Do parenthesis in dialogue make sense?

I've read multiple stories where they use them in dialogue. The first time I just thought it was a weird mess up, but I've now seen it happen in multiple different stories. I can't actually think of a reason they shouldn't be there, but it seems like if your doing a side note in dialogue, you should just use commas. Is this just me?

 

The jury is out on that one, I reckon. It's certainly not grammatically incorrect.

Personally, I probably wouldn't put them in dialogue, because I can't imagine how somebody would 'say' a parenthetical statement any differently from any other phrase. A comma simply indicates a pause, whereas parentheses have an actual meaning. Parentheses mean the statement is an unnecessary adjunct to the rest of what is being said. I don't know how a speaker would indicate that as they are speaking, so I don't think it makes sense to use them in dialogue. Parentheses are a meaning thing, not a speaking thing. But I wouldn't take that as absolute, either. I'm sure some people do write parentheses into their dialogue. So whatever works for you.

I've also had discussions with fellow writers about whether or not to use semicolons in dialogue. The semicolon indicates that the thought isn't finished, even though the sentence would be complete without it. However, it needs the second complete sentence to finish the thought—hence the semicolon instead of the period/full stop. However, how do you 'say' a semicolon in a speaking voice? I think it's not really possible, but that's my opinion. (And I do use semicolons when I write; I just don't use them in dialogue.) Other people do think it's perfectly okay to use semicolons in dialogue.

I maintain that while you're speaking your voice can pause, it can stop, it can question and it can exclaim. It can break off suddenly (an m-dash.) It can trail off (ellipsis.) It can even emphasise something (italics.) But I don't think you can vocalise parentheses or semicolons. I believe dialogue is a transcription of what has actually been said, not an explanation of what the statements mean.

 

I don't see myself using parentheses in dialogue, but I don't have a problem with reading it. To me, it implies sort of a lowering in voice for the duration of the parenthetical, which is different from how I read one with commas or dashes. Not sure why.

"Of course I want to go into the Forest of No Return -- you know me, I love adventure -- it's just that I don't think Alex would like it very much (poor dear hates spiders you know, can't stand them)."

In this case I'd read the m-dash'd section at full voice, and the parenthetical section in a quieter, more confiding tone.

That's just me.

 

My feelings exactly.

 

I would tend to indicate the parenthetical by just saying it.

"Of course I want to go into the Forest of No Return," izzybot said. "You know me, I love adventure. It's just that I don't think Alex would like it very much." izzybot lowered his voice and leaned in conspiratorially. "Poor dear hates spiders you know. Can't stand them."

The parentheses actually seem more like breaking the fourth wall - as if the author is directly addressing the reader, rather than the characters conversing. If that's the intent, it might work, but probably would need to be outside the quotation marks.

 

In a vacuum, I don't have an issue at all with parenthetical asides in dialogue. I think it's just fine, just as it's fine to use semicolons in dialogue.

Outside of said vacuum, I tend to stay away from things like that in my own work, because there is no accepted convention about how it would be read. To me, one of the key components is clarity; I want any reader to know what my words mean. With things like parentheses, it becomes a bit of a crap shoot.

Does that mean no one should use them? Absolutely not! More power to the people who do. In my own work, though, the juice is not worth the squeeze. I value clarity more than I value what I may or may not be able to do with something like this. As demonstrated by @madorosh, there's a way to convey the same thing with more clarity.

Maybe I'll use them in the future if I can be more creative.

 

Yeah. What an excellent example of what I wanted to say! That works better, in my opinion, in dialogue, than sticking the statement in parentheses. Examples are always useful to illustrate a concept, aren't they?

 

Ditto to the second part. But If I may, Homes? You're almost correct on the journalistic quote part, at least for the publicatons I've done interviews / news pieces for.

In a journalistic quote, you use parentheses instead of the pronoun, as a replacement. So it would be:

"I shot (Bob) in the face."

If it's something the editor added for clarification during the editing after deadline, it would be brackets, to indicate the Editor was popping in to give additional information, like this:

"I shot him [Bob--Ed] in the face."

The brackets make things difficult to read, and the Editor's role is supposed to be invisible, so it's usually parenthesis. (Plus, people don't know who "Ed" is anymore. I've had readers ask.)

But--and this is important--cynical readers take issue with parenthesis, because it makes them wonder if you're making up quotes. So unless the piece was in Q&A format, I always tried to find a re-write around it, like so:

Homer admitted he shot Bob in the face and said he had no regrets. "He was annoying as fuck. He had to go!"

In dialogue in fiction, I wouldn't use them.

 

Yeah Imeant fiction. In journalistic writing it makes perfect sense.

 

Yeah I meant fiction. In journalistic writing it makes perfect sense.

 

Ah, sorry bout that.