Dialogue

Ah, dialogue. I consider the skill of a writer to measured in how s/he writes to be measured by how well they pull it off; it shows the degree to which they now how people behave, the know how to create realistic characters, and know their plot. It does many things - they establish the mood, provide exposition, reveal characteristics of the speaker, move the plot forward (by adding or reducing conflict), refresh certain facts, and foreshadow. See, dialogue does many things - but one thing that they should never do is nothing.

 It should not be used for mundane greetings, conversations about the weather (unless it concerns character development), or random things which do not influence the plot or reveal the personality of the speakers (a conversation with a cashier, that never appears again, about the rising prices of gas should not be included unless your novel happens to concern that, for example). What it should be, however, is realistic for the character that is speaking. It should seem like something someone would actually say to the person they are talking to; it shouldn't reference the past too much (if you're using it for exposition purposes), if at all, and it should flow normally. As an example, whenever your tell a joke to your friends about a party they were all there for, would you go in depth about the party? No. You would just assume that they would understand - it's the same with your characters. When they are talking to someone that they know, they assume certain things are known.

 The other problem is with flow; what I mean by that is how things are revealed within dialogue. All too often I'll read a novel that has a character simply telling another character outright what the problem is and how they feel about it. Only the bluntest of characters will do that (or characters within a dire, urgent situation) Think about it for a moment; when you want something, or have a problem, you're unlikely to just go up to the another person Dialogue also has to fit the mood of the scene; eloquence is not usually present when monsters are attacking the city, nor is extreme formality when the speaker is around friends. Anything that anybody says is driven by some emotion, some motivation; it is what shape their words, what volume they speak in, how they approach a question. If the motivation is not present in dialogue then there's something wrong.

 Here's an example of some bad dialogue, to show some of the main problems mentioned here:

"Nheim Enther, will you go to war with us, to fight against the Misery-lord, the remaining god? After that will be able to live in without his judgement." He queried. 

 "No, I won't." She said, looking away. 

 "Why not? You have seen the conditions of the city, haven't you? It's outside everyday." He said, disbelievingly. 

"I can't trust you." 

"Why not?" 

"You sabotaged those trials. It wasn't a good thing to do." She said.

The first problem is that the emotion is the scene is barely there; the first character is asking a friend to help them start a war, but he hardly seems interested in it and divulges too much detail that the woman already knows. For the woman, she seems coldly logical and childlike in her moral stance, speaking in simple sentences and vague responses. This moves the plot forward, but in a way that seems forced, as though this dialogue has to be there, but the authour sure isn't going to take time making it good. 

To fix it, rewording is required, as well as putting more information into the dialogue tags without dragging it down. 

"T - Nheim Enther," Her title was unfamiliar on his tongue. "The Amourci requested that I start a war - we wonder if you will be on our side."

She should look surprised, but instead she looked as though she had been expecting this conversation to come. 

"I won't fight with you. I'm still loyal," She said, taunting, bitter. 

"Galen, you can't trust him. I know that, far better than anyone-"

"I've told you where I stand."

"You've seen the condition of the Amourci, the Ventri -  Cabriel, itself, " His voice rose. 

"They did not see, they did not trust."

"Please, Tesian, we need your leadership," He made one last attempt, pleading. 

"I can no longer trust your judgement." It was said in an abrasive whisper. Aureliusz bristled. 

"In truth, I don't think I ever should have."

"What do you mean by that?" He was deadpan, his tone a reflection of his mind. 

"Don't play innocent, Aureliusz. I know you were never that," She laughed without mirth. "At least, I know now."He gestured sharply for her to explain, the tendrils of self-loathing feeding this destructive activity. Her cup was slammed on the counter.

"I know what you did, on the trials - I heard about how you prevented that envoy from being tried, the numerous others that you sabotaged. Who knows how many murderers went loose because of you!"

While this isn't perfect, it's better than the first; the emotion of both characters is better reflected in there words, and, while past history is referenced, it is not outright stated. This slice of dialogue now achieves two things; it adds more conflict to the plot and reveals the personality of the characters. It is now (hopefully) more realistic and actually interesting to the people reading it (within context).

 Now, one sure way to check your dialogue is read it out, preferably to someone else. You'll be able to tell whether or not your dialogue is realistic and make sure your characters don't sound like they're reading off a teleprompter.

A Helpful Link:
Examples of Bad Dialogue

Random Recommendations

Prince Ombra by Roderick MacLeish
This is a rather obscure fantasy book, but it is one of my favourites. It is about the thousand and first hero to fight the evil that never dies, by the name of Prince Ombra. The writing is very evocative, the references to mythology delightful, and has wonderfully deep themes surrounding destiny.


The Name of the Star by Maureen Johnson
The novel is centered around Rory Deveaux, a Louisiana born teenager, who decides to go to an English boarding school; around the same time, a copy-cat Jack the Ripper is appearing in the city. Rory is the only one who can see the man that is thought to be the suspect. I didn't originally think I was going to enjoy this book, because of the somewhat cliche plot, but the writing is very well done and the characters are likable and realistic. 


Frankenstein by Mary Shelley
I'm not even going to cover the plot of this one; everyone should know about Frankenstein. However, I know a lot of people haven't read the book, and I think everyone needs to. It's very philosophical and just splendid. 


The Ego Tunnel by Thomas Metzinger
A non-fiction recommendation written by a philosopher, about "self" and reality. It addresses some science (quite a bit, actually) and includes the results of several scientific trials about consciousness. I liked this book because it made me question reality a bit more (a good thing, I think, when you're a writer) and think.


Ancestor by Scott Sigler
It has all my favourite things in a book; realistic sounding science, DNA, compelling plot, and fabulous, to die for, characters. It's centered around characters dealing with genetically-engineered monsters, and it's both horrifying and thrilling. However, it is also disgusting (though not as much as his other book, Infection); it's very reminiscent of watching a scary b-movie.


The Relic Master Series by Catherine Fisher
This one is difficult to summarize, so I'll let the novel's description speak for itself;"Welcome to Anara, a world mysteriously crumbling to devastation, where nothing is what it seems: Ancient relics emit technologically advanced powers, members of the old Order are hunted by the governing Watch yet revered by the people, and the great energy that connects all seems to also be destroying all. The only hope for the world lies in Galen, a man of the old Order and a Keeper of relics, and his sixteen-year-old apprentice, Raffi." The plot is pretty simple, but the characterization of Galen and Raffi (and everyone else) is done nicely, and the world-building is done extremely well. I especially liked how Raffi (the teenage protagonist) was not quite the chosen one.


Those are my book recommendations for week. 


Everyone enjoy the rest of their weekend!

The Monstrumologist : Book Review

The Monstrumologist by Rick Yancey
//Amazon//Barnes and Noble//The Book Depository//

These are the secrets I have kept. This is the trust I never betrayed.

But he is dead now and has been for more than forty years, the one who gave me his trust, the one for whom I kept these secrets.

The one who saved me...and the one who cursed me.

So begins the journal of Will Henry, orphaned assistant to Dr. Pellinore Warthrop, a man with a most unusual specialty: monstrumology, the study of monsters. In his time with the doctor, Will has met many a mysterious late-night visitor, and seen things he never imagined were real. But when a grave robber comes calling in the middle of the night with a gruesome find, he brings with him their most deadly case yet.

Critically acclaimed author Rick Yancey has written a gothic tour de force that explores the darkest heart of man and monster and asks the question: When does a man become the very thing he hunts? 

Setting: The Monstrumologist takes place in 1888, in a New England town not all too far from my own. The setting is done is wonderful detail, and draws the reader in extremely well. Any disgusting elements of the story (and there are quite a few) are described eloquently, and in way that establishes a firm image and does miracles to create the mood, adding to the horror of the story, as a whole. 

Characters: Of everything else, the characters are probably the weakest element of the books, though I am loathe to say that, as they are still very good. If they lack in development, I would say that it is more due to the way the story is told, through reflection in a journal, more than a hundred years later. That said, I immediately fell in love with Doctor Pellinore Warthrop and Will Henry; both are flawed human beings, the doctor very much so. While Will's youth (he is only twelve) would usually annoy me, his naivety (that he slowly loses over the course of the book and the next two) sets him up as a strong contrast to the more cynical doctor; he is a loveable boy, overall. 


Plot: Oh, the plot is marvelous. It is suspenseful, avoiding the typical pitfalls of horror literature, as well as being realistic, despite the presence of "monsters". The story takes place over a short period, involving relatively few events, but is nonetheless compelling. Each plot development is logical and truly adds to the story, as well as setting up the theme of the story - if the term monster can truly be limited to creatures of aberrant biology. 


Writing: This is my favourite part - the actual writing. There are few words to describe the writing, other than that it does its best to reflect the period, while remaining understandable to teenagers and adults. The metaphors and descriptors used fall just short of perfect - Yancey rarely falls upon the cliche comparisons, but every one that is made is apt and brilliant. It has an artistic and somewhat poetical bent; if you're vocabulary isn't up to par, then you might find yourself struggling to follow along. 


Overall: 5 stars. I cannot recommended this highly enough, along with it's two sequels, with the exception that if you're looking for a short, easy read, this is not it at all. The horrors and secrets which fuel each book lead to an engaging plot, made all the better by the writing.

Prewriting

Whether To Prewrite or Not
I have to admit, I'm somewhat biased on this; I've always done extensive prewriting (or, at the very least, preplanning), and I've never really just winged it for a story. I say that you should always do a bit prewriting, even if it's just a page or so; and I'm sure that everyone has heard this before, but it does help you flesh out your world, plot, and characters that much more.

Prewriting Styles
Let's start with my favourite method: Free Writing
This can be done several different ways, but I've always free-written, when writing Fiction, by selecting a few characters and writing a few pages with them. It can be centered around a conversation that I want to include, but I don't know where, or a cool scene that I'm not going to get to for a while, but the point's that I just get some writing done that may be important to the story. I've actually created one of my main characters (who was originally just a throw-away extra) and several of my major plot points during free writing.

If you're a more artistically minded, but still like to see how things connect type of person, then Webbing/Clustering might be bit more down your alley. To begin a cluster/web chose a plot point (maybe the conflict or main character?) and keep writing down (and connecting) other plot points and relationships with other characters.

Personally, this has never really helped me; I lay more on the logically-minded side of the spectrum. What helps me, when I'm not free-writing, is listing and story specific questioning. Listing is simple, though I recommend that you have an ending in mind before you begin; what you do is write down the beginning and the ending, leaving plenty of room between the two. Then write down all the events that connect the first and last events.

Story specific questioning is where you answer questions related to your story in order to flesh out your characters.

Character Questions In depth
9 Character Questions

Time Frame

Time Frame: A specified period in which something occurs or is planned to take place.

In relevance to writing, a time frame refers to the amount of time your book/novella/short story takes place in; a time frame can be anywhere from a day to a lifetime, or several. Sometimes choosing a time frame for your story is easy (eg. a teen summer romance, will, obviously, take place over two to three months); in other situations, it's difficult to chose how to pace your novel. 


The most important thing when choosing your pacing is to BE LOGICAL.


Whether you're writing romance, suspense, or fantasy, is to be logical and watch your pacing. You have to make sure that the events of your book, whatever they might be, are taking place in a realistic amount of time. If the events in the novel are supposed to occur over a month or two, make sure that they actually could take place within that time. 


If you have your characters traveling across the world, that not going to happen in a week/month, unless your world is about the size of a state or they have magic portals/teleportation. Do a little bit of research, and try to find examples in real life, of how long the events in your story would actually take to occur, and base a time frame off of that.  


However, you should always choose what feels NECESSARY.


If it's a simple, as in it doesn't have many events, story, you don't need to drag it out and have it take place over years. If it's a more complicated story, with many different characters, events, and world-building that need to be established, it's quite fine to have the story take place over years. 


The converse if also applicable; a simple story can take place over years, while a complicated one can take place over a week. 


Two things that a time frame affects is BELIEVABILITY and MOOD.


We've pretty much covered believability, and in previous posts as well, but I cannot stress enough how it's importance. I can't count the number of times I've scoffed and nearly put a book aside because of the romance happened within days of two characters meeting each other, wars started and were over in a week, and characters recovering from almost fatal wounds in a matter of days without any assistance. Suffice to say, if your time frame isn't realistic, readers will have a much harder time finding the book realistic and/or good.


Mood is slightly misleading, so let me clarify; the time frame that you chose to write your novel taking place in can change how it affects the reader. For example, if the novel is full of action, but only takes place over a few days, it will seems a lot more suspenseful than if the same events spanned months. A adventure novel that takes place over several years can really make it seem like the reader actually went on journey, rather than reading two characters get from point A to point B. 


To summarize, when choosing a time frame for your story be logical, do what seems necessary, as it can affect it's believeability and mood. 

Setting

The setting is one of the most vital elements of any story, and also one of the more difficult ones to get right. There are two problems, that I have seen, most often arise when new authours are trying to develop a setting; they are (and I'm generalizing a bit) writing in a purple-prose, over-informing, or they have, what I like to call, the empty-world problem.

We'll start with the "empty world" problem. What I mean by this is that, while the characters and plot may be described, the area around them is left completely up to the imagination.

Ex. "She whirled back at him, swinging her sword carelessly. He stepped back and tripped over something - she took advantage of this and flipped over the object and jabbed the sword into his chest."

While this is an example of bad writing, it also illustrates what I'm talking about. There are almost no sensory details that give me any context to the situation or tell me where this is even happening; the authour leaves it so vague that it could have occured in a barn or in a field and it have made absolutely no difference. The reader has very little idea of how to picture this scenerio, and unless they have a vibrant imagination, aren't going to be able to "see" more than two people fighting in a white/black/gray empty area.

If you don't have enough sensory details, the reader won't be able to picture the world, the story, that you're trying to create and won't be as drawn into it as they could have been.

Now to the opposite end of the specturm; purple-prose and over-information. I find this arises, usually, though not always, as a result of an authour trying to overcompensate (for lack of experience, not lack of skill) or having been taught in school/other classes to overload the reader with as much sensory information as possible, to "flesh out the story". When a writer gets too descriptive in a story, it distracts from the narrative, while annoying the reader.

I'll give an example (from one of my works, a few years back):

_{"The sun rose over the river, emitting rays of heat and light, a bright orange orb, shining over the river, reflecting on the scales of small, darting fish and gleaming lillypads. The river was thin, able to be crossed by a child if need be, not really a river at all, but a creek that people had just been calling a river for years now. No one was at it now, though. Weeds blew gently in the wind by the river, crickets chirping and leaping about within them, stretching from the water into the forest, which went on for miles, not touched, yet, but the rays of the golden-sun, which was just peaking over the moutain range. It was summer-time, the time when the bugs began to come out and children began to play. Almost time for the summer-festival."}

While this may have been...okay, if I were having something happen near the river, but the actual events of the chapter had absolutely nothing to do with the river at all and took place within an inn, with the story never coming back to that area ever again. In this, I'm just bogging the reader down with irrelevant details that do nothing to support the story.

You want to reach a happy medium between the two extremes; you want to have some detail, but not so much that it overwhelms the actual plot of the novel/short story.

Now, we can move right onto how to develop a good setting, and how much you should delve into settings.

A fantasy novel, especially one taking place in a different world, will definitely need more details about the world than, say, one taking place in a high school. However, both need to be developed; the best way, I've found and feel free to disagree, is to subtly introduce your world in sentences, rather than paragraphs, to avoid info-dumping.

Ex. She takes a deep, quavering breath and stands up, disentangling herself from blankets and a pair of arms. There is a bathroom in the corner of inn room and that is where she goes to, because there's a mirror. It's lined with mold, green grime, and is blurry with thousands of fingerprints, but it serves her purpose.

This is a decent example of that; from that last sentence you can infer that that the room she is in is filthy, a filthy inn, then, probably in a city. The phrasing also conjurers up a very specific type of imagery, which gives the reader the mood/setting that you were going for.

This goes into a bit more depth than I do, and covers characterization and voice as well.

This is also a quick exercise to help you flesh out your writing a bit more.

Have fun world-building and writing, everyone!