Dialogue and new paragraph Q

[Coragem]

Hi there:

Now, sorry, I think I'm suddenly having a problem with this (in a section of my current chapter) because my POV character isn't the one doing most of the dialogue -- he's reacting to and observing someone else's dialogue. Normally my POV characters are more active.

Anyway, obviously we always start a new paragraph when a new character begins speaking. Simple. But what I'm struggling with is the "grey areas".

So, do I start a new paragraph when a character responds with a gesture rather than with speech. And particularly relevant to my present chapter, if my POV character makes an observation, how far can I sneak into a paragraph of someone else's speech, or should the observation (especially if several lines long) come in a separate paragraph, with the speech resuming after?

I guess one reason I've never thought about this too much is that I've always assumed it is a matter of authorial judgement, rather than there being absolute rules.

Just to give you a very quick flavour, he's a paragraph I just wrote. POV character = Gary. Speaking character = Simon.

Gary nodded when, almost absently, routinely, Simon turned to him and asked, “In three?” It was better to have these things said and acknowledged, however confident they may’ve been that they each had something similar in mind. “I’d like to clear a way out of here in three moves,” Simon explained to the others. “Unless anyone has a better plan …” It was a genuine invitation like so many others Gary had witnessed; one which somehow, by some alchemy, would’ve made Sade, Juan, and Sokolov feel – if they hadn’t already – that they were at once under Simon’s command and on his same level.

Thanks.

Coragem.

 

[JunkMonkey]

I'm not sure about the punctuation but 'may’ve' is really ugly.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I suspect there might be stuff in the toolbox on this.

There is a lot for one paragraph, I think. Can you shorten the words between the dialogue? Or turn it into two pieces of dialogue instead of three; reduce one of the breaks? How about:

Gary nodded when, almost absently, routinely, Simon turned to him. "In three?" Simon asked; better to have these things said and acknowledged even when confident they had something similar in mind. He turned to the others. "I'd like to clear a way out of here in three moves, unless anyone has a better plan."
It was a genuine invitation, like so many others....

If it was me, I'd break it more, but I suspect I go too much the other way and chop it down too much... Much the way Hex has done, actually!

 

[Hex]

I think you're right and it's up to you, and I'm not the best person to comment on dialogue anyway.

However.

Anne said something I found really helpful -- that if an action is during/ immediately after the dialogue then it could be on the same line, but if you want to indicate a bit of a pause, then you can break.

If I'd been deciding with your paragraph I'd probably have done this:

Gary nodded when, almost absently, routinely, Simon turned to him and asked,
“In three?” [I would probably have put this on a separate line because it's kind of Gary doing something in the line above. No idea if that's correct]you know, thinking about it, I've changed my mind -- I'd leave it on the same line. I can see why you're wondering about this stuff...
It was better to have these things said and acknowledged, however confident they may’ve been that they each had something similar in mind. [that reads like a separate thought, so I'd give it a bit of space from the dialogue]
“I’d like to clear a way out of here in three moves,” Simon explained to the others. “Unless anyone has a better plan …”
It was a genuine invitation like so many others Gary had witnessed; one which somehow, by some alchemy, would’ve made Sade, Juan, and Sokolov feel – if they hadn’t already – that they were at once under Simon’s command and on his same level.

But, (a) it's up to you, (b) I struggle a bit with this as well, (c) I'm probably totally wrong, but I enjoyed the exercise.

 

[Mr Turtle]

Hi,

I'm not an expert in any shape way or form. Much like many people here I'm sure, my experience comes simply from reading lots and writing lots.

In my humble opinion, I've read enough books to say that it's all down to writer preference. I've seen books (reading an Arthur C Clarke anthology at the mo who does exactly this) where a person will speak, there's a whole paragraph explaining the reactions, and then more speech before the next paragraph.

On the otherhand, if you take someone like J.K Rowling, her speech/reactions whatever ALWAYS start on a new line.

I'm sure that some agents/publishers/editors would say otherwise, this much the same as the discussions on the boards here about comma usage - it's always changing and it's always different with each author - I don't think there is necessarily a wrong or write (buh buh cing) way!

I liken it to this:

I was always taught in school to NEVER, under any circumstances, put an 'and' after a full stop - but how many times do you see that in publications?

Peace

Jx

 

[ctg]

Gary nodded when, almost absently, routinely, Simon turned to him and asked, “In three?”

“Unless anyone has a better plan …”

It was a genuine invitation like so many others. One which somehow, by some alchemy, would’ve made Sade, Juan, and Sokolov feel – if they hadn’t already – that they were at once under Simon’s command and on his same level.


That way. You don't need more to say whatever you want to say. The red is unnecessary exposition that I'd try to rewrite in some other form, or consider removing - as it's not for you to decide, but to imply to the readers that's how it is.

The non-tagged dialogue line implies that it's Simon doing the speaking.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

If it was me, I'd break it more, but I suspect I go too much the other way and chop it down too much... Much the way Hex has done, actually!

just read this and realised how wrong that last line came out; what I meant was I'd cut it and that Hex had already done it the way I would have (and it was great!)
Sorry Hex.

 

[Hex]

I understood! I thought when I read your post how funny it was that I was suggesting breaking the dialogue up (which I don't tend to do) and you were suggesting keeping it in one paragraph (which you almost never do)! Can you tell we're in editing mode?

 

[mosaix]

I was always taught in school to NEVER, under any circumstances, put an 'and' after a full stop - but how many times do you see that in publications?

I was too and I tend to stick to it. One exception that I allow myself is in dialogue when it's a character's trait to do it.

"I'm fed up with you getting home late every night. And another thing, will you please stop..."

 

[HareBrain]

I was always taught in school to NEVER, under any circumstances, put an 'and' after a full stop - but how many times do you see that in publications?

I've said something like this before, but I believe the reason you were taught this isn't because it's a "proper" rule, but because it's far easier for the teacher to teach an absolute prohibition than it is to try to explain what the effect is of starting a sentence with "and", or "but", and why and when you might want to do it.

 

[Venusian Broon]

Hey Coragem,

To answer the question you put, I suppose it depends on how much you want to describe a gesture/action or thought of a PoV character - a lot then a new paragraph might fit - but for a line or two, I'd not start a new paragraph.

I find the construction of your first sentence a bit clunky, mainly because of the two adverbs and would probably re-write it:

"In three?" Simon said absently to Gary. Gary nodded, It was better to have these things said...

(and it is clear to me that if Simon has just started talking then it starts on a new paragraph - and the Gary action/thoughts carry on the same paragraph)

I'd do it this way because now the first sentence is about Simon only and the second is about Gary only and simplifies and clarifies what's happening. Before I found the first sentence quite difficult to digest as it took me a little while to figure out who the adverbs were referring to.

Anyway that's the way I'd do it, I am no technical expert!

 

[Ursa major]

Gary nodded when, almost absently, routinely, Simon turned to him and asked, “In three?”

“Unless anyone has a better plan …”

It was a genuine invitation like so many others. One which somehow, by some alchemy, would’ve made Sade, Juan, and Sokolov feel – if they hadn’t already – that they were at once under Simon’s command and on his same level.


That way. You don't need more to say whatever you want to say. The red is unnecessary exposition that I'd try to rewrite in some other form, or consider removing - as it's not for you to decide, but to imply to the readers that's how it is.

The non-tagged dialogue line implies that it's Simon doing the speaking.

But you don't have to - indeed, you can't - rely on that implication, ctg. However, if you follow the standard for multi-paragraph dialogue:

Gary nodded when, almost absently, routinely, Simon turned to him and asked, “In three?

“Unless anyone has a better plan….”

the reader will know that it's still Simon speaking, as the absence of a closing quote at the end of a paragraph will always indicate that there is no change of speaker.

(That there is such an end quote in your original will tell the reader that it cannot be Simon saying the words, "Unless anyone...." Only something that expressly indicates that it's Simon who's speaking - a speech attribution, a sentence whose subject is Simon** - will override this.)



** - And if characters regularly flit in and out of paragraphs in which someone else is speaking, it may still not be clear without the direct attribution of speech.

.

 

[Coragem]

"In three?" Simon said absently to Gary. Gary nodded, It was better to have these things said...

Thanks for all the responses.

Originally I had a construction much like the one above, but I have a "thing" (probably too much of one) for repetition. I couldn't handle the use of "Gary" twice so close together! I rarely repeat a character name twice, and almost never more than twice, in a paragraph.

In terms of splitting things up into shorter paragraphs, my default is not to do it if there's a choice to be made and it's not immediately obvious.

When I think of my two favourite writers at present (that's Guy Gavriel Kay and GRRM, who I do NOT compare myself to!) they rarely, or at least only with good reason, use shorter paragraphs. I think this is one reason why their work has so much depth and richness -- or maybe it's an inevitable consequence of the depth and richness? When they use short paragraphs they do so for impact and immediacy, and saving the short paragraphs for those special instances makes them all the more powerful.

Coragem.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

In that case I'm in very big trouble. I, as Hex has said earlier, do short paragraphs with the odd longer one for introspection. Mostly. But then again the writers I enjoy; Scott Card, King, Val McDermid seem to do as well.

(I think it has to do with a frightening low attention span at this end... )

 

[Venusian Broon]

There is always a way (of sorts!).

Could drop the 'to Gary' and then add something to the second sentence so that it's clear that it was directed to him. Also because Gary has PoV, the confidence that him and Simon are thinking along the same lines should really be his alone, whereas before it seemed to be shared between the two - but again that is the harsh 3rd person PoV that I tend to use:

"In three?" Simon said absently. Although Gary was confident that they were thinking along the same lines, he nodded at the suggestion. It was better to have these things said and acknowledged. “I’d like to clear a way out of here in three moves," Simon explained to the others.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Hi there:

Now, sorry, I think I'm suddenly having a problem with this (in a section of my current chapter) because my POV character isn't the one doing most of the dialogue -- he's reacting to and observing someone else's dialogue. Normally my POV characters are more active.

Anyway, obviously we always start a new paragraph when a new character begins speaking. Simple. But what I'm struggling with is the "grey areas".

So, do I start a new paragraph when a character responds with a gesture rather than with speech. And particularly relevant to my present chapter, if my POV character makes an observation, how far can I sneak into a paragraph of someone else's speech, or should the observation (especially if several lines long) come in a separate paragraph, with the speech resuming after?

I guess one reason I've never thought about this too much is that I've always assumed it is a matter of authorial judgement, rather than there being absolute rules.

Just to give you a very quick flavour, he's a paragraph I just wrote. POV character = Gary. Speaking character = Simon.

Gary nodded when, almost absently, routinely, Simon turned to him and asked, “In three?” It was better to have these things said and acknowledged, however confident they may’ve been that they each had something similar in mind. “I’d like to clear a way out of here in three moves,” Simon explained to the others. “Unless anyone has a better plan …” It was a genuine invitation like so many others Gary had witnessed; one which somehow, by some alchemy, would’ve made Sade, Juan, and Sokolov feel – if they hadn’t already – that they were at once under Simon’s command and on his same level.

Thanks.

Coragem.

Gary may be the POV character, but Simon is the main active subject in this paragraph.

I'd personally suggest (through personal opinion rather than clear rules) that you split it into two paragraphs: Simon's dialogue, then Gary's reflections.

Otherwise, as it stands, you've made Gary the active subject of the paragraph (by mentioning him first) and then left him passive through the dialogue, which I think could be quite confusing.

Try rewriting it a few different ways and see it how looks from each.

2c.