Can a fiction novel have dialogue written like this?

I read the play form of Steinbeck's 'Cat on a Hot Tin roof'. I enjoyed it. However, I knew it was the play version. A novel is a novel. A scriipt is a script.

 

I thought that was Tennessee Williams. I think I'd like it better by Steinbeck.

 

i'd never recommend using 'chastised' for a tag verb... it doesn't really fit well enough... the simpler the better, with 'said' being virtually invisible... most other verbs stick out like sore thumbs...

though 'whispered' and 'yelled' may be called for in some cases, they don't have to be used as dialog tags, can inform the reader in preceding, or following sentences, instead...

you'll find several lengthy threads here on this subject, if you look for them...

zaffy...
that was a play only, never a novel... and it was written by tennesse williams, as dig noted... steinbeck had nothing to do with it... you must be thinking of something else...

 

Thanks for the all the input guys. After weighing in on both the pros and the cons like you mentioned for a few days, I've decided that I am going to write dialogue the "normal" way instead of the IM chat way.

On a sidenote, I looked at a book by Cormac McCarthy, and what's interesting about his books are that he doesn't put quotes around dialogue. How does he get away with that?

 

It's a stylistic preference. There's nothing wrong with it as long as it is written clearly (i.e. the reader can distinguish the dialogue from the narrative).

 

Because hes an established writer and he knows how to use them. Writers like him are able to bend and sometimes break such rules.

Personaly? I don't see why you wouldn't add the quotes around dialogue. I don't see how it could possibly add to the story.

 

McCarthy did this for all of his novels as far as I know, including his first one. While I'm not advocating new writers to follow his example, it isn't necessary to abide by all traditional rules even for a first book from an unknown writer. Like I said before it's a stylistic effect and works perfectly with his writing.

 

I think that using the colons could work well if the story is told in first-person narrative. Otherwise it probably would make the reader do a double-take. Lol, but it seems like I'm a bit late to chime in.

In the novel I'm working on I use colons for a moment of dialogue only because it was unclear who was speaking and it was too weird to use says/said at that moment. I think it would be helpful (again, only from a first person narrative) if they wanted to indicate someone kept repeating themselves:

A:kfjsdkf
I ignore here.
A:sjfksjf
My word my throat is itchy.
A:slkdjfs!

Or something to that effect.

 

I am all for trying something new, but John: Blah, blah to me looks horrible. I can see how it might work when describing a conversation using text messaging, or instant messaging, but then it would have to be like this:

John looked at the screen, and smiled as he re-read the words.

John: Blah, blah.
Jill: Blah, blah, blah.
John: Blah, blah​

.

and continue narrative ...

Other than that, I can't see how it could work.

 

That's nothing: try following the dialogue in Joyce's Finnegan's Wake. As I said before, you can do absolutely anything you like. Whatever you do, conventional or unconventional, will have an effect on the reader, and the writer always needs to be aware of that effect. If the writing is particularly unconventional then the effect is most likely to be negative, of course, but in sufficiently skilled hands it need not be.

 

To Digtig

Re: Of Men, Mice and a Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.

Oops. I get those two mixed up, probaly equates to a sin.

 

Of cats and men and Mice on a hot tin roof -- two works I'd like to read

 

Cats and Mice on a Hot Tin Man's Roof by Tennessee Steinbeck Baum.

 

I find minimalistic writing very enjoyable, though this method is at the most extreme end of the spectrum.

 

Haven't read that but can recommend the sequel -

'Oz Mice and Men on a Hot Tin Roof'.

 

I read a book, A Step From Heaven by An Na. It was about a family emigrating (immigrating?) from Korea to America. All of the English dialogue would have quotes, as opposed to the non-quoted Korean dialogue. Na still properly punctuated as if quotes were there, so it didn't bother me much.

 

I think we have something that should move over to the word games topic, before the moderators step in!

 

I think the secret to making tags and beats a natural part of the dialogue, is to use them to describe body language. After all, body language is a large part of any normal communication between two people.

For example, this:

"Why do you follow me?" Eve said.
"Because I love you", John said.​

Can be changed into this:

"Why do you follow me?" Eve eyed him warily and clenched her fists.
"Because I love you." John's posture was forceful, and he stared her straight in the eyes.
​

Or this:

Eve sighed. "Why do you follow me?"
"Because I love you", John said with a wry smile.​

Or this:

"Why do you follow me?" Eve looked at him, puzzled, and shook her head.
"Because I love you", John said slowly, listening to his own words.​

Makes the message different, doesn't it?

 

Well, yes, except the comma should be inside the quotes.

 

I don't do dialogue tags. I wrote a post about it on another forum - incoming copy and paste!

"I don't use dialogue tags."

"Why not?"

"I like to let you know who's talking and how they feel by what they say and by emotional clues in the surrounding text."

"Oh."

"Yeah, I tend to write first person or deep third person point of view and I narrate the main character's thoughts so you already know what's going on inside their heads. Dialogue tags might work better for third person omniscient though."

"Cool."

"Oh, also it's better to keep what dialogue tags you do use simple. Use 'said' most of the time. No one likes a Tom Swiftie."

"Who's Tom Swiftie?"

"Just some guy," she waffled noncommittally.






I found a fanfic I wrote when I was 18 online a while ago. It's not...good. But you can see the beginnings of my style in it. I still use some of the same rhythms and sentence structure. And I didn't use dialogue tags back then either.

It's a personal style thing. I like it and it works for me, and I skimmed the thread and didn't see anyone else suggesting it even though you said you didn't like tags. So I just thought I'd suggest it as an alternative.

 

Except you have two floating heads and a pun. A funny pun, though.

 

bw... it wouldn't be centered, as you showed it above... it would be a block insert, with even margin on left, ragged on right... you may have meant that, but showing it centered could mislead new writers...

hugs, m

 

What! Moderate ourselves and put Cogito out of a job.
And besides, if this website is not a word game then what is it?

MedleyMisty - What is 'deep third person'?

 

Perhaps when you write in third person grammatical tense while keeping the viewpoint deeply rooted in the protagonist's subjective experiences?

 

Even though I'm not going to use that style, I'm not sure why everyone is saying it looks like instant messenger. Now that I think of it, it looks different, but I don't know if it looks like IM. For example, in Arthur Miller books, that's how the dialogue is presented. I doubt you would read the Crucible and think of MSN messenger.