Is there such a thing as too much dialogue?

Hello WF peeps.

Lately I've been wondering about dialogue. How much is too much? Is there such a thing as too much? All of my stories tend to use a lot of dialogue and I've definitely gotten comments about it here and there.

My view tends to be this: If I have a good degree of description to eliminate "White Room Syndrome", then I'm fine. If I don't have chatty dialogue (characters saying useless things that have absolutely nothing to do with the story), then I'm also fine.

Thoughts?

 

This is what I try to do too. Extending the "string of bare dialogue" too much definitely drags the story down.

 

Concision applies to dialogue as much as to everything else in story. In real life we blather on endlessly about nothing. That can't happen in a story. Every line needs to accomplish something important. There should be no filler or aimless meandering talk. It isn't just words that might need to be cut out, but often entire sentences or paragraphs, or whole pointless digressions.

It needs to be dramatic—meaning people are doing things to each other with every line. Attacking, defending, diverting. attention, stalling (keep that to a minimum or you risk the conversation becoming boring). Also don't repeat beats. If you've already had a beat where Ralph said, "Dude, it wasn't me! Beth hid your crayons," and Cindy relpied "I don't believe you," don't repeat the same beat in different words. This is why it's recommended to think of the beats in terms of what people are doing to each other, like:

Beat 1: Ralph defends himself against Cindy's accusation, deflects blame onto Beth.
Beat 2: Cindy accuses Ralph again, in different words.
Beat 3: Ralph again defends himself.
Beat 4: Cindy accuses him yet again.
​

When you look at it like this it becomes easy to see when you're just repeating a beat. That dissipates all the energy of a scene. You want to keep it moving, and have something fresh happening with each new beat.

 

Those beats are useful. I've actually caught myself doing that 'repetition' a few times, and the scene doesn't feel right because of it. It's nice to see my senses are working.

Something fresh happening with each new beat is good advice. I'll keep it in mind. Flow should be consistent and steady, right?

 

The way I'm doing it now is I first write the scene and then I check the beats to see if I'm repeating or anything, and to make sure everything contributes to the forward momentum of the scene, and that it all figures in as part of the big story arc.

 

I wouldn't say flow should always be consistent and steady. To me a story is like a symphony—parts of it are slow and pleasant, then parts can suddenly ramp up into high intensity, or drop off into low intensity from a near-intolerably high level. Maybe because both people don't want to push that hard yet and cause something irreversible to happen. Then parts are happy, parts are morose or depressing, parts are angry, parts are wistful, etc. Steady and consistent sounds mechanical to me, or boring. Story should often be surprising and unexpected, and yet feel inevitable.

 

Just to extend my example, a way to move the scene forward without just repeating the same beat could work like this:

(Starting after Cindy accused Ralph of taking her crayons and he defended himself)—

John stepped up and leveled an acusing finger in Ralph's face. "I seen it all! He ATE 'em! Look at his teeth."

Beth stepped close behind Ralph, reached around his head from both sides, and worked her fingers in between his lips. He struggled to keep them tightly compressed. "Come on, open up and say Aaah."

John stomped on Ralph's instep and his lips flew open in a grimace of pain. Revealed there for all to see, his teeth were a rainbow of colors. Spanish yellow, sky blue, brick red, eggplant purple.
​

Now it isn't just a repetition (even with a different person doing the accusing). Instead it's ramped way up. We now have an eyewitness and some real evidence. Ralph looks totally guilty now, and it's pretty hard to see how he could weasel out of this predicament! But it still follows the rule of each beat flipping the emotional value for the main character. From attacked to defended to attacked much more powerfully and seemingly inescapably now. About the only way Ralph could defend his honor now would be to show the color stains all over John's hands from when he forced him to eat them, and maybe a bite mark or two on John's hands. But that wouldn't be conclusive evidence, so maybe a kid standing nearby got the whole thing on his cell phone and lets them all see exactly what happened. Final proof.

 

Oh, I do remember the symphony part from the workshop.

You're right—should have thought more about that one. Good stories can and should vary in the "rhythm" of their beats, otherwise they really would be like a computerized straight-line.

It's psychology, too. Humans like variety. They tend to loose interest if something doesn't vary enough or brings nothing new to the table.

Hmmm, I think I can see what you mean with "flipping" the emotional value now. It's switching between states, right (attacked, defended, attacked) but you also bring other external factors (like John) to add something new to the scene and create variety.

Okay, I think I get what you did there. Again, I do these things unconsciously, but I don't always understand them on a logical level. I just re-write scenes until I get them right like this.

And I don't know if that's made-up on the spot or not but its a strangely intriguing story, somehow

 

I don't believe there should be a general rule about what's too much, or what's not enough when it comes to dialogue. Some of my best short stories are comprised entirely, or almost entirely, of dialogue. If it's done well, and every statement rings true, it works. You can use dialogue to reveal things about not only the characters speaking, but the setting, the plot, and anything else needed to create an engaging story.

I lean on dialogue heavily in a lot of my work now, because I recognize that my abilities to describe things in third-person narration are...not great. But I am skilled when it comes to dialogue. It mostly comes off as very natural and believable. I'm not saying that it's better to avoid aspects of writing that one has no natural inclination for; it's more about leaning into one's strengths. I'll also add that every piece of dialogue need not be integral to the story - it can be inane, irrelevant, meandering - as long as it's entertaining, and engaging in some way.

In my current WIP, the MC is alone, isolated, has no friends, no family. I tried writing about his struggles with just him, alone, and very quickly realized that what I was writing was not only very depressing and not fun, it was all boring as hell. The solution? I made up an AI personal assistant chat program for the MC to bounce ideas off of and discuss his problems with. Now all his depressing shit that he's dealing with can be discussed with an unemotional, often humorous foil.

Good dialogue rocks, so if you feel that this is one of your strengths, I say, have your characters chat away !

 

I've thoroughly enjoyed picturing these characters as adults right up until you said the word "kid."

I think the required or acceptable amount of dialogue depends greatly on the needs of the scene. Some scenes are supposed to be told by a narrator, some by the characters. I would say most books deserve balance, but the ratio will hinge on personal style and voice. I'm drawing a blank at the moment, but I know I've read books that I thought could almost be plays and some that used almost no dialogue at all or leaned heavily on indirect dialog. (She told me she was an alien, and I said that was fine by me, instead of "I'm an alien," she said. "Fine by me," I said.)

I would say the same of shorts. Some need nothing but dialog, and some don't have room for any at all. Many mix it up, and all three are fine, if they work for the piece.

So I would say go with your gut to figure out what each scene needs, play to your strengths, as @Set2Stun said and check in with your readers. I think "Happy to Help" had just the right amount of dialogue for that story, and, judging only from the one piece, I think it's definitely a strength of yours.

 

I'm not the biggest fan of stories that are compromised entirely of dialogue buuuuuuut I do remember your Android story from the LM challenge and it really was great. I read it a couple of times because it was just so good. So, as I always say, execution is really what matters at the end of the day.

But I do wonder: Can such a story get published? We all know how picky agents/publishers are.

I think so too. I like dialogue so I'm not going to change up my style too much, at least for now.

Haha, interesting you remembered Happy To Help. But I actually get mixed opinions on my strengths. Some say that my real strength is in description, others say dialogue. But I guess it's possible to have two strengths? I dunno. The jury's still out on that one, I guess

Thank you both!

 

I had to think about this question for a bit, because it never occurred to me after reading a story that it had too much of something as core as dialogue or description.

However, I've read many that have an excess of boring description or fluff dialogue.

So I'd say it's 'too much' dialogue if the dialogue is not interesting.

 

A story that works works. It's kind of that simple. However, really knowing what works for a story you're writing can be a challenge, especially if you are trying to get your story published.

I used to write pretty dialog heavy, thinking one of my strengths was dialog. And dialog can often feel easier or more fun to write. But the stories I wrote in my dialog-heavy phase were far from my best now. Sure, they weren't bad stories, but I came to realize later I was giving dialog too much real estate in my stories. And then I started to write better and write better stories. Please know I am only talking about my personal experience with dialog. Maybe some people will understand this or find it helpful.

I believe that when it comes to dialog writers should aim to arrive late and leave early. I know that this advice is usually aimed at short story writing, but I believe it rings true for writing dialog as well. You don't really want a whole conversation(s) stuck into a novel. Try being selective when allowing your characters to speak if this is something you're worried about.

One thing I did was to write a short story with no dialog as sort of an experiment. Then I read it through and strategically added some dialog to key parts of the story, but never allowed it to get to a level where there were actual conversations happening through dialog. The story turned out better than my other. And that story was the first short story I sold. I'm just saying it helps to tame and control dialog.

Especially, in novels I don't really think readers want pages of dialog. Too much dialog can actually pull a reader out of the story. I guess that's how you know if you have too much of it.

Now, there are always exceptions. I have read some great short stories that were constructed through dialog. And, in my opinion, those worked. However, I will say again that those were exceptions. As a reader, I'm not looking for work that's too heavy on dialog. Dialog can only do so much when it comes to stories. And I'm looking to read stories not a play or a transcript.

Just some things to keep in mind that might make you think about your relationship with dialog. And I think it does require some trial and error. Good luck.

 

I fully agree with this. It also seems to strengthen the dialog when there is less of it. Now that I aim to use less dialog it appears to hold more weight when my characters do talk. Also, I'm not trying to do too much with dialog. So, If I had to classify my dialog I would say that it's leaning toward the short list here from @Set2Stun. When I include dialog it's not to reveal or push through the story. It's more like adding texture to the story. It can and should reveal character more than plot, IMO.

Again, there are always exceptions. But this is sort of how I approach and what I have found to elevate my writing.

 

Dialog certainly has a place in moving the story forward. As to how much is too much, maybe this would help.

Write your scene(s), including all the dialog you like.
Read it through, editing until it seems/feels good.
Then read it again, out loud. The whole thing.

Written words feel different when heard rather than read. This may give you a different (better? maybe) sense as to whether there is too much.

 

I'd think that this tends to happen with everything. We practice more as time goes and we simply write better stories as we learn from previous ones and other learning experiences (i.e. a writing class or resource).

Personally, I'm already having a hard time taking my stories from months ago seriously.

And so I wouldn't be surprised if I end up in your shoes.

Thanks, deadrats. I appreciate your input!

 

I do this... kind off. I whisper as I read when I edit. It's like a habit that I've developed and it works really well!