Dialogue is an important tool that every writer should strive to master. Good dialogue does the following:

- It yanks the reader into the story, rather than keeping him at arm’s length, as a casual observer.

- It gives valuable insight into each character – his socioeconomic and educational background, his mannerisms, his thought processes, his reactions to others, his attitude.

- It provides clues about the time period and setting.

- It helps keep you from getting bogged down in lengthy narration, provided you don’t let your speaker get bogged down in lengthy narration.

Good dialogue is dialogue that is essential to the story or to the readers’ understanding of the character. It always serves a purpose – either it moves the story forward towards its conclusion, or it illustrates an important facet of the speaker’s character. Good dialogue is not idle chit-chat.

Believable or natural dialogue is not the same as “real speech.” Listen to a group of people talking in a restaurant (yes, of course – eavesdrop!). Record them, or attempt to faithfully jot down what’s said. Real, everyday speech is not very interesting to the casual observer, for the most part. It won’t be interesting to your readers, either. How many real conversations have you heard that are devoid of annoying little lack-of-forethought time fillers, like “well,” “you know,” “uh,” “um,” “like,” and so on? A well-placed “uh” or “um” can render dialogue more believable, but use them very sparingly to avoid turning your dialogue into a sleep aid.

Good dialogue should sound natural. One of the best ways to gauge this is to read it aloud, or ask a friend to read it aloud to you. Subvocalize, if you’re very shy. If your tripping over the words, or getting your tongue wrapped around your eyeteeth and can’t see what you’re saying, then it’s not natural.

Try to make dialogue match character. Consider the character’s socioeconomic status and background. A guttersnipe speaks differently than a college professor. Consider “My Fair Lady.” It would be easy to distinguish Henry Higgins from Eliza Doolittle, even if the same person read their lines. As Eliza learns, she is more careful and precise in her speech, even, than Higgins – because she is conscious of and cares about the perceptions of others. To her, it is not a game. He can afford to be casual in his speech, even though it is not truly in his nature to be; she cannot.

Use dropped terminal consonants (doin’, goin’, seein’, wanna, gimme, etc.), contractions (don’t, wouldn’t, didn’t, etc.), profanity and slang if the character would naturally use them. Pretend your mother and your Fifth Grade English teacher will never read your work. You can’t be a real writer and live in fear that someone will be shocked to learn that you know “those words.” Consider using profanity when it’s out of character to give dialogue “shock value.” For example, if the preacher’s wife runs across a dead body in her geranium bed, she’s not likely to say, “Oh, dear, it’s a corpse.” She might actually scream and yell a bad word. It’ll get the reader’s attention if you suddenly have a well-established character act out of character. That said, remember that profanity is the last resort of little minds, and use it sparingly – for deliberate effect.

Show – don’t tell! Make sure your characters understand this rule. Using dialogue to relate past events may tempt you to tell the story in between quotation marks. Don’t let one character simply narrate the whole story. Dialogue should give us insight into each character’s unique traits – it’s your opportunity, regardless of the point of view from which you’ve chosen to write, to give the reader a glimpse of the character’s thoughts and emotions. Use dialogue to show how characters respond to situations and react to one another.

- Consider the character’s socioeconomic and educational background.

- Give the character a distinctive “pet phrase” or set of commonly-used expressions (e.g., “Valley Girl” speech). Be careful not to exaggerate speech mannerisms to the point of annoying the reader; a little seasoning in the pot works better than dumping in a whole jar of spice.

- Show, don’t tell! Avoid academic or wordy statements, unless they reflect a character trait.

- Use contractions, dropped letters (goin’, doin’, etc.) slang, profanity, accents, etc. with deliberate intent.

- Recognize when characters are likely to relate past events in present tense.

- Unnecessary repetition of a phrase or idea.

- Small talk that doesn’t illustrate character OR move the story forward.

- Having one character address another by name (they know to whom they are talking; it should be clear enough to your reader in context and by other means)

- Wordy, academic, stiff, stilted phrases rolling off your characters’ tongues, unless it’s a character trait.

- Dialogue starts and ends with quotation marks: “ and ”

- If one speaker’s lines extend beyond one paragraph, each paragraph of dialogue opens with opening quotation marks (“); the last paragraph ends with closing quotation marks (”).

- Punctuation goes inside the quotation marks: “And so,” explained Liz, “that’s why I killed him.”

- When one speaker is quoting another, the quotation is enclosed in single quotation marks: ‘ and ’ For example: “I told him Liz said ‘Eat more oatmeal.’”

Several stock photographers on ShutterStock (http://www.shutterstock.com/?rid=6552) were discussing "Art Does Not Apologize," by Tony Long (http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,71599-0.html?tw=rss.culture) an article from Wired  that claims digital photography isn't really "art."

Tony writes:

What Tony is really getting at, I suspect, is something that all seasoned creative professionals expect of newcomers to the field - that they pay their dues. That they respect and appreciate the hard work that goes into creating something - whether it's a work of art, or literature, or music. But his examples don't really hold up to scrutiny. On the one hand, he says:

But he goes on to insult those who've embraced modern technology in the form of digital photography:

He seems to forget that the knowledge of how to crop, burn, dodge, mix and time chemical baths could also be seen as the work of a "technician with a good eye." Art has always involved the "technology" and tools of its time. Even the caveman had to figure out how to create pigments that would stick to stone walls.

So what is "art"? Is that the question? Or does the real question touch on those uglier things, like "what art is worthy to be called art?" "What is good art?"

As a writer, I have to laugh.

The author of the article may be dead wrong, but lots of photographers and artists read the article and it sparked numerous comments and discussions. I worried, reading some of them, that it might spark a few death threats. We all know what that did for Salman Rushdie's career, though. So, in writers' terms, it must be a great article. The worst condemnation for a writer - and quite probably for any artist - is to be dismissed as uninteresting and roundly ignored.

Now, as for "art," let me just throw a few ideas out there. If a plain, white porcelain urinal can be named "the most influential modern art work of all time" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4059997.stm), I suggest that some people just need to get over themselves and be a little more open-minded when it comes to judging what constitutes art and what does not. Art, in my opinion, is between the artist with his or her intentions - and the beholder, with his or her perception of the art. Some will like it - some will love it - others will think it's trash. So what? If we all thought alike, there would be no place for art in the world, anyway.

I'm more of a writer than a photographer (though I've been doing reasonably in stock photography, lately). Someone mentioned to me that they write "classic mainstream fiction," and my first thought was, "That's just pompous. 'Classic' is for readers and critics to decide, and only time will prove them right."

Art is a form of expression. You think it's art? It's art. A viewer thinks it's art, even if "art" wasn't on your mind at all when you created it? It's art. Its lasting value is what's really at issue, and whether it has value is up to you, while you live - and then to the artistic community and the art lovers out there.

The caveman probably didn't have some lofty concept of "art" when he created cave paintings. He also didn't have a written language, so this was his "journal" and a lasting record of his accomplishments. He took pride in bringing down the buffalo, and wanted others to remember his feat. That we consider it "art" is a lovely thing - a recognition of mental and expressive talents that went far beyond the ability to bring down meat on the hoof. But meat is important for survival, too - just as art is.

The "birthplace" of art is in the soul, I think. It's in what makes us human - a need to express what's in our minds, hearts, and souls. A need to create something new, maybe to leave a mark that says, "I was here."

Most animals don't create art. That leads to a bit of arrogance in humans, unfortunately. Elephants seem to enjoy painting, so maybe the creation of art is not unique to humans. If humans gave animals the idea of painting, and have "trained" them, to some extent, is it art? I don't know, but I'd sooner have one of these paintings (http://www.elephantart.com/catalog/thailand.php) hanging on my wall, than Duchamps "Fountain" gracing my foyer:

See "A Horse is a Horse: Cholla," by Casey Schumacher (http://www.newsreview.com/reno/Content?oid=oid%253A23257). It's about a horse who has learned to paint, and whose works sell for around $1000 each. Towards the end of the article, the author asks:

What do you think? Animal art, by all accounts, is a commercial success. I'm not sure it's just the novelty of animals creating art. After all, "novelty" is one of the defining characteristics of great art - or literature - and I think the BBC News article, "Bidders go ape" (http://www.elephantart.com/catalog/thailand.php), implies as much by dragging Andy Warhol's Piss Painting into a story that's primarily about works produced by a chimp. I'm not sure I can appreciate Warhol's friends' urinating on copper any more than I do Duchamps' "Fountain," but I wouldn't go so far as to say, "That's not art!"

Sooo...Andy Warhol's Piss Painting on your wall, or a colorful painting by Congo the Chimp? Apparently, Picasso had no problem giving other species their due; he reputedly had one of Congo's works on his wall.

I wonder if Tony Long would acknowledge the animal artists before giving a nod to the human digital artists out there. After all, it must be a hot, sweaty job teaching an elephant to paint.

Breezy-E ~ In College writes:

Writing a good battle scene. How on earth do you describe what you half-dozen heros are doing at the same time as the twenty-odd villains getting beat up?

Breezy-E

"Action/Adventure Newsletter (May 31, 2006)"  deals with writing battle scenes. In November, 2003, I found a great article called “Does Your Fight Scene Pack a Punch,” by Marg McAlister. See "Invalid Entry" .

Robert Waltz writes:

The hardest thing, for me, about writing is writing. That is, I have ideas, and I'm told I have some talent for communicating them - but I find myself distracted by inconsequentials like working for a living, eating, attending Conventions, and responding to newsletters. Procrastination is my lifelong companion - I keep meaning to send it holiday cards, but I never seem to get around to it until February.

J. A. Buxton writes:

What’s the hardest thing about writing? Using proper punctuation comes in first by a wide margin. Commas from hell and whether or not to hyphenate always seem to slow down the creative process for me. Even the half dozen grammar books I own sometimes are no help.

The ideas usually flow easily from my imagination to my fingers and then to my computer screen. Often, it’s as if my characters take over my body and mind, while I just sit back and let my fingers do their work.

A stray comma or lack of same, however, often trips up the flow of my words when I go back and edit the story. Right now, whether to use old-fashioned or old fashioned is holding up the final proofreading of my “Home of the Red Fox” at the printers. Google is absolutely no help since both versions pop up.

Yes, writing would be much easier if only correct punctuation wasn’t so important.

Judity

D. Cavanaugh writes:

I'm not necessarily sure this is the most difficult for me in writing, although it does happen occasionally. I find this more of a problem in reading. I have read published books that have changed timelines, character names, or even so much as references to them. A book published by Harlequin once had a party that everyone was to attend on Sunday, in the third chapter. By the fourth chapter, it was Saturday afternoon and everyone was at the party.

I guess my question would be if you know of any easy way of tracking your movement and characters when writing, aside from going back and forth to check. If not I think I need to develop software to help writers with this.

Diane

schipperke writes:

The hardest part of writing, for me, is getting past the middle part of the story. I tend to become lazy and give up on it and hit the delete button.

Excellent newsletter.

plainsue writes:

Great Newsletter! Now, about that question. What is the hardest thing about writing? Real compliments and criticism! It can give you a big head or writer's block. It scares me!

So true!

Invalid Item  This item number is not valid. #861905 by Not Available.

redshirt writes:

Firstly, your Katie has some great ways to come up with titles. Loved the trip from a piece of watermelon candy to a title of something she created. Secondly, for me, dialogue is the most difficult part of writing. I would love to know what advice others would give on writing good dialogue. Thirdly, THANK YOU for including my story "YoYo Conscience" in the newsletter. That was a very nice suprise! This is the first time I've commented on a newsletter but I have enjoyed each and every one and found some useful information in all of them.

twyls writes:

Jessie,

How I love your newsletters. Thanks for another informative one, this time about titles. (By the way, your daughter sounds like a child any parent would be proud of!)

The hardest part of writing for me is not scrapping what I write before the first draft is done. I have a very hard time shutting down that inner critic long enough to get a draft out. This is much harder with poetry or more artistic works than with my fiction. Why would this be?

Any advice is appreciated!

Write on!

twyls and her twin

Just for grins, here’s how I’d like to deal with the inner critic… See "Invalid Item"  . It’s not finished, yet - it may never be finished. Seems I’m in need of those tips for “not quitting in the middle.” The voice that got to me here said, “November’s over. This is silly. What a waste of your time. Write something that actually stands a chance at getting published, why dontcha?” Don’t fall victim to that voice.

scribbler writes:

ok so sure the title should be clever but my biggest pet peeve is titles that are cheesy. PLEASE don't use clichés, or something you figure sounds poetic. Titles need to be creative but have to be honestly. Your reader should pick up on that and feel it is sincere but not boring.

alicengoreland writes:

I agree. Titles are what you first see. It should fit but it should stand out also. If it's quirky title that's nice, but I want a clue as where it came from. Don't underestimate what the title can do for your work. Look at some classic books: Death on a Pale Horse, Catcher in the Rye, Needful Things, The Color of Magic. You have to be a bit into the books to see why the title works well. These titles alone make for great stories all on their own.

bazilbob writes:

Wow! Thanks a lot for a great newsletter on titles. I really struggle with thinking up good titles, but using an allusion rather than the obvious is a fantastic idea! Thank your daughter for me. :)

Helen writes:

This is great!

Thanks for your article and what a creative and lovely daughter you have~ You have helped me to be more inspirational!

shallot writes:

I think Katie is definitely thinking along the right track. There is some invaluable advice there! Thank you so much for including it in the newsletter.

dogfreek21 writes:

I never worried about titles. I need to finish the story first!

If you finish a nice story, then go back, look at all the different twists and turns the story takes. Get a title that the reader won't understand until the last page. Those are my favorite titles!

I mean, why worry about finding titles when they'll just come to you later on?

Mistress Sakusha writes:

I've got to say that this week's theme wowed me a bit. I think your daughter is on the right track. And it's really cute how you ask for her input about the topic. Anyway, it really was helpful.

Doris writes:

One of my favorite things to do is come up with a "title". That has been my trail of crumbs leading me through my story. Most often, (though not always) my title comes first. Now the question would be does it portray what I'm meaning, to other that read??? That would be a good feedback.

Equilibrium writes:

I agree with what your daughter said. I usually pick out titles just like that—they don't directly refer to what the pieces are about but makes the imagination of the readers work by suggesting what the content is. I think it makes things much more interesting, since the author doesn't spell it out for the reader. That way, there is more room for creative thinking.

Karen Bristow writes:

You are my hero and I bow before your greatness! Titles are THE HARDEST thing for me to come up with. Your daughter is a genius.

Thank you (and her) for this newsletter!

Remember what I said up there about widening the doorways to accommodate a swelled head? Gee thanks - my daughter and I will never be able to walk through a doorway side by side, ever again.

Lynn McKenzie writes:

I liked your advice (and your daughter's) about coming up with titles. Usually, I'll use a song title, because I'm a big music fan. Although sometimes coming up with the proper title eludes me for a while!

grim writes:

A month later, that sentence doesn't seem so bad...

Because I’ve written so many worse ones, since then?

We Editors love getting feedback on the Newsletters – it lets us know you’re reading, and it tells us whether we’re writing about the subjects that interest you. Please keep those questions and comments coming!

Back issues. Did you miss an issue? See http://www.writing.com/main/newsletters/action/archives.