Dialogue and Ye Old Authorial Intrusions

urbangrind1.jpgA few days ago I met up with BigD at Urban Grind, a trendy coffee house with a warehouse feel and interesting art. I was glad, once again, for the excuse to leave my home office, where I had so far accomplished nothing but staring out the window and bugging my ever-patient cat.

Since then, I’ve been thinking about a comment from BigD. Gazing at me from across our laptops, he wondered aloud how to create snappy and realistic dialogue — which is to say, dialogue that achieves a state of verisimilitude; which is to say, dialogue that reads realistically without being realistic; which is to say that if we were to write dialogue as we heard it in everyday life: boring, snooze, zzzzzz. For example:

urbangrind2.jpg

“I told that guy Todd that we’re, like, so over, and, like, you should have seen his face. I was like, whatever.”

I ask you, who wants to wade through a novel written the way people really talk?

But back to BigD: He provided a sample sentence in which character x says to character y, “You are always so stubborn.” The sentence is awkward, but why exactly? I realized today that if I’d written it, I’d have to accuse myself of an authorial intrusion.

The sentence tells us that character y is a stubborn person, which I might indeed want the reader to know. However, I could convey the same fact through implication, such as having character x state “you stubborn fool,” which implies the same thing and provides information about character x (his opinion about said stubborness). Also, my simplistic example is a bit more snappy and realistic.

urbangrind3.jpgMy point is that dialogue that smacks of authorial intrusion often lacks verisimilitude. I don’t know how many novels I’ve read where dialogue was used to convey a fact that the author obviously wanted the reader to know. For example, good friends sit in a diner and one says to the other: “But you remember Todd; he’s the investment banker who married my sister Claire last year and then divorced her two months later because he fell in love with me.”

urbangrind4.jpg

One: If they’re such good friends, why does the nonspeaking character need an in-depth reminder? Two: Even if a reminder is apt, who really talks to a good buddy like this? Three: There are more graceful ways to weave in backstory.

I’m differentiating between using dialogue to pass on data to the reader and using dialogue to show one character passing on data to another character. Hopefully, the latter scenario forwards plot, creates intrigue, develops characters, something.

Dialogue is great fun, but in the end BigD and I agreed that writing it can be tricky. I’m still learning how to tease out my own authorial missteps.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Dialogue and Ye Old Authorial Intrusions

  1. BigD, here. Always happy to give you an excuse to post awesome pictures. Those greens are granny-smith-apple-yummy, and the reds are toasty-fireplace-warm. Makes me want to write.

    Me thinks you’re right, too, about the authorial intrusions.

    Me also thinks that, when it comes to dialog, connotation is the name of the game, which means having the ability to talk *in* character rather than *about* character. (Oh, yeah! Now I sound like I know what I’m doing.)

  2. Thanks, Cindy! I had a good birthday weekend; not wanting to start my work week quite yet. Maybe a Tuesday thru Saturday week instead?

    And as for you, BigD — thanks for inadvertently providing me with a blog-post topic!

  3. This reminds me of the scenario where one character says to the other, “As you know, Bill, we’ve been driving through Texas for three days.” Nothing like passing a little information to the reader in a totally unrealistic manner.

    But all this sentence needs to make it believable is to add a few words: “As you know, Bill, we’ve been driving through Texas for three days with no Doritos…” and you have something. Well, not really.

    Yes, tricky stuff.

  4. I see your point about using real life conversations as models, but it’s important to listen to the way people speak otherwise you end up with conversation like you describe.

  5. I like authorial intrusion, digression, headhopping, and telling instead of showing; therefor, I write this way, and no critique will preevent me from doing so, coaxing me into writing deliberately something I know I would decline reading.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s