How do you feel about dialog tags? I know a book needs them--obviously--but how often should they be in there? Every few lines, if there are just two people? What about substituting action that can only be a certain character instead of the standard tag? ex-- "Stop that," Jane said swatting at him. Vs. "Stop that." Jane swatted his hand away from her. I realize that the second can't be done in every case and I really hate books where I have to go back up the page to find the start of a section of dialog and do the he said she said and then he said and she said to figure out who said what.
So the question is---is keeping them at an absolute minimum the best way to go?
Shawn
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
Actually, since "he said" and "she said" are almost invisible enough to be subliminal (the eye reads them, but the mind only pays attention to the information they give about who is speaking), they aren't intrusive in the text.
What this means is that you can actually put them in with every single piece of dialog and the reader will probably not notice.
So the question becomes, "if I want to leave them out, how much can I leave out?" instead of how much you have to put them in.
When there are only two speakers, and they aren't just talking heads (other things are going on), you can indicate the speaker by action tags (like your example) instead of the "he said" and "she said" indicators.
Also, when there are only two people, you only need to give an indication, of whatever kind, every fourth or fifth speech.
By the way, I have had six short stories published with speakers indicated only by action tags--no "he said" or "she said" at all. Only one editor said anything about this, and that was only about one place in one story.
So, it can be done, but you should be very sure that's the right way to do it for the story.
Posted by srhowen (Member # 462) on :
Thanks Kathleen. I am beginning to think that I am obsessing about this story!
It’s a first person. I’ve never done one seriously before so I am learning as I go with this one.
Shawn
Posted by JK (Member # 654) on :
For me, it's always action tags. They seem less obtrusive to me, and I think it gives a better visual impression of the scene as well. In all my stuff combined, I've probably only got about five "he said"s. But that's just me. JK
Posted by Parvo (Member # 1097) on :
I agree with JK. While the 'he said' tags certainly aren't annoying or even noticable, I find that in my day to day life, conversations rarely occur without some sort of action. If I'm bored with the conversation, my mind will begin wandering. If I'm uncomfortable with the topic, I'll start fidgeting. I think there is a lot that can be said about a character based on his actions during dialog--instead of simply speaking.
Posted by Joyce (Member # 956) on :
And that, Parvo, brings me to this question:
What is everyone's opinion on how to relay that action? I've read that one should avoid writing Swifties... she typed, quickly.
So, I'm not sure what approach to use.
Joyce
Posted by JP Carney (Member # 894) on :
She typed, quickly. ******** Buggers. She glanced over her shoulder, then back to the monitor. I'm not going to make it. Her fingers blured as they flew across the keyboard, her nails clicking on the keys. Then she heard the ding of the elevator. ******** It's a good question, Joyce. Personally, I try to avoid them, but it does take a conscious effort. When I find them in my writing I try to see if there is a way to get rid of them. When I do it always makes the writing stronger.
Posted by Joyce (Member # 956) on :
So, what you are saying is that I would just leave off the he said/she said all together? Just write the dialogue. End it. Write the action.
??? Joyce
Posted by SiliGurl (Member # 922) on :
Sometimes you can use action tags in lieu of "he said/she said." JP's post above perfectly illustrates this. Personally, I prefer this approach to the said-isms.
Just my opinion.
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
Joyce, the problem with Swifties is that they use adverbs, and adverbs tend to be crutches for weak verbs.
Since we're discussing "said" here, using an adverb makes "said" seem weak. Which leads to something even worst (something called "said bookisms").
Since the advice is usually to get rid of the adverbs and make the verbs stronger, writers try to do this with "said" and come up with some possibilities and a lot of impossibilities.
Instead of "he said sneeringly" you have "he sneered" (as a bad example). How do you sneer words?
The better thing to do is let the reader understand how something was said by the context and from the words themselves. And/or from the action tags.
And leave "said" unmodified.
Posted by JK (Member # 654) on :
Hmm, never heard the term 'Swiftie' before. You learn something new every day. I find that you rarely need to use just plain old 'said'. He whispered, she screamed, he murmered. These are fine, because they endow the speech with a special quality. Whether or not you can sneer words is trickier. Personally, I like to convey action like this:
"Where are you going?" He lowered his mug. I shrugged. "Just out."
The whole question of Swifties is difficult for me to address, since I'm still unsure as to what they really are. Care to enlighten me? JK
Posted by Joyce (Member # 956) on :
Jk, my dear, please do not get caught up with this. It was used as an example of what NOT to say, so some of you would post to to say instead. All it is is adding an 'ly' word for the action.
he/she said _____ly
Joyce
Posted by srhowen (Member # 462) on :
hmmm---somehow any of the swifties can sound bad. He said annoyingly. He said angrily. He said modestly. Who is annoyed? The speaker or the person being spoken to? Same with the others. I think that's what makes them weak.
Try, "blah blah." I(and or character name) know he said it just to annoy me. Or "blah blah blah." His annoyance colored his voice. More direct we know who is affected by the words.
Shawn
Posted by JK (Member # 654) on :
Ah, I get it. Ooh, no, stay away from swifties. Terrible things, they are. On a completely unrelated topic, why did Kathleen lock down the 'Honest crit' thread? Anyone (Kathleen, preferably)? JK
Posted by JP Carney (Member # 894) on :
My guess, the level to which the thread had degenerated. What started out as an honest attempt to discuss copyright and the confusion of the issue with the advent of the internet slid quickly to something that was soon to be (if it wasn't already) useless for everyone.
Yeah, I could (and probably should) have let Kathleen answer first, but ah well.
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
JP Carney is most astute.
Posted by JK (Member # 654) on :
Ah, but it was kinda funny really. The kid e-mailed me yesterday, and he wasn't best pleased by what I'd said. He was so indignant, it was hard not to laugh. I know, I know, you're right. *Walks away, muttering about some people being no fun* JK
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
I realize that it may seem funny to you (and you are right, if you're thinking "some people have no sense of humor"), but it wasn't funny to them.
Not being taken seriously adds insult to injury, I'm sure.
I closed down the topic because it had degenerated into personal attacks (calling people "rude" is a personal attack in my mind).
It also did not appear to be helping anyone, any more.
Ah, well.
Can we go back to talking about dialog tags now?
Posted by JK (Member # 654) on :
Yeah, sorry. I was being out of line there, wasn't I? I'd like to say something about 'he said' tags again, if I may. I was reading a Crichton this morning (Timeline), who uses this particular tag an awful lot. And it struck me that it was the only tag that he'd used throughout the last two 'chapters'. Not one of his characters had murmered or whispered, or done anything but plain 'said'. And I hadn't realised. All through this time, I'd been making the characters whisper when necessary, speak consipratorially when Crichton hadn't said they were doing so. I have renewed faith in 'she said' tags, although when I analysed what Crichton did, I noticed that he'd been very clever about it. It wasn't amateurish at all. I'm babbling now. JK
Posted by killian (Member # 417) on :
Isn't that non-realization what we're trying to achieve in some sense? For the reader (or even the writer) to become into the story so far that the actual tags become neutral and the story is just told? ...That didn't make sense, did it. Let me try again. If we just tell our story without the language interfering with the story, then we've done our job of storytelling. Like Swifties for example. Sure, they can show action, but the language becomes an inadvertent pun as well. Swifties such as," 'Pass the pickles,' he said sourly," can make the reader giggle, but also take him out of the story, ruining the willing suspension of disbelief.
Posted by JK (Member # 654) on :
I got what you meant, Killian, and I think you're right. We're trying to weave a reality, and dialogue tags are an instrument of weaving, but can definitely be a metophorical glass of cold water to the face. What I meant to say before is that lots of 'he said, she saids' can, for me at least, act like the same glass of cold water. Crichton's skill with it just goes to show that nothing in the creative writing world is a constant, I suppose. I think I'm babbling again. Must be a product of the revision... JK
