Beats, as defined by Browne and King in their book SELF-EDITING FOR FICTION WRITERS, is our first topic.

Officially joined:
snapper
sjsampson
branteaton
Symphonyofnames
OWASM
arriki

quote:

---

Beats are the bits of action interspersed through a scene, such as a character walking to a window or removing his glasses and rubbing his eyes--the literary equivalent of what is known in the theater as "stage business."

---

There are a lot of good concepts in Browne & King's book, but the concept of beats is one I have really incorporated into my writing.

I think it helps the writer to consciously control the speed of dialogue. One story that I wrote was virtually beat-less. Other than tags, I had good sized sections of snappy dialogue. It worked for that. But in other stories it made the action seemed rushed when it wasn't.

The control aspect isn't just beat or not. It's the length of the beat and how it acts as additional punctuation to the dialogue.

Yeah, the concept has helped me gain better control of my stories.

Here is a discussion I've edited with my reply.

How can we tell beats from necessary story actions? Sometimes the narration is not a beat but the reaction to what was said or happening -- ?

Snapper:

What if he’s not the first? What if they can’t find out what happened? What if…?”

I stood, held up my hands and pushed my palms out. “Let’s not jump to conclusions, Janie.

This didn’t work. I tried to show my MC trying to calm his down wife who is starting panic with his actions. It wasn’t clear to more than one reader.

This was your comment on it, arriki. -- You are putting in too many beats rather than relying on the impact of your dialogue

WriterDan felt the same way you did. -- This sounds a bit too literal. Soften the actions a bit.

Arriki: Look at it this way –

“What if he’s not the first? What if they can’t find out what happened? What if--?

“Let’s not jump to conclusions, Janie.”
(Then put in an action (and it would be an action in that case, not a beat)after his line that shows him comforting or calming her right here or even in the same paragraph.)

What I feel is the problem in this snippet is that you have interrupted the flow of their conversation with your beat. Beats do not perform well – just MY opinion – when they interrupt the flow of the action/dialogue. They do better slipped into little pauses, places where the topic changes, things like that. They are meant ( again, as I see it???) to support the story, not to make it.

Snapper:
I could cut the action out and let the dialog do the work but then the reader may want to know what the characters are doing.

Arriki: This isn’t true. Not these days. Not with good writing.

Snapper: Take too many actions out and your characters become flat and the story looks like it is being done inside a white room.

Arriki: No. You put in the right touches to evoke the scene/actions/setting in the reader’s mind. Granted, the reader might not see exactly what you had pictured. How many times have you heard people upon seeing a favorite story brought to the screen say – That’s NOT how I pictured it --? The strongest draw is to bring the reader into the story as an active participant. Modern fiction is more akin to Impressionism than Renaissance painting. Look at the writers with consistently superstar sales. Usually not in our genres. People like JK Rowling, Janet Evanovich, Robert B Parker, Martin Cruz Smith, even George RR Martin.

Snapper: Attaching beats into a plot is a balancing act. Making them work is not easy. Readers will have different opinions on them as well.

Arriki: Beats are not random. There are rules/guidelines underlying their use. We just have to figure them out. Always there are exceptions, but most probably hew to the guidelines. I think. That’s one of the reasons I wanted to start this discussion. I’m too on my own. I need outside views to tell when I’m wrong.

As I said it's a matter of pacing and control. If a writer gets beat happy, the dialog loses all of its punch.

The consequences of a white room dialog scene is that most readers need some clues to the environment, if they don't have any it becomes harder for them to get into the story.

So the key is striking a balance. If a reader has to concentrate on reading about a person looking, bringing their hands up and doing something with them that takes away from the flow of dialog, then the beat is too long unless the writer purposely wants a space in the dialogue for the reader to consider what's been said.

As I said it's an art.

Edited to say: It's an art I am still in the earlier stages of learning.

Has everybody found their way over here?

Write out about ten lines of dialogue with tags only. Then experiment with the flow. That's how Browne & King show it.

Every dialog is going to be different. I personally think of it as timing. You definitely don't need or want a beat after every little piece, but you want to show a flow.

Drawing a gun is usually part of the action of a scene.
(Not a stellar example of my writing, but can you see my point?)

"I heard what you said about my wife," growled Vinnie.
John shrugged. "So? It's the truth."
"What's truth got to do with it?"
"The reporter said he needed to verify the facts. He's going with the story in--"
Vinnie ripped the Beretta out of his side holster. "You XXXXX!"
"I didn't have a choice, Vinnie!"
"You don't now, either. Scumbag!"

Trite, yeah. But let's look at it.
John shrugging is a beat because I needed to name the other person in this scene. It colors the moment in the scene a bit but the line would have done just as well without it.

Drawing the gun, on the other hand, is part of the story action. It's a reaction to what John just said. In fact, the scene plays maybe a tiny bit better without his swearing, don't you think?

"I heard what you said about my wife," growled Vinnie.
John shrugged. "So? It's the truth."
"What's truth got to do with it?"
"The reporter said he needed to verify the facts. He's going with the story in--"
Vinnie ripped the Beretta out of his side holster.
"I didn't have a choice, Vinnie!"
"You don't now, either. Scumbag!"

Is this making sense to any of the rest of you guys?

[This message has been edited by arriki (edited August 20, 2009).]

"Clem, I do believe you've insulted me," he said, reaching for his gun.

To me, that is an action used as a beat to the dialog. I look at actions as beats when used in the flow of conversation. Perhaps not as the classical 'looked out the window' kind of beat, but it all figures into how you construct the flow scene as it is presented to the reader.

Maybe I'm wrong in this, but the results are the same.

quote:

---

"I heard what you said about my wife," growled Vinnie.
John shrugged. "So? It's the truth."
"What's truth got to do with it?"
"The reporter said he needed to verify the facts. He's going with the story in--"
Vinnie ripped the Beretta out of his side holster.
"I didn't have a choice, Vinnie!"
"You don't now, either. Scumbag!"

---

No question that the scene is stronger without the cursing, as it was, but maybe the swearign would have had more effect if placed before the action and if the wording of the beat was changed to blend with the flow

quote:

---

"I heard what you said about my wife," growled Vinnie.
John shrugged. "So? It's the truth."
"What's truth got to do with it?"
"The reporter said he needed to verify the facts. He's going with the story in--"
"Why you @#$*!" Vinnie said as he ripped the Beretta out of his side holster.
"I didn't have a choice, Vinnie!"
"You don't now, either. Scumbag!"

---

I submit I could improve on this if I add another visual element to the beat.

quote:

---

"I heard what you said about my wife," growled Vinnie.
John shrugged. "So? It's the truth."
"What's truth got to do with it?"
"The reporter said he needed to verify the facts. He's going with the story in--"
"Why you @#$*!" Vinnie said as he ripped the Beretta out of his side holster.
John backed into the oak desk and dug his fingernails into its hard surface as he stared at the guns barrel pointed at his belly.
"I didn't have a choice, Vinnie!"
"You don't now, either. Scumbag!"

---

Does this not add to the tension? Or at least convey that John realizes that he may be in over his head?
The example you wrote before was that white room effect that I mentioned before. I agree that a lot of us overwrite. We want the reader to see what is in our head. I had it drilled into my brain that you shouldn't write down to the reader. I believe that is what your lesson is trying to tell us, but writing is a form of art, not unlike a painting. Beats are like adding background to a scenery. Too many and your painting becomes to busy. Take too many away and portrait becomes nothing more than a stick figure.
Beats can be overused, I agree.

The "reaching for his gun" - won't that require a reaction in the story?

The problem, as I see it, is how to discern the differences between beats and story actions.

Story actions are responses to actions except (?) for the first one on a topic, maybe just the first action in a scene?

According to Browne and King page 102
Beats enable your reader to picture the action in a scene, allow you to vary the rhythm of the dialogue, and help reveal your character’s personalities.

enable your reader to picture the action in a scene -- What exactly does that mean? I’m confused about this one. Can we come up with some examples demonstrating it?

allow you to vary the rhythm of the dialogue – This one should be easy to come up with an example of.

Possibly just -- John backed into the oak desk. -- would work. Now the question is - does it increase the tension either way?

"I heard what you said about my wife," growled Vinnie.
John shrugged. "So? It's the truth."
"What's truth got to do with it?"
"The reporter said he needed to verify the facts. He's going with the story in--"
"Why you @#$*!" Vinnie said as he ripped the Beretta out of his side holster.
John backed into the oak desk. "I didn't have a choice, Vinnie!"
"You don't now, either. Scumbag!"

or does the simpler, cleaner -- Vinnie ripped the Beretta out of his side holster.-- give enough information for the reader without slowing the action down?

"I heard what you said about my wife," growled Vinnie.
John shrugged. "So? It's the truth."
"What's truth got to do with it?"
"The reporter said he needed to verify the facts. He's going with the story in--"
Vinnie ripped the Beretta out of his side holster.
John backed into the oak desk as he stared down the barrel of the gun. "I didn't have no choice, Vinnie!"

hmmm something about -- "Why you @#$*!" Vinnie said as he ripped the Beretta out of his side holster. -- bothers me. It's too complicated somehow? Is it the inclusion of "Vinnie said" that makes this not work to my satisfaction?

"Why you @#$*!" Vinnie ripped the Beretta out of his side holster.
John backed into the oak desk as he stared down the barrel of the gun.
"I didn't have no choice, Vinnie!"

This is a very simple scene and yet look how many delicate choices we have in its composition just with ordering the actions and beats.

[This message has been edited by arriki (edited August 20, 2009).]

In a real story this scene would be more than what we see here. There would be some sort of setting information at the opening somewhere. What I was trying for was a look at just how beats control the pace of a scene. Don't worry about white rooms for a while. These are just examples tailored to specific problems. Beats and how they affect a run of dialogue is what we're working through here, right now.

Thiking on it, the example that Browne and King used first had only one bit of setting in it -- where Mr. Wade walks over to the "window" -- white room? I'll bet, if we had the full text, the opening would have a tad more setting information. Maybe not. It's a doctor's office probably. We've all been there.

Are you getting any insights out of this?

quote:

---

snapper's -- John backed into the oak desk and dug his fingernails into its hard surface as he stared at the guns barrel pointed at his belly. -- seems to me to slow the flow of the scene down. The beat is too complex.
Possibly just -- John backed into the oak desk. -- would work. Now the question is - does it increase the tension either way?

---

My opinion, yes. Not only does it increase the tension it adds life to the scene. This line heightens John's fear. Add the gun pointing at his belly also shows how serious the threat is. Let's examine the scene with a minimum amount of beats again.

quote:

---

"I heard what you said about my wife," growled Vinnie.
John shrugged. "So? It's the truth."
"What's truth got to do with it?"
"The reporter said he needed to verify the facts. He's going with the story in--"
Vinnie ripped the Beretta out of his side holster.
"I didn't have no choice, Vinnie!"
"You don't now, either. Scumbag!"

---

These are a pair of monotoned stiffs. Is it wise that all the emotion in this scene relies on a single misused speech tag and two exclamation marks? These two characters could be robots in a disney theme park with all the effort put into this scene. It is bland.
To make matters worse the beat left behind could be misinterpetted. The Beretta that Vinnie ripped out of the holster could have been on John's waist. Wouldn't that have a whole different meaning to this scene?

Now back to my painting analogy

quote:

---

John backed into the oak desk and dug his fingernails into its hard surface as he stared at the guns barrel pointed at his belly.

---

Now I am going to admit that this line could use improvement, but the dug his fingernails into its hard surface is the smile on the Mona Lisa in this scene. It changes John's mood from concern to one where he just sh*t his pants. It is the part that elevates the tension for the entire paragraph. Where the gun is pointed adds two things as well.
1) It shows just how serious Vinny is with his threat
2) Shows that John has become very aware of his mortality

I welcome others to comment on this as well. I would be interested on how others interpet the different beats.

Even an impressionist doesn't leave bare spots on a canvas. If there is a white background, it is painted white.

Beats are extra brush strokes. If you think about computer graphics, beats are the drop shadow on a picture. It makes the graphic pop a bit on the screen.

I guess at some point this devolves into personal taste.
But let's try to find the points or rules that seem to hold overall.

Can you see that beats work wonderfully at places where the topic changes? And at places where there is a pause?

But I appreciate your point where there is a place where action must be separated and not treated or regarded by the writer as a beat. I think that's where the 'art' comes in.

In all instances the writer is responsible for determining what should be treated as a beat (non-germane action?) and what not (germane action?) Does that make my point more consistent with your view, arriki?

For example, beatless

quote:

---

"I'm sorry, Vinnie. It's gone to print already, it's too late."
"Can't you stop the presses?"

---

Nice, polite and boring. But add a small beat.

quote:

---

"I'm sorry, Vinnie. It's gone to print already, it's too late."
Vinnie frowned. "Can't you stop the presses?"

---

Polite and boring. This needs some pazazz.

quote:

---

"I'm sorry, Vinnie. It's gone to print already, it's too late."
Vinnie seized John's collar and pressed the gun into his temple. "Can't you think of a way to stop the presses?"

---

Now Vinnie sounds mad, but I want him to look cold as well.

quote:

---

"I'm sorry, Vinnie. It's gone to print already, it's too late."
Vinnie seized John's collar and pressed the gun into his temple. The grizzly Italian smiled as he framed his question in a nice, polite tone. "Can't you think of a way to stop the presses?"

---

At which point does this get to be too much? Sometimes dialog doesn't tell the story and you need that extra visual effect to hammer home what you want to say.

Hmmm, now we're getting into something interesting.

But this is killing me, so I had to.

quote:

---

When DOES narration be a beat and when does it become story action?

---

quote:

---

Good dialogue doesn't NEED explanations. Beats just sort of help it, but are not absolutely necessary.

---

I think you answered your own question. A beat adds to the story but isn't necessary for the scene. An action would be necessary to the scene.

quote:

---

That's the point - it doesn't. The emotion comes through the dialogue itself. Good dialogue doesn't NEED explanations. Beats just sort of help it, but are not absolutely necessary.

---

Good point. Now all we need is an example we can analyze.

Here is snippet sjsampson sent along.

A Game of Thrones – George R. R. Martin – Jon’s first chapter

“Is this one of the direwolves I’ve heard so much of?” a familiar voice asked close at hand.

Jon looked up happily as his uncle Ben put a hand on his head and ruffled his hair much as Jon had ruffled the wolf’s. “Yes,” he said. “His name is Ghost.”

a familiar voice asked close at hand. – is this a beat? Or is it an explanatory speaker attribution?

Then there’s this -- Jon looked up happily as his uncle Ben put a hand on his head and ruffled his hair much as Jon had ruffled the wolf’s.

I was thinking this is a beat, but after our discussion, I’m unclear. It may be story action.

Suppose it read –

“Is this one of the direwolves I’ve heard so much of?”
Jon looked up happily as his uncle Ben put a hand on his [Jon’s] head and ruffled his hair much as Jon had ruffled the wolf’s. “Yes. His name is Ghost.”

Losing the familiar voice doesn’t affect the story, but the looking up and the hand on Jon’s head and ruffling hair are story actions whose presence show the reader something about the relationship between Jon and Ben in a subtle way. Don’t they?

In some ways I’m more confused than when we began this discussion. But then maybe I’m in the process of clearing up the greater confusion I wasn’t aware of back then.

I think we need to look at bunch more examples.

I divide "beats'" contributions into immersion effect and fiction-writing mode.

Immersion effect applies to dialogue and the body of a narrative as well, though in the fiction-writing modes is where "beats" are powerful for contributing to immersion and meaning. As I know "beats," their purpose is to contribute context, subtext, pace, proportion, and magnitude to dialogue. Immersion relies on other story attributes as much as "beats" and dialogue, like reader resonance, the various qualities of character, setting, theme, tone, and especially plot, like cause and effect, sympathy and suspense, and problem and purpose, and so on.

It's in fiction-writing modes that I uncovered the most insight into the power of "beats," especially sensation, emotion, recollection, and introspection modes. "Beats" discernibly attributed to a focal character, ideally from a point of view character's perspective for purposes of establishing and maintaining immersion, in summarization, explanation, and exposition modes--in other words tells--are readily more palatable than a narrator's tell. For me, that's often what a tell is, a narrator's unnecessary intrusion in a narrative.

That pretty much leaves action depiction and transition mode as the remaining fiction-writing modes useful in "beats," or in the larger realms of narrative and, of course, not forgetting dialogue.

Indivisible yet distinguishable in well-written stories, the fiction-writng modes' "beats" do what "beats" do best, contribute context, subtext, pace, proportion, and magnitude to otherwise flat "Brenda Star" talking head syndrome dialogue.

Dissecting a "beat" for what it contributes to a line of dialogue might reveal a combination of several modes, ie., an action depiction of a facial expression, say a blush, is also a visual sensation with emotional context. That external reaction of a focal character perceived by a point of view character then allows for a follow-on introspective interpretation of it in another beat, as needed.

A blush by itself is open to several interpretations or misinterpretations. It's an involuntary reaction that can be fleeting in time. A cluster of expressions and/or gestures is more easily and accurately interpreted, like a blush followed by a covering expression intended to shield the blusher's surprise, for example.

For me, beats are absolutely necessary to deliver the expressions of the non-pov characters and the attitude of my pov characters, simply because my characters DON'T express themselves well or fully through dialogue. They're teens, after all. But I'm not convinced I'll ever write people who actually say what they mean.

So here's an example, short and poor, like me:
---------
"Don't let it get to you," said Cecilia.
"I'm not," he lied.
She didn't look convinced but she didn't press it. "See you Monday, then."
---------

Does good writing really consist of dialogue that says it all? That really supports my belief that we introverts get no respect. Everybody loves an extrovert, even in fiction!

Is that any different than when Vinnie pulls the gun? If so, how?

Which brings us back to the question of when is it a beat and when is it an action in the story?

I'm going to back and read the full chapter. I once thought I could recognize beats but now I'm not so certain.

If the scene just becomes a bit more flat, it's more than likely a beat. If without the phrase, the scene loses continuity, it's more than likely an action.

Therefore, pulling a gun would be an action.

Gripping the arms tightly on a chair would be a beat.

That's my take after all this.

quote:

---

Which brings us back to the question of when is it a beat and when is it an action in the story?

---

I'm going to have to agree with MAP's simple explanation, but I disagree with her conclusion for the Vinny question.

quote:

---

I think you answered your own question. A beat adds to the story but isn't necessary for the scene. An action would be necessary to the scene.

In the above example, I think the guy pulling the gun is an action. It changes the dynamics of the scene, and without it, the scene would be completely different.

---

Although I really like extrinsic's longer explanation of beats. Especially this line:

quote:

---

Indivisible yet distinguishable in well-written stories, the fiction-writng modes' "beats" do what "beats" do best, contribute context, subtext, pace, proportion, and magnitude to otherwise flat "Brenda Star" talking head syndrome dialogue.

---

And to answer arriki's question:

quote:

---

Is that any different than when Vinnie pulls the gun? If so, how?

---

The actual dialogue provided by snapper actually implies to me that the gun was already pulled. There is no actual drawing action. The danger already exists and when the gun is held directly to John's temple and Vinnie smiles, it provides context and the magnitude of the danger. That's my opinion. Now if the gun were pulled at that exact point instead of just pointed at his temple, I would be more tempted to say it was an action.

[This message has been edited by sjsampson (edited August 20, 2009).]

quote:

---

“Is this one of the direwolves I’ve heard so much of?”
Jon looked up happily as his uncle Ben put a hand on his [Jon’s] head and ruffled his hair much as Jon had ruffled the wolf’s. “Yes. His name is Ghost.”

Losing the familiar voice doesn’t affect the story, but the looking up and the hand on Jon’s head and ruffling hair are story actions whose presence show the reader something about the relationship between Jon and Ben in a subtle way. Don’t they?

---

I would say no. A mismatch of things happen and I would have suggested they were broken up. The action is in fact telling. Jon's mood is narrated to us, and worse, the reason for his mood is told.
I have been taught to show instead of tell. The first part of the sentence could have been...
Jon looked up happily
...if it wasn't so telling. The narration tells us what he looked like instead of showing. Funny thing is, it would have been easy.
Jon smiled
The rest of the sentence is an expalnation why John 'looked up happily'. Not a beat, IMO.

Then there is mitchellworks example...

quote:

---

"Don't let it get to you," said Cecilia.
"I'm not," he lied.
She didn't look convinced but she didn't press it. "See you Monday, then."

---

I would say no to this as well. In fact...

She didn't look convinced but she didn't press it

...is confusing to whose POV this is.

She didn't look convinced

Who is looking at her to make this determination?

but she didn't press it

Only she could know this.

I am thinking that I am only adding to the confusion

Something to think on overnight.

they do have more insightful gems.

page 106

...beats allow your readers to picture your dialogue taking place. As with other forms of description, you want to give your readers enough detail to allow them to picture the action and yet enough leeway for their imaginations to work. You want to define the action without overdefining it. If your dialogue is taking place over dinner, for instance, an occasional dropped fork or sip of wine are enough to keep the readers on the scene. You don't need a description of the meal from soup to nuts.

page 108

..."He blew his nose on the sheet." That little bit of action tells as much or more about that character than an entire page of narration on his slovenliness or even a description of his bedroom. Beats can be a powerful and efficient way to convey to convey your characters.

They can also be pointless, distracting, cliched -- or repetitive.

quote:

---

but she didn't press it

Only she could know this.

---

I don't agree with that statement. You can lie to someone, know they don't believe you, and also know they decided not to force the issue.

quote:

---

I'm going to have to agree with MAP's simple explanation, but I disagree with his conclusion for the Vinny question.

---

I was unclear; I wasn't referring to the above example. I was referring to this scene..

quote:

---

"I heard what you said about my wife," growled Vinnie.
John shrugged. "So? It's the truth."
"What's truth got to do with it?"
"The reporter said he needed to verify the facts. He's going with the story in--"
Vinnie ripped the Beretta out of his side holster.
"I didn't have no choice, Vinnie!"
"You don't now, either. Scumbag!"

---

I am also a girl by the way, not that it matters, but being called he was weird.

quote:

---

Is this one of the direwolves I’ve heard so much of?” a familiar voice asked close at hand.

Jon looked up happily as his uncle Ben put a hand on his head and ruffled his hair much as Jon had ruffled the wolf’s. “Yes,” he said. “His name is Ghost.”

---

I think all non dialog is a beat in this scene, but it does add nicely to the story as all good beats should. It does establish proximity of the speakers to each other and show their relationship.

I disagree with you Snapper that "Jon looked up happily as his uncle is..." line is a tell. A tell would be saying Jon was close to his uncle. But this scene nicely shows that Jon is close to his uncle by their interactions and his joy.

Also I think "looking up happily.." cannot be replaced with a smile. That line paints Jon as a child, a very young child to me. Looking up happily is such a childish thing whereas a smile gives a more adult feel.

Anyway, that is my take on it.

I would like to say that the I found the POV switches distracting and I lost track of who was say what in the example you sent to us but we are to discuss the beats (or lack of them) and find out whether they work or not.

Yes the beats show a couple of things. Her regret, and not much else now that I go over it again. Here is a couple of reasons why…

quote:

---

She stared at the weapon. She wanted very much to pull the trigger.

---

I don’t know whom she wants to shoot and there is only two people in the scene. I’m serious. It could be herself she wants to put out of her misery. The dialog doesn’t provide me with enough information for me to make a determination.

quote:

---

Heshy saw the wetness in her eyes. This was not about the money. He knew that.

---

Aww, the POV switch. Not thrilled about ‘wetness in her eyes’ when ‘tears’ or (if you want to be more dramatic) ‘her eyes welling’, would work better, IMO, but I do get the beat. The rest is telling. I do not believe it is a beat but commentary by the narrator.

quote:

---

Lydia moved into Heshy's lap, curled into him like a kitten. He wrapped his giant arms around her and for a moment, Lydia calmed. She felt safe and quiet. She closed her eyes. She loved the feeling. And she knew -- as he did -- that it would never last. That it would never be enough.

---

Okay, I get it. She digs him and feels comforted by him, but who’s flying the plane? It just took off!

This is what I am noticing by the examples, thus far. They are from noir-type of action hero stories and romance tales. The criteria (I believe) of what works and what doesn’t for the genre that most of chose to write in is quite different.
Truthfully, I am not impressed by the writing in this example. Too many questions, who, what , why, are left behind for me. The dialog is plain. It needs help, be that beats, action, or whatever it takes to capture my interest.

The pov is a narrator. At least, I think so. That's why the pov switches. I think.

To me, knowing the whole story, this is a powerful scene, a big turning point in the heart of the novel. Has anyone else here, or lurking here, read it? NO SECOND CHANCE by Harlan Coben. If so, what do you think?

That's the problem with snippets, they are like plants pulled out of the ground. They come trailing roots with dirt clinging to them, their actual form lost. Did that make any sense?

Got go. Work calls.

The closest element that might be a beat is when Lydia moves to his lap and curls into him like a kitten. When he comforts her by wrapping her in his arms, we're back into action mode that is vital to the story. I think the closing her eyes and loving the feeling ends up being part of the story because she refers to it as knowing it would never last, taking it from beat to action.

Even the wetness of her eyes is an action that results in a reaction on Heshy's part, moving the scene along and adding to the cumulative effects of the scene resulting the ultimate decision to kill.

Am I offbase with this thinking?

Beats are useful to demonstrate what the dialogue can't show. If we were sitting in a room, we could see if John is smiling, or frowning, pulling a gun, or whatever when he speaks. But a reader can't see those things unless a writer focuses attention on them. I call this the writer's hurdle in dialogue. Like most beginners, i tried to overcome this by adding in beats, tags, and lots of adverbs. Now I know that isn't good.

Snappers dialogue in the Vinnie example evolved until it showed what he wanted: a cold, murderous threat. That was adding tags to demonstrate what the spoken words alone lacked. So I think that beats are useful to show what the dialogue can't.

So I guess my question is, when do you rely on Tags and beats to tell the story, and when do you rely on snappy, descriptive dialogue? Where is the balance?

Here's a great exercise I am going to do to try and answer my own question. I recently rented "Man from Earth" thinking it was going to be a great science fiction movie. It was, but not in the way I expected. It was a bunch of science professors sitting around having a discussion. That's it. The whole movie. But it was still interesting. I want to transcribe their dialogue (at least for a few minutes of scenes) and see how:
1) the dialogue itself shows what is going on without tags and beats.
2) where it NEEDS tags and beats to overcome the writer's hurdle.

That is, if I understand beats correctly this time.

Of course, then the question becomes even stickier.
So, if all the narrative in a scene told through dialogue is a beat, what about scenes that are all narration and scenes that are a heavy mix of dialogue and narration?

Reading manuscripts I do “feel” the difference between good beats and bad – a lot of the time. I don’t think I’m all that wrong, but, with this new information, I’m kind of feeling lost.

The scene from NO SECOND CHANCE, if all narrative is beats – then we have to evaluate each bit of narrative.

"Beats" in script writing are largely stage directions for actors, props, and scenery.

A simple "beat," [Antonio pauses.]

A more meaningful "beat," [Antonio picks up knife.]

A "beat" with emotional context, [Antonio flutters eyelids, grins, counts money.]

A classic "beat," [Exuent Romeo.]

A narrative dialogue scene relies on "beats" to provide context for the dialogue. The term I prefer, dialogue attributes are indivisible but distinguishable combinations or permutations of narration, action, description, introspection, emotion, recollection, sensation--dialogue's spoken words are an aural sensation depiction--summarization, explanation, exposition, and transition fiction-writing modes.

An action scene relies on fiction-writing mode "beats" to provide context for the action. Action attributes. A transition scene relies on "beats" to provide context for the transition. Transition attributes.

However, any given dramatic unit, a scene for example, is comprised of dialogue, action, and transition attributes.

"Beat" in the music analogy context refers to the number of notes in a measure or meter, like 4/4, 6/4 and so on. The English language generally follows an iambic rhythm, down beat, up beat. The foot, meter, or measure of a given prose passage varies widely in English language, and blank verse, but a pentameter foot is a fairly common sentence unit. Prose generally avoids a rhyme scheme but not exclusively so. A story as a song has many measures, many beats, many modes and forms.

Of course, "beats" will do as a shorthand term a long as there's a wide recognition of its meaning, but then there's little in life that's more prone to disagreement than writers discussing writing.

Let's discuss this. Find examples both published to share through email and our own attempts -- anybody interested in doing that?

We also have the benefit of the internet as well.

(note to the flies on the wall. This is a small portion of an example arriki sent to the rest of us)

quote:

---

“But,” said Owen, "where is the body?"
"Ah, yes," said the watchman, rubbing one horny foot up and down his shin.
"Ah, yes," said the corporal, shuffling uneasily.
Owen waited.
"Well," said the corporal at last, looking out over the river to where a low mud shoal raised its back above the water, gray and wrinkled like a hippopotamus, "it was there."
"Well," said Owen, "it's not there now."
It had been a long, hot, fruitless morning. And now this!
He boiled over.
"If this is some joke --"
The watchman looked as if he was about to burst into tears.
"But, effendi, it was there; I saw it."

---

then without

quote:

---

"But," said Owen, "where is the body?"
"Ah, yes," said the watchman
"Ah, yes," said the corporal.
Owen waited.
"Well," said the corporal, "it was there."
"Well," said Owen, "it's not there now."
"If this is some joke --"
"But, effendi, it was there; I saw it."

---

In my very humble opinion, the opening reads better without the beats. Not meaning any disrespect to Mr Pearce, but the ‘beats’ he used were the equivalent of a laugh track in a 80’s sitcom.

1-rubbing one horny foot up and down his shin.

I would like to know what a ‘horny foot’ is. Distractive.

2-shuffling uneasily

Adverbs rarely improve a prose.

3-Owen waited.

This work and I noticed it remained.

4-at last, looking out over the river to where a low mud shoal raised its back above the water,

5-gray and wrinkled like a hippopotamus

These two were in the same sentence, the descriptive part 4 was in for the benefit of the part 5 simile. They conveyed an accurate picture of the river but slowed down the story. It did nothing to help the hook.

6-It had been a long, hot, fruitless morning. And now this!

A POV commentary. Sidetracked the action, IMO.

7-He boiled over.

Telling. The exclamation point said it better.
8-The watchman looked as if he was about to burst into tears.

Ugh. If you need a ‘looked’, ‘seems’, or ‘like’ to describe what is happening, your prose needs more work than identifying what is, or what isn’t a beat.

The dialog without the beats shows what Mr. Pearce’s opening littered ‘beats’ attempted. The quick back and forth between Owen and the watchman and corporal showed Owen’s irritation and the other two’s discomfort better. True, a beat or two would have helped the plain dialog but the authors attempt to provide a complete picture to the reader bogged down the prose.

The problem I'm seeing is we're getting into a frame of mind to eliminate most or all beats. Is that what Browne and King are advising?

One good thing about Pearce is you can really see the beats in this scene. I liked most of them. Although it makes his writing a bit ponderous, it is in keeping with Victorian prose. Part of Pearce's style is recounting a European working with a culture where time and truth are a bit more fuzzy. The beats make the prose more languid (boring to some) but I think work within the context of the period.

I looked at the second scene with the beats removed and thought the images and the conflicting moods between the Egyptian and the impatient European were helped by the beats... not that a little more economy might make the piece read more quickly.

My takeaway is that style has a real bearing on how beats are used. Pearce also writes with lots of -ly adjectives. Perhaps he would be brutally mistreated on Hatrack, but he's published about a dozen of these little books and I've read most of them.

Anyhow, it is interesting to see how people here are responding to these examples.

I made an error in the reasons for beats -- one of the pearls of wisdom should read -- The fact that some beats are interesting and well-written doesn’t keep the constant interruption from irritating the reader

It is clear what the beats used by each indivual author are and how they reflect their style. Pearce showed us just exactly what we wanted to see. He told the story his way. The fact he was successful at it means that quite a few people liked the way he did it.

I suppose that Mr Pearce disregard for what some of us see as a no-no proves one thing, not all rules are set stone.