@GuardianWynn - I think if it's 'filler' you should probably re-write it so it's not filler. Leaving narrative out altogether isn't really the answer, except in short dialogue exchanges. Twitching, tapping, etc, can be just lazy writing. If you, as a writer, take the time to truly envision the scene you're writing, to truly understand your characters, to think about what they are actually doing, how they are feeling and what is happening around them as they talk, you will be able to write narrative that matters to your story. Just slow down, and spend more time with each scene. Are both characters so deeply engrossed in the conversation that they miss something that happens nearby until it's too late? Is one character watching the other one, who is avoiding eye contact? Any idea why? Work with it. Is one character thinking ...my god, what did I ever see in that boy? Does her body language give this away? And if so, how does the 'boy' react? If one character is showing ill-contained impatience during the conversation (and how do you convey this?), does this impatience register with the other person? If so, how do they react to it? If not—if they are oblivious to the other person's desire to escape—what happens next? Just automatically inserting eyebrow lifting, head-turning, tapping the foot and stuff like that doesn't work very well, if it's not thought out. And it especially doesn't work well if you employ the same character tics over and over. But ...don't be tempted to just dump all narrative because you don't think you can write it well. Learn to write it well. Narrative helps pace your story, and also adds the 'visuals' that any story needs. Narrative is only boring if you write boring narrative. I just finished reading a pulp sci-fi series written by a respected sci-fi author, in which every character feels his 'stomach tighten' at every bit of news that is the least bit unsettling. I think this is used dozens of times in each novel in the series, and it becomes laughable. It's a stock response. Try to avoid stock responses. And keep in mind the old adage: 'if you've heard a turn of phrase before, don't use it.' You can expand that to: 'if you've used a turn of phrase before, don't use it again.' Probably not 100% possible in a long novel or series of novels, but it's a good goal to strive for. If you think you may be over-using a term, try using your wordprocessor's search function to ferret out any instance. Then work on devising something else instead. Interspersing narrative with dialogue helps to pace your scenes AND creates the visuals a reader needs to fully engage with your story. Don't be tempted to leave narrative out simply because you can't write it well. Learn to write it well. It doesn't make sense to leave useful tools out of your tool box, simply because you don't know how to use them.
But you weren't just talking for hours, were you? You were also thinking, feeling, reacting, testing, watching the other person, trying to figure out how they might take what you were going to say next. Maybe your emotions rose and fell during the conversation? This is what you might want to focus on as you write your sections of dialogue. If it's a group conversation, you REALLY need narrative and certainly dialogue tags to keep the speakers straight for the reader. Reading badly-attributed group conversations is one of my biggest pet peeves. Too often, the writer is concentrating so hard on what is being said that they forget the reader needs to know WHO is speaking the lines. Even momentary confusion will destroy a scene for a reader. Imagine getting halfway down the page before you realise that "Oh, my god, my mother hates me," is spoken by a different character from the one you originally assumed had spoken the line. You have to go back and re-read the entire thing. And if this happens more than once ...well, I quit reading. What's the point?
Seriously. Why does that even happen? Is it so hard for an author to put a "said _____" after a line of dialogue?
There is a lot of advice around telling writers to use "he said, she said" as little as possible, letting the flow of conversation make the identity of the speaker obvious. While this is good advice when used properly, many take it to heart to the extent that they hardly use identifiers at all.
Well, you wouldn't expect an author to tag every line of dialogue, so it makes sense that they're sometimes going to lose track of whether or not the reader can tell who's saying what. It's much the same issue as authors who don't describe as much because they can picture exactly what they're going for, even though someone else won't be able to.
Exciting dialogue hangs tight together with meaning. The tension behind that meaning, which has to impact the technical structure of the plot in order to be meaningful, you can build up by intriguing amazement-fueled dialogues, by missing pieces of information as desired with the characters or the reader or both. Think of a revelation, and what it means if the revelation never happens for the global tension. At least that's what I can come up with now.
Yeah. As someone else said it is the writers goal to write it with as little unneeded words as possible but if a reader losses track apparently that was a needed word. lol Right?
It all depends. You could have several pages of little but dialogue - only the occasional tag to ensure that the reader understood exactly who was saying what - and that would be fine IF it worked! As long as the dialogue is going somewhere, takes the story forward, doesn't have UNNECESSARY filler it would be good. But if you read Mckk's example above, she shows the same dialogue done well and done badly. So, post us an example, and we can give you our thoughts.
I posted an example in writers workshop. On tablet so can't copy a link. It is in novel under the title the order redemption chapter 11. When I get to a real computer I can copy a link if you can't find it.
