writing without dialog tags

[yowser]

The only possible times that one might want to abandon clarity in dialogue is when the ambiguity forces the reader to think more, engage more, understand more, the characters. David Foster Wallace could do this (and sometimes overdo it) and it only works when the author has complete command over the narrative.

He wasn't a fan of tags of any variety, yet pages could go by and you knew exactly who was speaking, the character delineation already accomplished, and the speakers' voices obvious. But he also forced you to read carefully.

For most of us, most of the time, clarity, even at the expense of repetitive markers, seems a more pressing and important goal.

 

[NoJo]

There are lots of cases where "he said" in dialog is necessary, particularly if the dialog is interspersed with descriptive sentences, which make the reader less likely to remember whose turn it is to speak. But there are even more cases where it's not.

It's also just about okay to use "snarled", "murmured", "called", "sang", etc - when the verb "said" is inappropriate to describe the tone. But adverbs, "said angrily" or "said soothingly" are weak ways of indicate the speaker's tone.



The two uses that make sense for dialog tags are

1) keeping track of who's saying the words

and

2) supplying "prosody" in the (rare) case when it's not obvious from the words (like when you see <WHISPERS> in a script)

I try to avoid both as much as possible, mainly to maintain pace.

But the one thing I avoid completely is "privileged access" to the speaker's intent or state of mind -- I avoid any omniscience as much as possible (in dialog).

Sometimes it's not omniscience that's the problem, just laziness:

"That's the last time I'm warning you," said Jim angrily.

Only marginally better is the "standard proxy gesture", mentioned in another thread:

"That's the last time I'm warning you," said Jim, clenching his fists.

Why not move the story on and use reactions, or subsequent acts which describe not only how the speech was given (angrily), but what the listeners reaction was:

(We know that it's Jim's turn to speak

"That's the last time I'm warning you." Alice's wiped his spittle from her cheek, laughing.

Jim snatched the phone from Alice's hand. "That's the last time I'm warning you."

 

[yukonnights]

Our Femdom Valentine 01/21/20, Lumberyard Miracle 02/18/20, Unexpected Love 04/13/20.

I've been intentionally playing with dropping the dialogue tags for over a year. The three stories listed above are examples of this and I have a couple more in the works but not published.

If you scan a page or two of these I think you'll get the gist of what I'm trying for. It's all about immersion and immediacy, in my opinion. I've also come to the conclusion that there are not only different styles of writing — there are differences in the preference of styles in the readers of stories. If you check these stories out, jump to the Comments and you'll see there are those who found the "no tag" approach confusing. In Lumberyard Miracle, I over used character names in the dialogue in an unrealistic way.

The thing is; These stories turned out to be some of my higher rated ones. I'm left with thinking that a given reader is either gonna love it or hate it. And that gets back into the no Universal reader reality. But most of the comments are positive.

As some may recall; there is an even closer style that I brought up a year or so back; Deep POV, which delves even deeper into the actual experience of the character through, not only thoughts, but in the way each sensation the character experiences, each action they take, ever fear or elation is written in a way that the sensations and the way the actions are described reveals what the character is experiencing — I've not come close to figuring that one out yet.

Last but not least; I think there is a place for a good old fashioned telling of a story. Literally, a story told by an unknown omniscient "old elder" that comes off as sitting around the fireplace or campfire and being taken on a magical mystery tour. (that said, I don't think these are as immediate, nor as immersive erotically — but that's just 'one reader's' opinion.)

 

[ElectricBlue]

Last but not least; I think there is a place for a good old fashioned telling of a story. Literally, a story told by an unknown omniscient "old elder" that comes off as sitting around the fireplace or campfire and being taken on a magical mystery tour. (that said, I don't think these are as immediate, nor as immersive erotically — but that's just 'one reader's' opinion.)

It's been said of my writing that it's like being "curled up at your feet in front of a log fire, with a whisky and a warm rug, wondering where you're going to take us next." I shall take that as a yes - since I also have comments saying, "My God, I could drown in the rivers of your world."

 

[Bramblethorn]

Yeah, just in general, any reader confusion is unforgivable, and negates any pacing advantage.

Reader confusion is a pacing problem, among other things, because the reader has to stop and take time out to figure out who said what.

 

[NotWise]

For the story I'm working on now, I'll probably stay with minimal tags, except to control the pace.

I'll keep dialog tags for scenes when the two lovers and talking with each other. That will control the pace and reduce the tension.

I found a few cases where the speaker is ambiguous. If I can't find a non-superfluous action to focus on the speaker, then I'll use them there, too.

While searching for ambiguous cases, I found two where it didn't make a difference who was speaking. I removed both of those lines. If it doesn't make a difference, then it doesn't need to be there.

 

[yukonnights]

You've read "Her Dream House," which was the first story I wrote with minimal tagging. The second was "Hurricane Twyla." You can find those in my catalog, linked in my sig line. I won't link directly because that has been an invitation to trolling.

The third is my Summer Lovin' contest story. It's longer than the first two and it's a more complicated story. It seems to bring out some of the problems with pacing and tension.

I just finished 'Hurricane Twyla'; I didn't have any problem following the characters of the story w/o the dialogue tags. ( I do think you owe me an answer about the "announcements" though. About halfway through I figured it was going to end up being a dream one of the two main characters would wake up from — but, no dream. So, how and why did the mysterious announcements arise? Same thing with the street names? Did I miss a clue somewhere along the way?) Anyway, a cute story that kept me entertained.

 

[NotWise]

I just finished 'Hurricane Twyla'; I didn't have any problem following the characters of the story w/o the dialogue tags. ( I do think you owe me an answer about the "announcements" though. About halfway through I figured it was going to end up being a dream one of the two main characters would wake up from — but, no dream. So, how and why did the mysterious announcements arise? Same thing with the street names? Did I miss a clue somewhere along the way?) Anyway, a cute story that kept me entertained.

The story originated from a dream. I liked it, so I kept some of the dream-like quality. It happens on the last day of classes for high school seniors. The dreaminess resonated for me because my memories from that time are fairly dream-like. The drugs may have had something to do with that.

So there's no explanation for the announcements. They are what they are, and the announcer becomes kind-of a fifth character.

As for tag-less dialog, I was fond of the scene with the four of them sitting in the park and passing a pipe. The focus of the dialog passes with the pipe.

I had fun writing the story, and my main goal was that it should be fun to read.

 

[Emirus]

If someone who is not a writer or editor can read the story without tags you’ve got it right. If they can’t understand any part of it you need to put in tags.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

If someone who is not a writer or editor can read the story without tags you’ve got it right. If they can’t understand any part of it you need to put in tags.

This. I write on my phone, so the text tends to be sparse and I don't put in quote marks etc that will only get moved around. Once I've got a basic draft, I go back to put in the punctuation and add tags for clarity, pacing and adding a bit of action and interest.

The next edit tends to be to remove statements of the obvious or that don't move the story along. Sometimes I draft conversations between my characters to see what happens, so my current series had a bit where they argue over grocery shopping. It really helped me flesh out both characters in detail, but the reader doesn't need all that, so most of it has been cut.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Hmmm... I use tags to keep the reader and myself from getting confused as to who is doing the talking. I have tried not using them and find myself quickly getting confused with who is saying what and I'm writing the damn thing.

Now I can see if it's a monologue but the minute you add a second person without a tag, it will become quite confusing.

I too would like to see how you accomplish this... link please.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

...

The other thing I noticed about this style of writing is that as a substitute for tags, you insert narrative snippets at the beginning of dialogue lines:

Cat turned to look at him.

Joe wiped his beard.

Rich cut in.

Joe laughed.

...

Which in essences is a dialog tag. Just because you don't use said, asked, replied, shouted, etc. doesn't mean it's not a dialog tag.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Another thing about dialog tags, unless the reader is confused about who is speaking they tend to ignore simple tags such as said and asked. So having them usually doesn't slow the pacing for the reader.

 

[Voboy]

Another thing about dialog tags, unless the reader is confused about who is speaking they tend to ignore simple tags such as said and asked. So having them usually doesn't slow the pacing for the reader.

This.

 

[SimonDoom]

Another thing about dialog tags, unless the reader is confused about who is speaking they tend to ignore simple tags such as said and asked. So having them usually doesn't slow the pacing for the reader.

My feeling too. Readers are so accustomed to tags that they can absorb them without having to slow down.

 

[davet_1_1]

I use short sentences describing actions in a way that sounds like what you're using as one method of making it clear who is speaking. I don't find it necessary to do with great frequency, but I have noticed the effect on pacing. I think the effect has been limited and that it is a controllable effect. I keep the sentence replacing a dialog tag short and simple ("He laughed," "She grimaced," "John fidgeted with his tie," "Anne was thoughtful.")

I space out the actions that are substituting for dialog tags so that I have some sort of identification of the speaker, be it a rare dialog tag, a short sentence describing an action, of something inherent to the dialog, around every four or five changes in speaker, or if I have one character with two pieces of dialog without intervening dialog from another character. It varies, of course, depending on how much is obvious from context.

This is similar to my approach, I think. One thing I'm noticing recently is that I'll write a conversation in first draft without any tags, just to get what the characters are saying out of my head and on the page.

OR, total opposite, particularly during sex scenes, I go way overboard, describing every inflection of what the character said and did, probably again to just get it out.

A huge part of the editing process then becomes balancing these out, adding some clarification to long dialogue sections, looking for creative ways to say "Rob said," "Katie said." Also then to simplify the sexytimes so that it actually scans and reads in a compelling manner. Sometimes I feel like I spend all my editing time deleting the words "she moaned seductively."

 

[SimonDoom]

Just chiming in to say that I think it's often unnecessary to find creative ways to replace "said". "Said" has a special power in fiction -- any seasoned reader will barely even notice that it's there, glossing over it, but will retain the important information from it: which character is speaking, if there was any doubt. There's a reason "X said", "Y said" is the gold standard in fiction at the moment, and other variations have mostly fallen into disuse except for occasional emphasis.

Yes to all this.

The basic "he said" "she said" format is overwhelmingly the format used in most published fiction. There's a reason for that.

There's no hard and fast rule against ever using substitutes for "said", but there are good reasons to stick with "said" most of the time and not use substitute verbs:

1. The dialogue itself should do the heavy lifting, not the tags or words that describe the dialogue.
2. As nada_doing says, readers don't actually notice "said", but they'll notice substitutes and they can slow down the dialogue.
3. There's a big risk of the prose getting a bit purplish and silly if you do it too much.

"No!" he said.

Usually will do the trick better than

"No!" he rejoined with great alarm.

4. Despite the concern that the use of "said" in tags will clutter the prose, the opposite often is true. Getting rid of them requires alternative ways to identify speakers that are clumsier and may end up taking more words.

 

[SimonDoom]

That's an important point -- mixing in a bunch of other verbs that stick out more than "said" diverts attention away from the dialogue itself. Hopefully the tone of voice and intensity of what someone's saying can be inferred from the dialogue, without a helper verb.

In a similar vein, I'd love to get people's opinions on this. I read someone's theory that if you're using descriptive words to influence dialogue, it should be before the dialogue. Their theory was that if it's after the dialogue, the reader has already read the dialogue once in whatever tone of voice they imagined it in originally, and now they have to go back and read that line again.

Ie:

"I hate you," he whispered, his eyes narrowing.

vs:

His eyes narrowed, his voice dropping to a hoarse whisper. "I hate you."

I'm not sure how much I agree with this theory, and I'll use either option depending on how I feel in the moment, but I'm curious if anyone else has a take. For me as a reader, I think I parse both of these about the same way; I could see it being an issue with a long piece of dialogue, though, when a few seconds have gone by before I get to the descriptive piece.

I understand the rationale but come to the opposite conclusion. This may just be me, but in dialogue paragraphs I think the default should be for the dialogue to come first. I think it's crisper and reads better. I am much less keen on seeing the snippet of dialogue at the end of the paragraph.

Again, not an inflexible rule, but I think it usually reads better this way. So in the examples above I prefer no. 1.

 

[NotWise]

In a similar vein, I'd love to get people's opinions on this. I read someone's theory that if you're using descriptive words to influence dialogue, it should be before the dialogue. Their theory was that if it's after the dialogue, the reader has already read the dialogue once in whatever tone of voice they imagined it in originally, and now they have to go back and read that line again.

Ie:

"I hate you," he whispered, his eyes narrowing.

vs:

His eyes narrowed, his voice dropping to a hoarse whisper. "I hate you."

I'm not sure how much I agree with this theory, and I'll use either option depending on how I feel in the moment, but I'm curious if anyone else has a take. For me as a reader, I think I parse both of these about the same way; I could see it being an issue with a long piece of dialogue, though, when a few seconds have gone by before I get to the description.

I use it both ways, but tend to put the action before the dialog unless I need to start a paragraph with dialog. I also sometimes break the spoken line and place the tag and/or action in the middle to create the effect of a pause.

 

[HappySpouse]

In a realistic casual conversation, where each person is saying few words per turn, I get irritated if everything has a tag. However, I think it’s far worse when two people are only speaking in odd monologues that have forced descriptions of the scenery or unrealistic use of names.

I don’t believe there is a “right” and “wrong” to it, but those are the two main instances where it totally removes me from a story to roll my eyes at the author. I guess my favorites are when the characters speak so differently that the reader doesn’t have to keep track of taking turns and such.

 

[Sextified]

I love how many opinions and thoughts are being offered on this subject! The examples do help clarify what is being discussed. But unless this should start a new thread, I am wondering how much the POV the writer chooses affects how much the readers need tags in the first place?

A storyteller, recounting a fable for children around a campfire, would use their voice to bring each character to life differently. Deeper for the villain. Roars for the monster. Yells for the brave guard. Screams for the heroine being rescued. He'd get to wave his hands. Point. Shake his fist. Yell. Shout. Whisper. Frighten and elate his audience.

As writers, usually we want to engage our readers, but lack all the advantages of the spoken word, or actors have on a stage. How can we, when needed, achieve the same effect with just words on a screen?

If a short story is being told ONLY thru the eyes of one person, as they climb down a steep mountain, to go explore a haunted and abandoned city in the narrow valley below? What is going on in their head is so much more important, than having an impersonal editor simply describe what his actions are. Feelings, fears, worries and expectations will be easier to express directly from inside his mind. Only when he actually meets someone living in one of the decrepit buildings, would there be need for dialogue. Do you entirely switch the POV just for that?

In an earlier example, a conversation between a whole table full of people was going on. Using a world view in that situation is usually a nightmare! There may be no good reason to even try that approach at all?

How would some of you handle the challenge below, and add some select dialogue, with a few tags to make it readable?

< < < < > > > >

Seven people are sitting at a huge round table in a small private college's cafeteria, having all just returned from a group visit into town, and are having tea.

The main character in the story is one of the junior girls, and is too shy to even speak, at least in such a large and diverse group. She will just be listening, as will one other girl.

Going clock-wise around the table, the two students on her left are whispering about the cute boy, that they had just seen working in a shop earlier. The tall oldest student is busy arguing with the professor about a moral question, and her teacher is just droning on, and on. The next oldest student is frustrated, also flanking the pompous man, and is trying to get a word in edge wise. But the newest student to the small college, is just staring directly at her, with a strange expression on her face, that is beginning to make her feel a bit uncomfortable. Eventually, the new girl shifts her chair towards her a bit closer, and places a hand on the main character's thigh, safely hidden by the table cloth.

Soon the impromptu meeting breaks up, with the announcement that the new girl will be her roommate, for the rest of the semester.

< < < < > > > >

How would you handle tagging such an important conversation, if the two silent girls are about to become lovers, over the next few months? What POV would you choose? The other five will speak, and need to be identified, but aren't the main focus or reason the scene is included in the story. But since it's the first time all the recurring characters are being introduced to the readers, the little bit of conversations before she feels the hand on her leg, are very important.

Tagging is needed, but aren't POV and Style of the writer the most important factors on how to approach representing the dialogue?

Clockwise from the main character. Jill, Susy, Brenda, Professor Wit, Rhonda, Wendy, Michelle (main character)

How would you write about two big paragraph's worth on a page, and get all the important items across, and tag it out so it is clear to the readers? I tend to use lot's of line breaks, myself, and visually separate and spread out the words on the screen.

 

[KeithD]

I am wondering how much the POV the writer chooses affects how much the readers need tags in the first place?

The lower realms of common-denominator reader comprehension among the actual readers of your work would determine that, case by case.

 

[Sextified]

The lower realms of common-denominator reader comprehension among the actual readers of your work would determine that, case by case.

Which is why I think you should only write for your own enjoyment, and if you choose to share it with others, let your proper audience find you.

Don't change the way YOU want to write, trying to please any and everyone out there.

 

[SimonDoom]

Which is why I think you should only write for your own enjoyment, and if you choose to share it with others, let your proper audience find you.

Don't change the way YOU want to write, trying to please any and everyone out there.

I don't see it as this simple, nor do I see an obvious conflict, most of the time, between me writing what I want and me writing to gain an audience.

I write different stories of different kinds with different purposes. Some stories are based on quirky ideas of no obvious interest to anyone but me (e.g., Penis Fish, or BTB Incorporated, or Bullfighter). Others I write with the express purpose of trying to please an audience (mom stories). They're both fun for me to write. I derive artistic satisfaction of some kind with every story I write.

I see publishing a story as an act of communication, as a two-way street, and therefore even with stories that are more personal or unusual I try to write in a style that I think is accessible. I stick to fairly conventional American English styles of prose, grammar, spelling, punctuation, dialogue, etc. I refer often to the Chicago Manual of Style (I strongly recommend it to any author here, and I give credit to KeithD for persuading me to look at it). This also happens to be a style that I believe in artistically, so for me there's no conflict. I'm not trying to write like Thomas Pynchon or Cormac McCarthy -- not that there's anything wrong with that!

 

[KeithD]

I agree. I lot of writing time is wasted here looking for the Holy Grail of what "the reader" wants.