OMG I'm listening to and reading books by Charles Dickens, Emily Bronte and Harriot Beecher Stowen...and as much as I try to replace "said" trust me that their old-timey use of the word "ejaculated" will never ever EVER happen. I know it meant "shouted" or "yelled loudly" but I still chuckle each time I hear or read it there. LOL.
Pixiebells, I have to say I could not disagree more with your view. I think everything Steerpike says in reply not only reflects my own view, but that of the vast majority of writers, editors and publishers too. I have no idea where you picked up the idea that all uses of 'said' as a dialogue tag should be replaced, but my advice is to ignore it.
I actually liked both of them in different ways. When I read the first one (which is more my style,) I imagined all of those people were together discussing it, clearly interacting. When I read the second one, it sounded like they all stood up in a line and *said* their piece. In other words. to me, the first one told a story. The second one was just a bunch of people making statements. No inflection in their voices, no hint of their sincerity or lack of via things like sarcasm or cynicism. While the second one got the point across in a direct way, I didn't feel like the characters were interacting with each other. Maybe that's it! Maybe for me, "said" feels like they could be saying those things by or to themselves. When Barbra whined, I felt she was whining TO the other people. When Barbra said, she was merely stating a thought. I guess colorful dialogue tags keep me focused on the back-and-forth. With the first one, I felt like I was there with all those people. With the second one, I felt like I was sitting at home reading it by myself.
See when I read the first one, I'm so distracted by all the tags that I'm not really paying attention to the dialogue. In the second one, I'm forced to pay attention to the dialogue to work out the tone and nuance of the conversation. As a writer, I want my readers doing the latter.
My opinion of said wasn't "picked up" anywhere. It's just something I've always thought when I read or wrote, even when I was much younger, long before I started a a novel or got into debates online. And I plan on continuing my writing in whichever way suits my needs, goals, preferences, personal standards, and storytelling process, thank you very much. In short: if that's how I prefer to write, that's how I'm going to write. And I would hope all of you write however you'd like. This thread was not trying to tell other people they should write differently; merely explaining and giving examples of how I prefer to write, and seeing if anyone else felt the same way.
Hmm....psychologically, I happen to have a very shot attention span....maybe I need the colorful tags to pay attention? I'm actually rather serious. Maybe the way I read and write is outside the norm. Maybe I see things backwards or from a different angle than most. I'd like to think I could use this to my advantage. Again, thank you for everyone being polite. Nothing worse than arguing online when one could politely debate like we have.
Oh, my, oh, my, oh, my, no. "Said" is the best dialogue tag the vast, vast majority of the time. Saying that it shouldn't be used is, to me, like saying the word "and" shouldn't be used. After all, it's possible to eliminate "and": Joe picked up a shoe in addition to a hat. Jane opened the door, plus she put her briefcase into the room. Come out to the lobby in your hat while also wearing your coat! Mind your P's. Also, mind your Q's. It was raining cats. Added to the cats were dogs. But...no. Why on earth would you do such a thing? No, no, no. Replacing "said" for the purpose of replacing "said" is wrong intolerable to me as a reader. (I edit because "wrong" has a moralistic feel. It's no more "wrong" than salty-tomato cake frosting is wrong, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to put up with either one of them.) I'll bet that you would be very hard-pressed to find a single well-regarded book that isn't packed with "said"s.
“Never use ‘said’ as a dialogue tag,” Bert intoned. “Why not?” Ernie interrogated. “Because it’s a boring word,” Bert uttered. “But it works!” Ernie exclaimed. “Who cares? It’s dull as dishwater!” Bert ejaculated. “At least it doesn’t distract the reader,” Ernie spat. “Distracting the reader isn’t the issue,” Bert professed. “Clarity is.” “Nothing’s clearer than ‘said’,” Ernie explained. “Will you guys stop arguing?” Oscar grouched. “No!” Bert erupted. “Arguing is our thing!” Etc. A little of this goes a very long way.
I agree that everyone should follow their own views. Ultimately, you have to do that despite what other writers, editors, and the like might think. It is worth, however, being aware that modern editors, agents, and the like often see an overuse of colorful dialogue tags as amateurish. I'm basing that on things I've heard agents and editors say, and what I've read by them. So you might be putting yourself at a disadvantage by going that route, but so long as you're aware of it that's OK. I'm submitting a story to publishers now that is in second person, knowing full well that many editors don't like that
@Pixiebells, I'd suggest that you grab a text version of as many of your favorite books as you can get your hand on, and see how those books handle dialogue tags. (I say "text version" because it's much easier to analyze these things in text than audio.) I'm betting that you will find that almost every single one of them uses "said" as their primary dialogue tag. That doesn't mean that you have to use "said". But I still think that when you're choosing to go contrary to an overwhelming custom, it's best to be thoroughly informed about that decision.
This reminds me of an ancedote. Hope you don't mind me sharing. I love cherries. My sister hates cherries. One day we were eating Cherry Ice Cream. I exclaim "This is horrible!" My sister in shock says "What? I think this tastes great." She then laughs at what she considers ironic. As she further explains "You love cherries but hate this ice cream. I hate cherries yet love this ice cream. That doesn't make any sense!" I then give my two sense and tell her. "Oh, the reverse it makes perfect sense. This ice cream doesn't taste like cherries. Which explains both positions." She laughed more. See me? I like said because it is invisible. I can read past it without slowing down. When I read-a-loud I find myself accidently skipping the tags entirely. But that is what I want. The tags to me are just to keep me straight. I don't want them to slow me down. I want them to just prevent me from being confused. It seems like you dislike the missed chance. I think not using said most of the time is dangerous to purple prose though. Just my thoughts.
The best kind of dialogue tag is the kind that is unnoticeable. You forget it is even there, and you end up focusing 100% on the content rather than the presentation. My favorite way to read dialogue is formatted like a play. It contains zero replacements for "said". In fact, it goes to the opposite extreme by omitting dialogue verbs entirely. And it takes all of two pages to get used to. To prove it actually works, here is a passage from the last book (Will Grayson, Will Grayson) I can remember reading that has dialogue formatted like this: Can you really read that and tell me it missed out on the opportunity to give me a "deeper look" at what is going on with the characters because it does not affix phrases like "he jokes" or "i retort" to the content?
I think my main issue was with, ""Said", to me, used too often can seem lazy, or like it's missing an opportunity to give your readers a deeper look at what's going on in that moment with your precious characters and their stories we're so excited to tell our readers!" To my way of thinking, the special tag is lazy. Writing the dialog as engaging and interesting, as well as showing us the tone or emotion of the setting is hard work. You can cop out of writing good dialog if you think the new said replacement conveys the information required. It guess it comes back to whether you think the dialog should convey the info, or the words around the dialog.
I believe that quotes should stand alone. It should be obvious who is speaking. Everything should be in the dialogue. If you want to write "he shouted," then don't. Write dialogue which the reader can most easily visualize as being shouted. EVERYTHING should be communicated in the dialogue, itself. Since I'm not yet a grandmaster story writer, there are times when I do have to identify which character is speaking. There, I'll usually tag the quote with "he said." or, better, imply who is talking like If any word like "whined," "teased," "demanded," etc. is necessary to convey the speaker's tone, then I believe better dialogue is needed. However, I'm not a grandmaster of the written word and there are times when the best I'm capable of is to use those kinds of tags. There's a fine art in knowing when to leave good enough alone. I can lose too much if I pick and pick at every flaw.
I suspect the best dialogue tags are the ones you don't notice as a reader. Too many 'saids' and you will notice. Too many colourful substitutes for 'said,' you notice. No dialogue tags at all? If there are more than two people in a conversation, or if it goes on for more than a couple of exchanges, you get confused as to who said what. Confusion is something you'll definitely notice. So rather than worrying about which method is 'best,' why not try using a mixture of all of these tags when you write a scene? Add in action breaks as well, which effectively 'tag' the speaker, but also give the reader a picture of what is physically going on during the conversation. Mix the tags so your readers don't notice you've put them in at all. Keep the dialogue running smoothly. Focus reader attention on the meaning of what is being said and who is saying it. Don't distract the reader with too many repetitive or attention-seeking tags. This is yet another area where strict 'rules' work against the writer, not for the writer. Just be aware that every word you choose will have an effect on how the story works. Do what works best in your particular situation. Every time.
How do you do that without tags when there are more than two people speaking? It would be unusual for three or more characters to have such distinct styles that you know from a couple of words which one is speaking.
I've read so many books on writing, I've forgotten most of them. But one thing that was common to every one of them was this: 'Said' and 'asked' are the only recommended dialog tags. Anything else is trying too hard and can be best done in other ways. EDIT: Further, 'said' or 'asked' shouldn't be used more often than every three to six exchanges in dialogue and then, only to make sure the reader doesn't lose track of what's going on. The more that can be indicated by word usage, etc. to keep from using so-called tags, the better the flow.
I have a scene in my WIP in which a magical raven, a boy, and a doctor of archaeology are having a discussion. Once I've established which voice belongs to whom, I drop the "said"s and keep them distinguished by 1.) They all have different voices. The magical raven is a bit of a wise ass. The doctor uses a lot of large words and a formal voice and is the boy's father-figure. We are, after all, talking about dramatic characters, not real people. 2.) Dialogue has subtext and, for lack of a better word, "noise". They are having an argument which has three sides. But, even after the reader knows which position is championed by which character, the scene continues. Why has each character decided the position he takes? 3.) Remember that characters aren't talking about just what you want them to be talking about. The discussion takes place in a context and there is a lot of padding in the dialogue. In the example from my WIP, that context is the doctor's office. The raven finds a jelly doughnut in the trash. His comments include asides about doughnuts. He may also talk about being a raven (example, "Damn drawers, I'd crack my beak trying to open the things.") The raven also teases the boy about how awkward the boy gets around a girl he likes. The doctor may include asides about the office (example, "That is a four hundred year old Ming dynasty artifact. Please don't get jelly all over it.") 4.) I will occasionally throw in a "said" or "asked" so as to refresh the reader's touch points and reassure the reader that they are correctly keeping track of who is saying what. But, most importantly, I try to avoid situations in which there is a three-way conversation. I could have easily turned this into a two-way discussion by distracting one of the characters (e.g. the raven could be absorbed in eating the doughnut, the boy could be absorbed in playing a game on his phone, or the doctor could be absorbed in looking for a file). I had a specific reason I didn't do that. I include more than two characters in dialogue only if I absolutely need to.
Exactly. Unless you want to entirely avoid three-way conversations, and limit yourself for no reason, you need some tags to keep things straight. So I don't think you should say that dialogue must always be able to stand on its own - it isn't a sign of bad dialogue if it can't.
For any rule in writing there are exceptions. I need about one "said" or "ask" per about three hundred words of mostly dialogue. Dialogue should be able to stand on its own. The "said"s and "ask"eds are to give the reader confidence. "Unless you want to entirely avoid three-way conversations, and limit yourself for no reason" I'm not a fan of avoiding three-way conversations for no reason. Rather, I am a fan of using three-way conversations only when there is a reason. While there are exceptions to every rule, that doesn't mean the rules of writing should all be ignored. The rules of writing serve as flags. If a writer needs to break a rule, it is almost always a sign that there is a flaw somewhere nearby (forex. "dead" dialogue, which is to say that the dialogue carries no emotion, or underdeveloped scenes or ambiguity about a character's goal or motivation, etc.)
We'll just have to disagree on that. I would find it very confusing to read 300 words of dialogue with a single tag, and it isn't something I'd aspire to in my own writing.
I was once a follower of the "Said" haters, since the attitude was drilled into me by every English teacher who ever taught me. However, I do feel there is a place for this contentious word - many places, in fact, but using other words to emphasize the emotions of your characters every once in a while adds life to otherwise bland dialogue.
I don't know...if your dialogue is bland without some colorful tag attached to it my first thought would be to rewrite the dialogue.
