If you don’t have a natural “eye” for dialogue—and, let’s face it, even if you do—reading your dialogue aloud is the best way to tell if your dialogue sounds natural. In her EDITS system, Margie Lawson suggests reading all of the dialogue in a chapter—and nothing else (on that pass).
As you read, ask yourself: is this how people talk?
The following examples have been exaggerated to protect the imaginary.
“At this juncture, I firmly believe, from the bottom of my heart, that it would be most beneficial for us if you would open the door, proceed down the hall, and retrieve beverages of your choice for our consumption.”
Is it too formal? Tone down the formal language, use contractions, and/or cut out some phrases. In fact, we use elliptic speech most of the time in conversation—sentence fragments that are easy to understand in context. Do your characters use too many complete sentences? (“Why, yes, yes they do.”)
[in chapter 2]
“Did you steal the diamonds?”
“You know, I just think we shouldn’t go assigning blame for stuff like that.”
“Yeah, you’re right. Let’s go for a walk.”
“I like walking.”
Is this too direct—or not direct enough (see #1 above)? Real dialogue doesn’t always follow quid pro quo. Sometimes we’re evasive, sometimes we try to be pithy or clever, and sometimes we spent more of our time formulating our response than listening. (Of course, that last one doesn’t come across so well in fiction…)
“As everyone in this room knows, if the timer reaches zero, we’ll all die.”
“Yes, Jenny the doctor, we will.”
Do they discuss things that they wouldn’t really have to talk about? If everyone in the room already knows something—from the time on the timer to the characters’ relationships to their shared histories—dialogue isn’t going to be a natural way to clue the reader in.
“What do you think of irrigation reform?”
“Well, I hadn’t ever really considered it, but now that you mention it, I can see that irrigation reform is not only necessary but beneficial to all parties. I mean, so many farmers hog all the water—pardon the pun—and we have to use that same water supply for all the farms as well as the rest of us. Not to mention the frequency of farm-related spills and water contamination.”
“Yeah, but considering that water rights are used for political ends so often, I think there’s an even more important argument for irrigation reform that you’ve missed. Let me explicate it for you over the course of the next seven pages. You may speak, but only in single sentences, preferably phrased as questions perfectly timed to introduce the next tenet of my argument. And please wait for me to finish my sentence before you attempt to speak.”
“Yes, of course. How are water rights used for political ends?”
Is it realistic? Real people seldom spout off prepared speeches—or let other people make them.
Next time: Is this how people talk part deux, in which I totally contradict myself sort of.
What do you think? What kind of things do you see included in dialogue that shouldn’t be?
Photos by Akuppa John Wigham and Gillie, respectively.
I just read Elizabeth Mueller’s attached first chapter to AI regarding the EDITS method. I wasn’t surprised to find out that you already knew about it and have your own methods, too. You are doing so many things right, Jordan! I’m so glad I found your site. I know that you will be very successful as an author! I’m going backwards now to read your latest posts on dialogue. C-ya.
Kathleen, you’re such a flatterer! Do go on 😉 .
EDITS is great—once you have the BIG things in place. It can’t fix patchy characters or plots for you, but it can make a BIG difference within scenes and smaller.
lol! Just re-reading your dialogue posts. I signed up for nanowrimo, and I’m excited! I’m trying to get prepared!!!