Dialogue tags

[Wruter]

I guess it is a matter of style and style is such an individual thing. I never used to think about dialogue tags until I started reading the books of John Scalzi, who puts a said tag on every single line and it seemed to make sense if they really are invisible...especially if there are more than 2 characters in the scene so the reader always knows who is speaking...but then Scalzi's style is very dialogue-driven and movie script-like.

 

[Brian G Turner]

I'm going to assume you think it's a makes the writing weaker rather than stronger.

There's a technical argument that, yes, that is the case.

There's a counter argument that a writer can intentionally break such "rules", but my observation is that most writers are not aware they are actually doing so.

Many people say it is a bad thing, yet people eat those books up like candy.

I've not read 50 Shades of Grey (yet?), but I'm told the writing in that can be pretty sloppy. As it's the UK's biggest selling novel ever, readers plainly forgive that.

Could it have sold better if it had been technically better written? I would dare say yes - in theory. But sometimes it's the rawness of a voice or vision that can give an extra edge to a work and it's hard to discount that.

In the meantime, none of us aspiring writers have the luxury of being given the benefit of the doubt on such issues.

 

[Zebra Wizard]

It's not the use or frequency of dialogue tags that worry me. As I do minimise it where I can and I'm sure most writers here can spot it when there is too much during the revision process.

The question I pose is how do you feel about alternatives to "said". for example: added, admitted, demanded etc. (As well as adverbs too but that can be left out for a different discussion)

 

[Ursa major]

The 'added 'one may need to have more care taken with it, because a lot of (most?) occasions where it would be used, it may actually be superfluous, e.g.

"Bit of dialogue (tagged or otherwise)." Some 'action'. "The additional bit of dialogue."
​

If the dialogue is in the same paragraph as some other dialogue, the identity of the speaker ought already to be clear. And the fact that it's further dialogue in the paragraph rather suggests** that it has been added (after an interruption).


** - I suppose it may depend what the 'action' and/or the 'interruption' is/are.

 

[Zebra Wizard]

There's a technical argument that, yes, that is the case.

There's a counter argument that a writer can intentionally break such "rules", but my observation is that most writers are not aware they are actually doing so.

I'm pretty sure this this case, Pat is quite aware of what he is doing since he is known to spend alot of time analysing his sentences or paragraphs to get them "right". And if you pick out all the alternatives to "said" it appears to be done as a conscious decision.

This is what led me to ask this question whether the "cull as many non-said/asked" as a definite improvement or just another opinion spiralled out of control.

 

[Zebra Wizard]

The added one may need to have more care taken with it, because a lot of (most?) occasions where it would be used

Added would likely be used between multiple people.
"What happened to him?" I asked.
"He went into the house" Bart explained.
"He took a dump." Jim added.

Not the best and overloaded example but you get the jist. As I said before, the question is not when to use it, but if you are for or against their use.

And don't get me wrong, I don't think theres anything wrong about culling these words out. I just flicked through GRRM and almost all the tags are "said". So I know its fine that way too.

 

[Ursa major]

As I said before, the question is not when to use it, but if you are for or against their use.

I would tend to be wary of using it, if that's of any help.

 

[Fishbowl Helmet]

Added would likely be used between multiple people.
"What happened to him?" I asked.
"He went into the house" Bart explained.
"He took a dump." Jim added.

Not the best and overloaded example but you get the jist. As I said before, the question is not when to use it, but if you are for or against their use.

And don't get me wrong, I don't think theres anything wrong about culling these words out. I just flicked through GRRM and almost all the tags are "said". So I know its fine that way too.

(Insert more badly done but hopefully illustrative spice and cooking metaphors here.)

That's the trick, though.

Speaker One is asking a question (and yes, if the speaker is actually asking a question and you need to tag it, always go with asked instead of said), so of course Speaker Two is explaining, he's answering a bloody question. Which makes 'answered', 'explained', and most of the rest of those non-standard tags purely redundant. Which is why most writers will use 'beats' (those little moments of action during dialogue heavy scenes), instead of tagging everyone all the time. And of course Speaker Three 'added' or 'clarified' or 'offered', again, that's obvious from the context. She's providing additional information, clarifying information. So again, purely redundant.

'What happened to him?' Zebra asked.
'He went into the house.' Bart nodded towards the shack.
Jim flashed a look of disgust then said, 'He took a dump.'

Not sterling prose, but look at the difference. In one you have a simple back and forth with redundant tags, in the other you avoid those redundant tags and add a bit to the characterisation and sense of place.

I know you're asking for a black and white answer, but as quite a few people have said, it doesn't work that way. The answer is: generally stick with said or asked, but when you think something else is vital to get the perfect nuance through to the reader, go for it. But again, intent and restraint. Like most things, once you're past learning the absolute basics of writing, there's not many 'always' or 'never' rules, except always do your best and never be boring.

 

[TheDustyZebra]

I know you're asking for a black and white answer

Bwahahaha!

 

[Zebra Wizard]

I know theres no black and white answer since neither way is considered "correct" grammar but just different prose. I just wanted to find out how much of a No-no it is to people (which seems to be alot) and why they thought it.

'What happened to him?' Zebra asked.
'He went into the house.' Bart nodded towards the shack.
Jim flashed a look of disgust then said, 'He took a dump.'

You just replaced tags with action, which is good. I'm not disputing against it. I personally prefer to mix it up when it feels right. As I'm not a huge fan of using alot of tags.

I asked this question because I found it hard to understand why these alternative should be culled, yet "asked" is fine. Some other alternatives flow off dialogue easily too. When I read Name of the Wind, I never at any point found these alternative tags slow down dialogue or stand out. This is what led me to start questioning this widely accepted rule.

 

[Kylara]

Ah but the thing is avoiding descriptor tags is not a rule. It's one of those helpful tips handed out to starter writers who feel pressured to use different tags for every bit of speech. It's a bit like when you teach someone to ride, you can't give them everything they have to do, and you tell them to just do the basics, then when they get better they learn that in some cases a different technique works better. But only by knowing the basics and understanding how the horse works can they may the decision about using either technique. For writers the basic is don't feel obliged to come up with descriptor tags, using said is absolutely fine. However once your writing progresses and you understand, in this case, why you are using a tag and what it is giving the reader, can you add a bit of flair with your tags to increase characterisation or to make the ambiguous dialogue specific:

"He's gone," she said, struggling to stop the tears.

Is absolutely fine. However,

"He's gone," she whispered, struggling to stop the tears.

Gives the reader a little more - there's a bit more heartbreak, there is more loss, but both are fine. Without understanding that using said is fine and generally the best option, you can't make an adequate decision about when to use a descriptor tag.

Much like with adverbs. Most starter writers don't realise they are using them so they are told to not use them. When you understand writing more you can see where they will add something and where they are extra fluff. In my piece mentioned earlier the adverbs had both been carefully chosen and did add something, but the person who work shopped it is one of the more beginnery writers and seemed to be pointing them out because they have finally worked out what an adverb is but hadn't progressed far enough to understand that they can be used, but thoughtfully

 

[Ihe]

The argument for said can often be taken out of proportion IMO. The main reason this "use said all you can" advise is so popular is because a writer "should" be able to convey tone and other subtleties through the voice of the character and the content of the phrase alone. So, ideally, you'd be using "said" all the time because you wouldn't need to use anything extra to complement the sentence, and having mostly simple tags would mean your sentences are "stronger", which is a flawed assumption. This advice is only a fragment of the big picture. What it actually means to say is: "set the stage and write dialogue in such a way that flowery tags become redundant".

"Use said tags all you can" treats the symptoms, not the disease ("weak" dialogue) IMO, and I feel it loses focus on why this advise really came to be. "Write to make flowery tags redundant" is what really treats the disease, but I do understand it's not the most practical suggestion out there. And ofc this won't always be possible, unless you're some sort of prodigy. All you can do is aim towards flowery tag redundancy to the best of your abilities, but don't be ashamed of them. Writing clarity always comes first. If a flowery tag helps to convey necessary undertones that your dialogue lacks, go for it. Go for it until you don't have to any more (ideally).

 

[Zebra Wizard]

Thanks for all the opinions. Now I've got a much better understanding on the subject.

I'm the kind of person who likes to understand my boundaries when doing anything creative, so I know how to push against them without breaking it.

 

[NbDawn]

I think using flowery tags on occasion is okay. But don't overdo it. From what I understand, some writers use them too much and the tags tend to tell the story rather than show it. On the other hand, textual information can sometimes be difficult to convey a tone, even if you are properly showing rather than telling. So I think tags can sometimes convey tone better. I occasionally use tags like whispered or said quietly, growled, sneered, or some such. I enjoy Patrick Rothfuss's books very much and I honestly never found a problem with his use of flowery tags.

 

[TitaniumTi]

I'm currently writing a scene set on a mountain. One protagonist shouts to another one, who is 50 to 100 metres away. In that context, I don't think 'said' is a silent speech tag. In fact, if I was reading the scene, 'said' would puzzle me: I'd be wondering how far apart they really were. I could clarify this be adding another phrase, clause or sentence, but that would risk slowing down the action with several words, rather than just one.

I opted to use 'yelled' once. It's economical and evocative - a speech tag that serves double duty. The next time, I replaced the speech tag with action.

 

[Ursa major]

I think it's hard to get the reader to understand that a speaker is whispering without something like:

• using 'whispers'/'whispered' as a dialogue tag;
• modifying says/said:
  • she said in a whisper'
  • he says in a quiet voice (although this could describe someone talking quietly, not whispering... and one can whisper in a (relatively) loud voice);
• getting the reader to guess (where the PoV character states -- I had trouble hearing what she said -- although this has the disadvantage of not being specific as to why the words were difficult to hear).

Sometimes it's better -- less confusing and less wordy-for-its-own sake -- simply to use whisper as a verb in the dialogue tag.

 

[Inca_UK]

I use said a lot of the time, when I tag, but I will also use others if I need to, such as asked and whispered. I prefer to use action tags, where the dialogue is either preceded or followed by a character doing something. I think this reads better and kills two birds with one stone.