Paragraphing dialogue

[Brian G Turner]

To me, it makes most sense to ensure each individual character has their own paragraph during a dialogue. Unless there's a dramatic need otherwise, when a single character is speaking, their words all stay within the same paragraph.

Then when the next person speaks, they have their own paragraph.

However, I find in books I read, it's not uncommon for:

1. One character says something. Then a new paragraph starts, and the character speaks again. It's as if the paragraph break is being used to act as a pause for character actions.

2. One character says something in a paragraph, then another character's words appear in the same paragraph, ie:

[FONT=&quot]“Is,” Jon corrected. He would not accept that Benjen Stark was dead. Before he could say more, Halder cried, “Here, you planning to drink that all yourself?”[/FONT]

Is my original idea correct, or am I mistaken??

 

[Warren_Paul]

As far as I was aware it was supposed to be done how you originally thought: new paragraph when its a different character speaking. Sometimes I find it appropriate to make a new paragraph for the same character when there has been a lot of narrative since they last spoke.

strange though that one of the best writers (or isn't it official that George Martin is rated as the best?) breaks that rule yet his writing is praised. That's all in the first book, isn't it? Which means he was breaking rules before he even became a bestseller and famous?

 

[Mouse]

I don't think that example is wrong. Jon was going to speak but Halder interrupted. In fact, I think the order of the words in your GRRM example there make a big difference to how it's paragraphed.

I think you can feel when it's right to have two people speaking in the same paragraph. I've done it and nobody's told me it's wrong. Depends how it's done and what they're doing.

I'm sure somebody else will explain it better than that!

 

[HareBrain]

Both Jon and Halder do speak in that paragraph, Mouse, though Jon only says one word.

It's possible it was a mistake on GRRM's part that wasn't picked up by his editor. On the other hand, it would be difficult to break that paragraph without losing the smooth flow from one sentence to the next, so maybe it was deliberate.

The only time I would include speech from more than one person in the same paragraph is if it wasn't proper dialogue, such as:

Some shouted "Hang him!" and some called "Give him a knighthood!"

 

[Mouse]

Both Jon and Halder do speak in that paragraph, Mouse, though Jon only says one word.

Yes I know that. I was referring to the 'before he could say more' bit.

 

[Warren_Paul]

it would be difficult to break that paragraph without losing the smooth flow from one sentence to the next, so maybe it was deliberate.

Yeah, thinking on this, I believe you might be right there. To put Halder's words on a new line might cause the reader to pause, spoiling the smooth flow as you called it.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I'm looking at it and trying not to be a killjoy, but to me, it's just wrong. where you break it or how, I'm not sure, but it's wrong.
Actually I'd either have a new paragraph just after Jon spoke, or at before.
I like my writers to make it easy for me, and that includes telling me that someone else is going to speak by taking a new paragraph.
I've got a bit better at putting a short action between two sections of one person's speech, but the bottom line is my eyes and readers experience tells me when I look at it, this shoudl be one person speaking.
When I realise it's not I have to go back and read it again because my concious mind is jarring with my subconcious knowledge of how these things are formed.

At which point I say too much work and move on. (terrible aren't I? )

 

[Brian G Turner]

On the other hand, it would be difficult to break that paragraph without losing the smooth flow from one sentence to the next, so maybe it was deliberate.

I suspect this is the case in this instance - the paragraph continues by describing a general cheer among different characters.

However, it's simply the more immediate example that I was able to reference.

I just wasn't sure if my general "common sense" idea was the norm - but even if it is, it's probably one of those "rules" that can be broken to good effect, if understood and used to balance in favour of a more effective "rule".

 

[AnyaKimlin]

I agree with Springs. I've yet to read anything he has written apart from this but the whole paragraph is clumsy. I'm not about to tinker with it, because it isn't my work, but there are ways it could have been split without much of a problem. It will also have ruined any further dialogue flow.

I'd be more inclined to say it was something missed in editing.

 

[Culhwch]

I just wasn't sure if my general "common sense" idea was the norm - but even if it is, it's probably one of those "rules" that can be broken to good effect, if understood and used to balance in favour of a more effective "rule".

I think this is definitely the case. This isn't the only example I've seen like this, for certain, and there is the potential for it to be done badly (usually in the case where it is done unknowingly). In that example it works exactly as it was meant to, and I doubt it was an error on the part of the writer or an oversight on the part of the editor. Those oversights came in book five, not book one...

 

[Interference]

I think when you are writing, you can hear the pauses (para breaks) and will be guided by the inner ear. I was taught, though, that each speaker gets his own para and if someone interrupts a speaker, he does so on his own line.

 

[Ursa major]

The two possible ways of writing this are this, the original:

“Is,” Jon corrected. He would not accept that Benjen Stark was dead. Before he could say more, Halder cried, “Here, you planning to drink that all yourself?”

and this, where the paragraphs are separated out:

“Is,” Jon corrected. He would not accept that Benjen Stark was dead.

Before he could say more, Halder cried, “Here, you planning to drink that all yourself?”

Personally, I think I prefer the second version, but there's not much in it for me, particularly because we still have a chapter that starts with a phrase looking at Jon, which then transfers its focus to what Halder says.


The only way to move the focus on Halder to the start of that second paragraph would be to write something like:

Halder cried, “Here, you planning to drink that all yourself?” before Jon could say more.

which sounds more than a bit awkward to me (not helped by the word, Here).


I think we just have to accept that there isn't always a perfect way of getting something across, so we have to go with the best of the available options.



By the way, I think I'd remove** the said-replacement ('corrected') from the first paragraph:

“Is.” Jon would not accept that Benjen Stark was dead.

** - Assuming, that is, the fact that a correction is being made is clear from the context.

 

[The Judge]

1. One character says something. Then a new paragraph starts, and the character speaks again. It's as if the paragraph break is being used to act as a pause for character actions.

This I think is legitimate, especially to break up a long speech into something more manageable on the page.

2. One character says something in a paragraph, then another character's words appear in the same paragraph

I'm reading The Painted Man at the moment and Brett does this, too (as well as info-dumping and POV shifts and a hundred other things we'd be screaming about in Critiques). It drives me crazy, because in none of his one-paragraph-two-voices is there even a fig-leaf of smoothing the sentence/keeping the flow/maintaining momentum. In 9 cases out of 10 I'd say it's sloppy writing and bad editing.

 

[Boneman]

I'm reading The Painted Man at the moment and Brett does this, too (as well as info-dumping and POV shifts and a hundred other things we'd be screaming about in Critiques). It drives me crazy, because in none of his one-paragraph-two-voices is there even a fig-leaf of smoothing the sentence/keeping the flow/maintaining momentum. In 9 cases out of 10 I'd say it's sloppy writing and bad editing.

Wait until you get to The Desert Spear... (book 2)

 

[The Judge]

I'm not going there -- this book has already hit the wall too often. If I get his second book, we'll need to get a plasterer in to mend the hole.

 

[Hex]

Oh dear. I loved both of those books...

When people are giving speeches or something, a single, enormous block of text can be totally overwhelming -- so then it's best (I think) to break it into paragraphs.

For me as a reader, the Jon/ Halder example is fine because it's perfectly clear who's talking. It's where that starts getting confused that weird dialogue paragraphing begins to annoy me.

 

[Grimbear]

Wait until you get to The Desert Spear... (book 2)

Started reading that - couldn't finish it. The first one was ok, but his writing started annoying me more and more. Also the characters started grating on me. Not really sure why though.

To me, it makes most sense to ensure each individual character has their own paragraph during a dialogue. Unless there's a dramatic need otherwise, when a single character is speaking, their words all stay within the same paragraph.

Then when the next person speaks, they have their own paragraph.

However, I find in books I read, it's not uncommon for:

1. One character says something. Then a new paragraph starts, and the character speaks again. It's as if the paragraph break is being used to act as a pause for character actions.

2. One character says something in a paragraph, then another character's words appear in the same paragraph, ie:

Quote:
“Is,” Jon corrected. He would not accept that Benjen Stark was dead. Before he could say more, Halder cried, “Here, you planning to drink that all yourself?”
Is my original idea correct, or am I mistaken??

New paragraph for every new speaker - Imo this is correct.

 

[Peter Graham]

To me, it makes most sense to ensure each individual character has their own paragraph during a dialogue. Unless there's a dramatic need otherwise, when a single character is speaking, their words all stay within the same paragraph.

I think it's a matter of preference, although I don't like option b - two characters speaking in the same paragraph looks clumsy to me.

Your theory is perfectly sound, but option a is also workable, especially when dialogue is broken by an action and there is supposed to be a little pause in there. I use option a most of the time - I think it's easier to read, for one thing.

So:-

"Crikey," said Peter. "Looks like Redknapp has the favour of the gods, what?"

But if there in another action which might necessitate a pause in dialogue in real life:-

"Crikey," said Peter. He tamped down his pipe and manged to light it on only the third attempt.

"Looks like Redknapp has the favour of the gods, what?"


Regards,

Peter

 

[Brian G Turner]

"Crikey," said Peter. He tamped down his pipe and manged to light it on only the third attempt.

"Looks like Redknapp has the favour of the gods, what?"

To myself, the second line looks like it would need to be added to the first. Otherwise it potentially looks like another character speaking. Definitely confusing when multiple characters present, and something I've stumbled over a few times in published works.

 

[Peter Graham]

Many people would agree with you, I suspect.

To my mind, the lack of a new dialogue attribution tag means that the baton has not been passed to another speaker. I suspect it's very much personal preference, but I agree that it is for the author to ensure that there is no possibility for confusion - whichever method they use.

What I think must be avoided is:-

"Lighting his pipe, Peter said....."

Not only is this a weak way to start a sentence (why not start with the subject?), it also implies that Peter speaks at the precise moment he is lighting his pipe, which would be virtually impossible, as he'd be sucking away on it like a good 'un.

Regards,

Peter