every bit of dialogue and action without allowing any room for the readers' imagination (or intelligence).

It doesn't sound as if you're as bad about that as I was, but you did mentionthat it was noticing "a lot of dialogue tags" that made you concerned about the percentage of dialogue.

Perhaps the problem isn't 'too much dialogue,' but 'too many dialogue tags?'

I feel a bit foolish for admitting this, but when I wrote "dialogue tags" I meant "quotation marks". After I read your post I was a little confused, so I looked up the definition of dialogue tag and was like, "Oh, yeah, that's what it is." Brain fart, I guess.

The thing is, it was actually a good thing I made this mistake because what you just said here made me go back to see if I was overusing them and...I was.

I probably should have my writing critiqued, because between that, overuse of adverbs, overwriting, etc., it makes me wonder where else I need improvement. I'm just really scared; I can be easily discouraged if I get bombarded with everything I'm doing wrong. I'm a sensitive soul who needs a little honey to make the medicine go down.

Something I've found interesting from writing/submitting chapters over a long period of time is that the later installments are better-written than the earlier ones since I'm trying to apply what I've been learning over the last six months. The only problem is you have to hook 'em in from the beginning to get them to the end. Looks like I'll have to do a pretty serious retooling at some point, since, of course, I'll never be able to let it stand as-is.

It's something that the late Robert Jordan always warned his fans about; he had no intention of resolving every little plot thread because, "real-life doesn't wrap things up in neat little packages with all questions answered."

It might be worthwhile to revisit an old discussion on "how to make a cup of tea" -- about how much detail needs to be described for any particular situation and why moe or less description might be desireable to achieve the desired mood/effect. I would link it, but it was a long time ago and past the limits of the search engine for a simple search.

I think that discussion (or a revisit) might help with deciding which plot threads can be left hanging and which need to be tied up; the factors that determine how much of routine actions need to be described are similar to those governing loose plot threads.

I will have to comb the older listings to see if I can find that thread; I definitely think it would be useful for me.

Thank you. I really appreciate your help!

 

[Pure]

i don't think there can be 'too much dialogue'; ever heard a good radio play?

IF someone has trouble writing dialogue [though s/he may not know it!], THEN there can be too much. i.e. bad or BORING dialogue. it has to have a bit of snap; make the reader want to read, more than skim past.

as to erotica, i disagree with sr71's generalization that preponderance of narrative generates the hottest scenes. to me, 'he drove his cock into her" is LESS hot than her "that's it, fuck me hard, baby!"

further, the narrator's insight/omniscience into the main character's mind [a typical set-up] may detract from hotness, as it leads often to 'telling': he suddenly felt boiling hatred. as opposed to, "take that! bitch!"

==
the reverse holds, of course; if your narrative is weak and gets boring after a para, then don't put in "too much"!

===
PS. i agree with weird h, above; the EXCESS of tags may make reading the dialogue unpleasant.
i prefer as spare as possible. "bastard!" as opposed to, "you're a bastard," she said angrily.

 

[sr71plt]

I wonder when the last time you heard erotica over the radio. I'd love to hear what the dialgue was like during the sex scenes.

And if it was anything like "that's it, fuck me hard, baby," I think I'd be giggling in no time. Makes me think of junior high school.

But each to their own on that one.

Actually, I came looking for this thread just now, because I was tooling along writing a story for a romance anthology, and I stopped and started chuckling, thinking about this thread. My story is set in the iron age and involves characters from two entirely different tribes--at different levels on the social evolution scale. No dialogue at all. Not even possible. At the most grunts and groans and expressions and pointing of fingers. We'll have to see what the readers have to say about the lack of dialogue.

 

[TE999]

I can't add a whole lot to what's been said already...so if you'll permit me, I'll offer one of my stories as an example of how dialogue can move the story along and keep the reader interested.

'A Hard Climb' was written for the last Earth Day story contest: http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=414018 .

 

[Guest]

I wonder when the last time you heard erotica over the radio. I'd love to hear what the dialgue was like during the sex scenes.

And if it was anything like "that's it, fuck me hard, baby," I think I'd be giggling in no time. Makes me think of junior high school.

But each to their own on that one.

Actually, I came looking for this thread just now, because I was tooling along writing a story for a romance anthology, and I stopped and started chuckling, thinking about this thread. My story is set in the iron age and involves characters from two entirely different tribes--at different levels on the social evolution scale. No dialogue at all. Not even possible. At the most grunts and groans and expressions and pointing of fingers. We'll have to see what the readers have to say about the lack of dialogue.

I am laughing out loud right now, imagining the tribal characters doing the pointing - open mouth (ah ah ah), to crotch (mm mm mm), to the ass (ooh ooh ooh?)

Oh, yeah.

(Edited to add - I forgot the guy, holding his erection in one hand, eyebrows raised - no words necessary at all.)

 

[Elianna]

===
PS. i agree with weird h, above; the EXCESS of tags may make reading the dialogue unpleasant.
i prefer as spare as possible. "bastard!" as opposed to, "you're a bastard," she said angrily.

Yeah. Right there. I suck at too many tags. I've gotten better, but still...

I am laughing out loud right now, imagining the tribal characters doing the pointing - open mouth (ah ah ah), to crotch (mm mm mm), to the ass (ooh ooh ooh?)

Oh, yeah.

(Edited to add - I forgot the guy, holding his erection in one hand, eyebrows raised - no words necessary at all.)

ROFLMAO

 

[starscape]

dialogue ... has to have a bit of snap; make the reader want to read, more than skim past.

I like the way you put this. I've read stories where the dialogue makes the characters come to life and thereby makes me invested in what happens to them. I've read others where the characters sound so stilted and wooden (or otherwise unreal) they're little more than cardboard cutouts; it reminds me too much that I'm reading a story, as opposed to losing myself in it.

the narrator's insight/omniscience into the main character's mind [a typical set-up] may detract from hotness, as it leads often to 'telling': he suddenly felt boiling hatred. as opposed to, "take that! bitch!"

PS. i agree with weird h, above; the EXCESS of tags may make reading the dialogue unpleasant. i prefer as spare as possible. "bastard!" as opposed to, "you're a bastard," she said angrily.

Good point. I know I have a tendency to do this; I'm especially prone to combining the two, a la: He suddenly felt boiling hatred. "Take that! Bitch!"

I read somewhere around here that you don't have to spell everything out for the reader; give them some credit that they'll get what you mean. I think in my case it comes from really, really wanting to be heard/understood, exactly the way I intended it. I'm not trying to be a control freak, but, at least for me, I think that's what it essentially boils down to, so I'm working on it. I believe it's important to clearly communicate your vision for the reader, but in the end, what they do with what you've presented is up to them, dag nabbit.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Good point. I know I have a tendency to do this; I'm especially prone to combining the two, a la: He suddenly felt boiling hatred. "Take that! Bitch!"

I whip out my editor's pen; it's pretty obvious what made him say that, if your context is any good.

I told one of my writers that I didn't mind doubling up like that in the first draft, and I'm truly sorry i gave her that permission... her manuscripts expanded by about a third, and she expects me to make the decision for her...

 

[starscape]

Actually, I came looking for this thread just now, because I was tooling along writing a story for a romance anthology, and I stopped and started chuckling, thinking about this thread. My story is set in the iron age and involves characters from two entirely different tribes--at different levels on the social evolution scale. No dialogue at all. Not even possible. At the most grunts and groans and expressions and pointing of fingers. We'll have to see what the readers have to say about the lack of dialogue.

Would you be allowed to post that story here at some point? It sounds fascinating, and really, quite hot.

I can't add a whole lot to what's been said already...so if you'll permit me, I'll offer one of my stories as an example of how dialogue can move the story along and keep the reader interested.

'A Hard Climb' was written for the last Earth Day story contest: http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=414018 .

Yeah, I think it worked very nicely in this story. It made the protagonists in particular seem like real people. I really enjoyed it and loved the ending.

 

[TE999]

Yeah, I think it worked very nicely in this story. It made the protagonists in particular seem like real people. I really enjoyed it and loved the ending.

Thanks, star. I think I like writing dialogue more than descriptive prose. I like to leave a bit to the readers' imaginations. A writer for radio named Norman Corwyn called it "The Theater of the Mind".

 

[Dragonlipz]

"Dialogue is easy because you only need to transcribe the voice of the character you hear in your head"

If you hear interesting voices and transcribe them faithfully, it's easy to make the story interesting.

The reverse is true also; if the voices are pompous and preachy or are stilted and formal, they don't make very interesing reading -- especially in large blocks of dialogue. Sometimes it's better to stuff a sock in it and summarize a character's speech.

One of my early problems with dialogue was "over-tagging" which was part of a larger problem with over-controlling the action. Too many breaks in the dialogue -- to remind the reader who is speaking or describing how they are speaking or their facial expressions and nervous gestures -- tends to disrupt the flow and push readers out of the story. The editor that brought the problem to my attention called it "insulting the reader's inteligence."




It's something that the late Robert Jordan always warned his fans about; he had no intention of resolving every little plot thread because, "real-life doesn't wrap things up in neat little packages with all questions answered."



It might be worthwhile to revisit an old discussion on "how to make a cup of tea" -- about how much detail needs to be described for any particular situation and why moe or less description might be desireable to achieve the desired mood/effect. I would link it, but it was a long time ago and past the limits of the search engine for a simple search.

I think that discussion (or a revisit) might help with deciding which plot threads can be left hanging and which need to be tied up; the factors that determine how much of routine actions need to be described are similar to those governing loose plot threads.

The point that made me think of the "cup of tea" thread is the over-controlling that was at the root of my over-tagging of dialogue; I was in essense, "writing a checklist for making tea properly" for every bit of dialogue and action without allowing any room for the readers' imagination (or intelligence).

It doesn't sound as if you're as bad about that as I was, but you did mentionthat it was noticing "a lot of dialogue tags" that made you concerned about the percentage of dialogue.

Perhaps the problem isn't 'too much dialogue,' but 'too many dialogue tags?'

Well said

 

[Weird Harold]

Actually, I came looking for this thread just now, because I was tooling along writing a story for a romance anthology, and I stopped and started chuckling, thinking about this thread. My story is set in the iron age and involves characters from two entirely different tribes--at different levels on the social evolution scale. No dialogue at all. Not even possible. At the most grunts and groans and expressions and pointing of fingers. We'll have to see what the readers have to say about the lack of dialogue.

A good, if rather extreme, example of how the story dictates how much dialogue is too much dialogue.

Dialogue is a very versatile tool for a writer, but like all tools, it has to be applied in the right place with the right amount of force to get the job done.

 

[starscape]

I whip out my editor's pen; it's pretty obvious what made him say that, if your context is any good.

What you say makes sense. I think I worry about not being clear enough, but then it ends up being too much. <sigh> It's depressing sometimes how much I've got to learn.

I told one of my writers that I didn't mind doubling up like that in the first draft, and I'm truly sorry i gave her that permission... her manuscripts expanded by about a third, and she expects me to make the decision for her...

That stinks. I could see maybe doing that once to have a good example for your reference. I wouldn't do it myself because I don't want to burden my editor. I figure they're donating their time to help you become a better writer, so you owe them the courtesy of trying to learn from your mistakes and (hopefully) make their job easier over time, not harder.