Hi everyone. You guys are so nice and helpful. I have another question. With this story I'm writing, the majority, like 70 percent is so far just narrative. There is only a bit of dialogue here and there. It is 3rd person, just so you know. What is everyone's take on this?? I have a couple of friends who are not writers, just avid readers, and they say, don't worry about it. The story is the story, and don't force the issue. But I just feel that is might be a little boring or something without a lot of dialogue. So anyways, what do you guys think?
Posted by Beth (Member # 2192) on :
Without actually reading it, it's hard to say; it might be completely perfect as is. But in general, I'd look at breaking it up more, particularly if your instincts are telling you its boring.
Posted by BuffySquirrel (Member # 2780) on :
Beth's right: it's impossible to do more than generalise without actually reading the work.
I confess that any story arriving in slush that presented solid pages of narrative used to make my heart sink. It's a lot more reading than mixed narrative/dialogue pages. A story that's mostly narrative may not be longer than a mixed story, but it feels longer. That said, too much bare dialogue and I lose interest, especially if I have to start playing "he said, she said".
Tastes differ. I like scenes. Other readers like, or at least don't mind, a lot of glossing and reported speech. I like scenes . Scenes involve dialogue.
That said, a gripping story is a gripping story, no matter how it's presented on the page. If you've written a gripping enough story, nobody's going to start counting the number of dialogue lines.
Posted by luapc (Member # 2878) on :
I agree with both Beth and Buffy Squirrel. There's nothing wrong with a story having either too much dialog, or too little, it simply has to be right for the story. Consider a story about a lone survivor somewhere with no one to talk to. It could be a very good story, and yet have absolutely no dialog. There's no hard and fast rules with writing fantasy. There's only common sense rules like spelling, punctuation, and grammar.
I will make a suggestion though that might help you adjust a story if you find it has too much narative. Take one of the scenes that is completely narative and introduce an outside non important character. In SF it could even be a computer or something, and talk the scene out through dialog instead.
Posted by ChrisOwens (Member # 1955) on :
I'm just brainstorming without a very big brain, so how am I even typing this?
Do your friends give real objective judgements, what OSC calls a "Wise Reader"? Or are they just telling you what you want to here? I know that might sound a little harsh, but people may value your friendship over your writing, and thus they might not make the best objective audience. Oftentimes, the writer might not even be objective enough themselves to judge.
For me, if it is blocks of straight dialog, that would be a bit of a challenge to read, just as if it were blocks of narritive with no break.
Take Roger Zelazny's first novel, "This Immortal". While I really like Zelazny's works, his first novel had blocks of dialog that made it unenjoyable for me. Sometimes it was a challenge to even follow who was saying what. Of course, that was just straight dialog, no narritive beats at all.
But what do I know? It tied with Dune for a Hugo.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 1563) on :
Remember Ursula LeGuin's classic short story, "Those Who Walk Away From Omelas." One of the most powerful short stories ever written, and not one line of dialogue!
So, as said before, it depends.
(BTW, if you haven't read the above story, what are you waiting for? Go down to the library and find it! )
Posted by Silver3 (Member # 2174) on :
Yeah, but it was quite a short story. But I think the majority is right: you can't know until you try. It's your story, not ours. (incidentally, does anyone know in which volume I could find "Omelas"? I've been wanting to own it for ages, but I can't find something still in print containing it).
Posted by Leaf II (Member # 2924) on :
Thanks for the help, guys. I definately have a 'wise reader,' so that's all good. They've been very helpful, as opposed to being a 'yes man.'
Also, in another part of the forum I can solicit readers to help with my story, right? I've only read some of the rules for that so far ( don't worry I will though, but Im not ready to post anything yet).
And the title is actually "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas" (my bad ).
Posted by djvdakota (Member # 2002) on :
If the narrative is simply exposition (like the way fairy tales are told) then I'd be concerned. If it involves a good number of active scenes, that may very well be dialogue-less, then I don't see a problem with it.
Posted by Paul-girtbooks (Member # 2799) on :
Thomas Ligotti, the short story writer, uses very little dialog and his stories are excellent. So, as a lot of people have pointed out, it really does depend on how good the story is and whether the story doesn't need a lot, if any, dialog.
[This message has been edited by Paul-girtbooks (edited October 12, 2005).]
Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :
To be any good, dialog needs narrative context. The reverse isn't true.
Of course, dialog can contain narrative context, so there are occasional all dialog stories that work just as there are stories with no dialog at all which also work.
Don't make characters say things just so you'll have more dialog. Don't muzzle them because you think you have too much. Let them say what they say.
. Scenes involve dialogue.
).