Getting the balance right in prose between Narration, Description and Dialogue.

[Mark_Harbinger]

Which reiterates the point that just about every technique and style will find its detractors and its enthusiasts.

Well, logically, fewer words on a page (ie, shorter paragraphs, more breaks) should make for faster reading, not slower. That's just math.

My point was that a person's personal reading preferences *could* override that. For example, it will always take ME longer to read, say, Romance, than Sci Fi, since I prefer Sci Fi.

 

[Swank]

This article has some interesting data points.

Language Log » Proportion of dialogue in novels

I would imagine the exposition necessary to drive most SFF books would make the proportion of dialogue in most quite low. Unless we're talking about something like Star Trek novel, which could hang as heavily on dialogue as a teleplay.

I'm not surprised Christie uses so much dialogue - look at Pierrot; the guy comes in after something has happened, has no physicality and spends all of his time either interviewing or explaining. The events of the story exist largely in dialogue, like a play.

 

[Swank]

Well, logically, fewer words on a page (ie, shorter paragraphs, more breaks) should make for faster reading, not slower. That's just math.

The math I was speaking of is the rate of words read per minute and information conveyed, not the rate of pages read. An empty page is very quick to read, but gives you zero story. Dialogue has a lot of fluff in it and spaces, so it imparts story more slowly to the reader than dense paragraphs of prose because they have to get through all those extras. Dialogue is more of a chore to the eyes, more complex to follow and isn't as straightforward in its telling.


Which isn't to say that dialogue is bad, just that it can be wearisome to certain kinds of readers because it uses more page to do less - especially when it is more naturalistic and less to the point. It takes a lot of lines of dialogue to show that a character is upset and unsure of themselves than it takes to say: A character is upset and unsure of themselves.

Good writing takes this into account by using dialogue where it is most effective; gives the characters meaty things to say; and uses dialogue to inject things like humor that wouldn't naturally exist in the construction of the narrative. In other words, writing great dialogue that keeps the reader's interest is not easy, and no writer should feel like every conversation or person-to-person interaction is naturally best illustrated with quotations. In fact, very few are. In terms of proportions, I think most verbal interactions should largely be prose, with only the most pivotal, emotional or pithy parts of those interactions actually quoted.

This sort of thing is lean and effective:

We drank, we sang, we recalled acquaintances best forgotten. By early morning we were the dearest of friends, by dawn wily adversaries, then long-suffering family in the full light of the day. He spoke with unblinking intensity of three tense weeks in Prague, decades ago.

"You must have known I loved you."

Of course I knew.

 

[Mark_Harbinger]

You present some interesting ideas, @Swank. I appreciate that.

 

[Steve Harrison]

Dialogue that doesn't impart story is just poor writing. All dialogue should either: i) reveal something relevant about the characters, ii) reveal a plot point, or iii) be humorous/entertaining on its own.

All good points, but one of the most important uses of dialogue for me is for pacing. Even if it doesn't fit any of your categories, dialogue can be a terrific way to create and maintain tension, pause the action and/or manipulate readers. In fact, dialogue that doesn't fit those three can be the most effective.

Dialogue is the Swiss army knife of writing!

 

[Phyrebrat]

Dialogue is the Swiss army knife of writing!

And a very efficient way of world building, too! Can be responsible for some really heavy lifting

 

[Swank]

And a very efficient way of world building, too! Can be responsible for some really heavy lifting

"Oh, is that one of those new spaceships that can travel 1.8 light years per hour? I'm very impressed with your masculinity!" Madeline said, with one flick of her well curved hip at the enormous metal sausage poised on the spaceport pad.

 

[Phyrebrat]

"Oh, is that one of those new spaceships that can travel 1.8 light years per hour? I'm very impressed with your masculinity!" Madeline said, with one flick of her well curved hip at the enormous metal sausage poised on the spaceport pad.

You’ve done this before, haven’t you?! Where can I buy your work?

 

[Swank]

You’ve done this before, haven’t you?! Where can I buy your work?

I'm Theodore Sturgeon.

 

[Mark_Harbinger]

Even if it doesn't fit any of your categories, dialogue can be a terrific way to create and maintain tension, pause the action and/or manipulate readers.

Another interesting idea. I'd never thought of creating/maintaining tension and/or pausing action as being a separate thing from both character and plot.

 

[sknox]

WRT dialog carrying the story, a classic example is the opening chapter of The Friends of Eddie Coyle. Almost nothing but dialog, but it throws you well and truly into the story.

I think this is another case of it's bad writing if it's badly written. Dialog, description, narration, all and any of it can be done well or badly. And the assessment of what is good or bad varies by reader. Heck, it even varies within one reader over the course of a lifetime. There are books I loved when I was young that are cringey to me now.

 

[Phyrebrat]

Dialog, description, narration, all and any of it can be done well or badly. And the assessment of what is good or bad varies by reader. Heck, it even varies within one reader over the course of a lifetime. There are books I loved when I was young that are cringey to me now

So true. Our reading predilections change, too, over time so it’s constantly shifting.

Also I think it’s important to understand our own strengths so that, whilst all three have to carry the story, if our skill is more at the description end of things — to evoke— (for example) then we’d be best served to make that the feature of our style whilst improving on our weaker, other areas of the craft.

Im reading a SFF at the moment that is a short story where you’re dropped in the world and the characters speak as if the reader is completely au fait with the world. It should be inscrutable but it’s actually simple enough to read (the story is called A Colder War by Charles Stross which I suspect would be very helpful for the OP.

It makes me think of Kafka and how absurdist fiction gives the reader very little hand-holding, making assumptions that the reader exists in the same world as their characters.

I was wondering if I have a style or pattern I follow. I think TJ has called my prose dense before but … I do know I find it excruciatingly difficult to not focus on my tone, and not rewrite Adlestrop by Edward Thomas (the last line of my last book was heavily inspired by Adlestrop’s last lines).

Finally, genre is immensely important in dictating how you write (or perhaps more accurately what you can write). If you’ve made up a fantasy place like Midworld, or Dathomir, you’re going to have to work harder to put the reader in the world than, urban or gothic horror, or a milieu that has a setting that actually existed.

I said ‘finally’ but I want to add that on top of this, it’s important to develop your own style; what works for you. Check out the 300 word challenges and crits and you’ll see a range of styles and clarity. Write for yourself first, then polish as needed.

Bit of a ‘how-long-is-a-piece-of-string’ answer but like all creative endeavours, that’s often the only ‘correct’ answer. Certainly I’d avoid pro/prescriptive advice; go with suggestions rather than binary right and wrong approach. Remember, you have to have fun and be proud of what you’ve written and if you’re writing for someone else it’s unlikely you’ll be doing either.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

When we navigate the world, our brains fill in many of the details for us without us realising it. It's the same with reading. A few choice details is quite enough.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

I'm not sure there is such a thing as a general right balance. Every novel has its own. A novel entirely composed of conversation for instance is certainly feasible.

 

[DAgent]

"Oh, is that one of those new spaceships that can travel 1.8 light years per hour? I'm very impressed with your masculinity!" Madeline said, with one flick of her well curved hip at the enormous metal sausage poised on the spaceport pad.

I've read Star Trek "fanfic" with setups like that !

 

[AnyaKimlin]

You could use a text to speech software - getting it to read to you will help you see for yourself if it's a reasonable balance.