Believable dialogue

[Over_Red]

I try to think about my conversations with people, and how I've heard people talk. You have to smooth it out in writing -- no one wants to read a lot of um, uh, ah, or things like that. There's less stumbling in written dialogue, I think, but that's okay because it's written and you don't want the reader tripping over it.

My take on creating believable dialog is to first make it tell part of the story. Dialog for dialogs sake is distracting.

Don't feel like you have to fill in all of the blanks for the reader either. Let the dialog imply what is happening. The reader will fill in the rest using other parts of the story and their own past experiences.

Writing dialogue is a lot like writing erotica. On the one hand, obviously artificial constructions are bound to be off-putting. On the other hand, absolutely authentic dialogue just doesn't sound "right" when seen on the printed page. What we're looking for is a sort of stylized reality, which obeys its own rules.

I learned this the first time I tried to write a play. I tried to make the dialogue remorselessly authentic in dialect and pacing, but another playwright pointed out that it wasn't working because it wasn't what the audience expected to hear.

A major point of written dialogue, though, is that you shouldn't replicate actual speech. If you think otherwise, record a couple of people speaking for a few minutes and then listen to it. It will be nearly unintelligible, repetitive, and incomplete. It's like sets and costumes in a play. If you go up on stage, you'll see that what is actually there isn't how you see it from the audience. You need to find a median between reality and stilted.

The type of story, for me, also influences how I write dialogue. Epic fantasy demands more complex and dramatic dialogue, while a story about modern street people requires a lot of slang and awkward conjunctions. The key for believability lies in the context of the story.

First, use dialogue to bring a character to life or to move the story along. But don’t use dialogue to dump information. It will invariably sound false and clunky.

Second, remember that, in real life, people seldom follow the script. In particular, people seldom answer questions with neat and tidy answers.

Third, as a general rule, keep it short. People seldom make speeches when they are having a conversation.

Fourth, when using dialogue tags, keep it simple. You rarely need anything other than ‘he said’, ‘she said’, ‘he asked,’ ‘she replied’.

And maybe a fifth: be careful with dialects and accents. A little goes a long way; and too much can just make it difficult for the reader to read.

I wish I could contribute more to the thread than a summary, but better writers than I have already spoken.

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--IfOrTigP--/c2wzqx4jyhicpg7uj3aa.gif

 

[Handley_Page]

And if I may say so, most elegantly put.

 

[JaxRhapsody]

You're halfway to good dialog, if it isn't comparable to a childrens book, and understand many people don't use proper english, or even heavy as slang. I might be black, but I'm not about to "sign yo pitty on tha runnin tine."

 

[oggbashan]

You're halfway to good dialog, if it isn't comparable to a childrens book, and understand many people don't use proper english, or even heavy as slang. I might be black, but I'm not about to "sign yo pitty on tha runnin tine."

If you are writing slang, or dialect, or a foreign accent in dialogue I think you should be very restrained about it. A hint or two is enough.

It is very easy to overdo it. Kipling's soldier slang from 19th Century India is terrible. It is difficult to read, and as contemporary soldiers said 'No one ever talked like that'.

This is an example of his less extreme version:

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an` Tommy, fall be'ind,"
But it's " Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in the wind
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's " Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in the wind.

 

[ishtat]

Wodehouse

Read almost anything by PG Wodehouse. A Jeeves story may seem like light hearted nonsense, but technically his dialogue is brilliant. He is the complete master of understandable misunderstandings.

 

[elfin_odalisque]

Fourth, when using dialogue tags, keep it simple. You rarely need anything other than ‘he said’, ‘she said’, ‘he asked,’ ‘she replied’.

And maybe a fifth: be careful with dialects and accents. A little goes a long way; and too much can just make it difficult for the reader to read.

Sam Scribble

In a conversation between two people, story tags are not often needed. The flow and style guidelines make it clear who's speaking.

Yeah, treat dialects and accents like a nest of rattlers - run away fast.

You can lose the need of story tags by putting a name in the dialogue.

 

[SamScribble]

In a conversation between two people, story tags are not often needed. The flow and style guidelines make it clear who's speaking.

Agreed. My point was not that you must use dialogue tags; my point was that when you do use dialogue tags, keep them simple.

 

[CWatson]

If you're shy about recording other human beings in a public place and then transcribing their dialogue, I recommend listening to the stand-up comedian Eddie Izzard. In addition to being very funny, he employs a rambling, casual presentation style that can provide very good exercise. Pick one of his routines and transcribe it, word for word, sound for sound, punctuation mark for punctuation mark. If you can get his stuff well, you can get anything, precisely because he's overly casual and rambly. It'll train you to listen to how dialogue is delivered, and you don't have to be all voyeuristic to do it.

(Here's a fun one to start with: http://youtu.be/Bq03xebtbeU)

 

[CharleyH]

Where do you find inspiration to write your dialogue? Do you base it on conversations you've engaged in?

Great question.

People in RL tend to cut each other off, or finish sentences for one another. A great way to really listen to 'how' real people talk is to set up a video camera with your family and then watch how everyone interacts. It may be real, but it isn't good dialogue.

Good dialogue, in any story, is paced with the story. By this, I mean that anything one character says has some effect on how other characters react. Unlike RL, conversations in stories aren't give and take - they are a dance to get the characters to where they need to be.

 

[jonthechaosman]

I'll leave it up to others whether my dialog is any good or not. The way I write it is based on the way I write in general. My writing comes about when I create a character or characters. To me these characters are people who have come to life in my head and are fully developed with a back-story and a noticeable personality. I put them in situations and then let them do or say what that person would naturally do or say in that situation. When I write dialog I don't plan it out other than a general idea of what the setting is and who is present. Each character then plays their part. When I start a conversation between characters I generally have no idea how long it will end up being because in my mind it's just happening in real time based on the characters personality. I am often surprised how it ends up.

 

[DreamCloud]

I try and make sure my dialog furthers the story.

I skip all the trivial communication that everyone knows exists. There is no reason to bore the reader (and the writer) with hello's and goodbye's unless there is something special about them. I prefer a sentence that encompasses all the boring aspects:

I ended the call with a promise to see her soon.
She greeted me at the door cordially and led me inside.

I think this approach makes your real dialog meaningful. I also avoid dialog rehashes, where the speaker tells another something that you have already written about. I prefer a sentence or two that evokes the emotion and not the actual words.

Bob then told me about the affair. I could see the shame in his eyes as he confessed.

I guess this just points out where I don't write dialog. I have read a lot of stories with pages of useless dialog. I start skipping over it and find myself missing important story points.

 

[sethp]

The key to good dialogue is in the adverbs.

...he said angrily

...she said lustily

...they said enthusiastically

...we said sheepishly

...he said with bombastic authority!

 

[DreamCloud]

The key to good dialogue is in the adverbs.

...he said angrily

...she said lustily

...they said enthusiastically

...we said sheepishly

...he said with bombastic authority!

Yes, dialog without feeling is just a speech - boring.
"bombastic authority": I love words that contradict, but work so well together. I am stealing this one.

 

[PennLady]

The key to good dialogue is in the adverbs.

...he said angrily

...she said lustily

...they said enthusiastically

...we said sheepishly

...he said with bombastic authority!

I'll disagree somewhat on the adverbs. They're okay but should be used occasionally. Also, I think you don't need them, or need them much, if you've set up your characters and seen. Whether a character is saying something angrily or sheepishly could (should?) be gotten from context. I find that when writers go overboard with adverbs it's like they're trying to convince me that yes, things really are *this way*!

Again, I'm not saying never use them, because sometimes it's the best way to get across what you're doing but not always.

 

[sethp]

I'll disagree somewhat on the adverbs. They're okay but should be used occasionally. Also, I think you don't need them, or need them much, if you've set up your characters and seen. Whether a character is saying something angrily or sheepishly could (should?) be gotten from context. I find that when writers go overboard with adverbs it's like they're trying to convince me that yes, things really are *this way*!

Again, I'm not saying never use them, because sometimes it's the best way to get across what you're doing but not always.

...PennLady said accurately, assertively and convincingly.

 

[SamScribble]

I'll disagree somewhat on the adverbs. They're okay but should be used occasionally. Also, I think you don't need them, or need them much, if you've set up your characters and seen. Whether a character is saying something angrily or sheepishly could (should?) be gotten from context. I find that when writers go overboard with adverbs it's like they're trying to convince me that yes, things really are *this way*!

Again, I'm not saying never use them, because sometimes it's the best way to get across what you're doing but not always.

I'm with PennLady on this one. In my experience, tags with adverbs seldom make the dialogue more believable.

 

[_Lynn_]

I'll disagree somewhat on the adverbs. They're okay but should be used occasionally. Also, I think you don't need them, or need them much, if you've set up your characters and seen. Whether a character is saying something angrily or sheepishly could (should?) be gotten from context. I find that when writers go overboard with adverbs it's like they're trying to convince me that yes, things really are *this way*!

Again, I'm not saying never use them, because sometimes it's the best way to get across what you're doing but not always.

I agree, too.



When I started writing, I didn't know what I was doing. Someone noticed and spent countless hours teaching me the basics, including how to write dialogue (thanks, slyc).

 

[karaline]

Where do you find inspiration to write your dialogue? Do you base it on conversations you've engaged in?

Thank you for the interesting question, the responses are very useful.

the only thing I do (which doesn't seem to have been suggested so far -although maybe I missed it) is I read my dialogue aloud to myself.

I also have an editor, useful for checking over the plausibility of everything not just dialogue.

And that you're writing an 'historical' story is a factor too I guess, I think you can get away with more stilted dialogue but would have to be aware of not including any historically inappropriate references. But you seem to be doing a good job, the dialogue certainly didn't jump out at me as poor (as far as I can recall).

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

In grad school I learned a useful trick related to dialogue. We recorded our sessions with patients, transcribed them, then searched each statement for its function. The function was a brief tag, like...."blah, blah, blah." (she complained).

Plenty of patients were seductive. I recall a mom who brought her daughter in but did all the talking while the girl played on the carpet. However the girl got up, unbuttoned mom's blouse, mom said WOULD YOU LOOK WHAT SHE JUST DID! but left her breasts exposed, then tossed in I WOULDNT MIND HAVING ANOTHER BABY. So my tag was Mom and kid baited me for...?

 

[Handley_Page]

If you are writing slang, or dialect, or a foreign accent in dialogue I think you should be very restrained about it. A hint or two is enough.

It is very easy to overdo it. Kipling's soldier slang from 19th Century India is terrible. It is difficult to read, and as contemporary soldiers said 'No one ever talked like that'.

This is an example of his less extreme version:

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an` Tommy, fall be'ind,"
But it's " Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in the wind
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's " Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in the wind.

But oh, how Kipling got it dead right! It hasn't changed much in a century or two


"when you're wounded and lying on Afghanistan's plains
and the women come out to pluck what remains,
just lie on your rifle and blow out you brains
and go to your God like a soljer."

 

[wws_wws]

Why thank you! That's very nice of you.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

I don't think there's any trick to it. I never think consciously about dialogue. You just hear it in your head.

Edit: And if you're not hearing it, you probably shouldn't be writing it.

 

[sr71plt]

I don't think there's any trick to it. I never think consciously about dialogue. You just hear it in your head.

This is pretty much the way with me, as well. I'm so infused in the scene that it's just running on its own.

 

[SecondCircle]

I don't think about it, and I do. I don't actually try to make the dialogue go a certain way or read a certain way, but I do.

If I were to look back, I don't really consider the dialogue in my stories to be good or realistic or anything. It's what I try, though. Unrealistic or unbelievable dialogue kind of is a deal breaker for me as a reader. Some is too robotic, some is too complex, or just simply does not sound like the way people talk. When it stands out, it breaks my immersion in the story and reminds me that I'm reading.

As I read this thread, I again see plenty of examples of great dialogue advice. My thing is that there's never one or just a few ways to do it. Like anything else, there's LOADS of ways to write dialogue.

Mostly, I have a general idea of what characters are going to talk about, or if there are major points that they need to address pertinent to the story. But usually when my characters talk, what they say kind of unfolds before me. Mainly because I let them talk, and I try to have them respond realistically. I think "well what would someone actually say in that scenario" and better "what would THIS character say in this scenario". To me it kind of keeps the words from sounding scripted or forced.

The tags are a matter that is really here or there for me. It's one of them "rules o writing" things. Dialogue tags aren't needed. Use less adverbs in tags. Tags before. Tags after. Tags between. To me, there is not one true way to do it 100% of the time. I use all of these. I read back and if it's not confusing to do without tags, I'll lose them. But I don't like block text of just back and forth quotes.

The idea of you only need tags like "asked" and "said" is only true for me to a certain extent. I certainly don't want to read a story where every single spoken line was followed by "he said, she said, he asked." I think this was raised because most of the time, if you notice, when you're reading, your mind will skim right over the dialogue tag anyway unless its one that stands out to serve a specific effect. My eyes dart right past "he said". Now "he demanded" ? That serves a different purpose.

Of course, you can make "he demanded" unnecessary by showing he was being demanding in the dialogue itself.

"Give me the damn address."

See, to me, if you put "he demanded" after that sentence it'd be redundant. That sentence says enough by itself, and actually shows you the way he's saying that, not just telling you how he said it. But that's not to say never use those type of tags. I use a lot of tags like "screamed" or "whispered" because they provide a picture of HOW someone is talking. I've got a lot of horror stories that wouldn't be the same if only using "said, asked, replied".

Me? I am a huge fan of not just hearing the conversation, but WATCHING it. Thus, I describe the scene as they talk. Not heavily, but I show tidbits. You could say...

"I'm not sure where he went," she said nervously.

...But me personally, I'm a fan of...

Amy bit her lip as her eyes darted away. "I'm not sure where he went."

...I dunno if that's entirely correct. But I find I do not care. It conveys who is speaking, but rather than tell you how she said something, you're "watching" how she says it. Like you're right there, taking note of the habit of biting her lip at every question, or how she shifts in her chair, or tracing the glow on her thigh to the....

<shakes head> Sorry. Got distracted. Anyway I like little actions like that to break up the dialogue. Because it paints the picture. Makes you hang on tense words, puts more emphasis on how the characters are reacting to each other.

And I'm not particularly against adverbs. Or certain tags. Or use of dialect and slang or anything. There's no one way. But there is the way that works. It's up to the author to wield these techniques to make the story work. Pick your words, your tags, your adverbs, your slang, and use them where they help the most. Listen to how people speak. Play back an argument in your head. Watch a good drama and analyze it. Mix it up a bit. Lil of this or that. Try an adverb in this spot, then try to restructure the dialogue, or maybe show a little action. Try it all, and use it all wisely. After a while, you'll learn where you like to use what and develop your own style. You will realize that these techniques aren't rules or mandates. They are tools at your disposal.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I'll disagree somewhat on the adverbs. They're okay but should be used occasionally. Also, I think you don't need them, or need them much, if you've set up your characters and seen. Whether a character is saying something angrily or sheepishly could (should?) be gotten from context. I find that when writers go overboard with adverbs it's like they're trying to convince me that yes, things really are *this way*!

Again, I'm not saying never use them, because sometimes it's the best way to get across what you're doing but not always.

This. When an author relies heavily on adverbs in speech tags (or indeed fancy verbs - "he sniped", "she exaggerated") it leaves me feeling that they don't have confidence in the dialogue they've written. It's a "show, don't tell" thing.

After all, your characters don't have access to the script - they have to make sense of the conversation from word choices and contextual cues - so if your reader needs additional info to understand what's going on, how are the characters managing?

Adverbs/verbs that indicate mood can be useful, but even there - my characters aren't telepathic. Rather than write "she said excitedly" I'd rather describe how that excitement is expressed. I can do that with speech patterns: "Are you-I mean when will we-oh, this will be the best day ever!" or I can do it with nonverbal cues: "She was waving her hands as she spoke, and turning red in the face."

IME fancy adverbs/speech verbs are more useful for indirect speech, where they're replacing dialogue.