# Unrealistic Dialogue



## Androxine Vortex (Dec 31, 2011)

I love fantasy and sci-fi but I really can't stand it when the characters say things that don't sound... well, normal. Even though the story might take place in a whole new world with new magical races and creatures, but when I write I try to make the dialogue more "normalish" Like here is what I don't like:

"Oh hello. Blessings of Mother Mayra upon you, great one. I am so humbled to see of your most anticipated arrival. I shall inform his lordship that you are here. May the divines smile upon you."

I literaly just made that off the top of my head so yeah it's kind of lame but do you see what I mean? I don't know, maybe it's because we are so used to using "slang" in today's culture(s). But I think sometimes authors get carried away, especially in regarding high status, royalties, or people with divine-association.

I understand that (especially) with royalties and lordships, its fine to speak with more dignaty and respect but still, sometimes I read a passage in a book and think to myself, "That dosen't sound plausible." I try to imagine (or when I'm writting, create) characters who are more "normal", more or less. Meaning, they don't have to have over-the-top dialogue and the reader can listen to what the character says (or even feels) and can relate to it in sense that maybe they would have said the same thing, or something similar.

What are your thoughts? Do you think that (especially in fiction) dialogue has become a little exaggerated?


----------



## Kevlar (Dec 31, 2011)

It all depends, really, on the status of the speaker and who they address, the speaker's education, personality, ideals and so on. You will often read dialogue, though, where the author seems to think formal means bland. What you created off the top of your head would count as this if I found it in a book.

Your little bit of monologue actually came across as text from an old RPG, where every sentence is in a new box and requires you to press the A button to appear, where the loss of flow is less noticeable. I'll do a quick edit to show how it can be formal without being bland, because I agree with you that dialogue in fiction by many authors seems to be becoming... stiff.



			
				Androxine Vortex said:
			
		

> "Oh hello. Blessings of Mother Mayra upon you, great one. I am so humbled to see of your most anticipated arrival. I shall inform his lordship that you are here. May the divines smile upon you."



As I said, it reads like monologue from an old RPG. I imagine the KnightTemplar is about to visit the Sinister Minister. (Much faster explenation than I could otherwise create.)

I would write this as:

"Oh, hello great one! Blessings of Mother Mayra upon you. I am so humbled by your presence. Come! I will inform his lordship of your arrival. May the divines smile upon you."

As you can see there's not much difference, but now the doorman has some character, he's not just a robot. Depending on how you read that he's either exuberant or Igor. Take your pick. I'm not saying it's perfect, it's just better. It's not as if I've changed his vocabulary, or made him less formal. I've simply given him some character. Alternatively, if he or she is more I the staid type an emotionless greeting is required, though not necessarily a bland one. There are so many ways to spin dialogue, giving it emotion and preventing the reader's eyes from just glazing over.

Another thing might be that these authors are scared that their emotion filled dialogue could be bad. I once read a book for half an hour before I realized it wasn't any good. The dialogue was not over the top, nor was it dumbed down, but it was stale. I sort of read the dialogue as if it was part of the narration. I can't remember what the book was called, but I picked it up in English class for "silent reading" and zoned out as I read each word. I couldn't even recall what had happened. Maybe it was Twilight. Doubt it, from what I've read of it it fits more with the following.

If that book had been blatantly bad I would have noticed. I would have thought "This sucks!" and put it back and grab another. Poor books are obvious. Bland books are fodder to the distracted or bored mind, perhaps explaining why they manage to get published.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Dec 31, 2011)

The word you're looking for is "modern," not "normal." Back in ye olden days, people talked differently than they do now. There's nothing wrong with writing a story set in a medieval-like society and having the characters use modern speech, but it will put off some readers who expect medieval-like stories to have medieval-like dialogue (even if what actually shows up in most novels is not actually realistic in the sense of what people _actually_ used to talk like; it just has to sound like what people have been taught to expect, by long exposure to other novels, movies, etc.).

And it doesn't all have to be as flowery as the example you gave. What you wrote there, I'd expect to hear from some sort of high servant in a palace, upon the arrival of a distinguished guest. But the stableboys and blacksmiths and farmers of that realm presumably wouldn't talk that way.


----------



## Kevlar (Dec 31, 2011)

I also agree with what Benjamin stated, though him and I took your post in different ways. A more modern dialogue is not a better one in non-urban fantasy. One of the most glaring mistakes is when someone says "okay." It shatters immersion.


----------



## Voldermort (Dec 31, 2011)

This reminds me of something I once read. Allegedly, Harrison Ford told George Lucas that the dialogue in Star Wars was terrible (before it was filmed). Which goes to show.

I would just get the job done in a clean a way as possible. Remember, English speakers the world over are not likely to speak like you do if "normal" to you means lots of parochial language.


----------



## Xanados (Dec 31, 2011)

My writing is full of archaisms... I respect and adore the use of old langauge. Anyone who dislikes archaic langauge in fantasy is a fool.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Dec 31, 2011)

Good points everyone. I again gave a terrible example but I've actually seen books where Everyone talked like that. I do know that language changes over time and but too many times in fantasy stories i read the dialogue and it just sounds really corny.

One book I recently read was called, Nagash the Sorcerer. The book mainly dealt with a lot of royalties and princes so I can understand how the author would want the dialogue to sound more proper but it was just terrible. Everyone always used over the top greetings with exaggerated responses, I can't really think of an example right now. 

Also another thing, there is a really good author named Dan Abnett. He wrote a book called Legion and it was given Huge praise on a Warhammer  forum so I decided to try it. Now, the characters are on a different world and live in a different culture so the language is different as well. I like it when authors throw in a made up word every now and then as a reminder that you're in a foreign place. I don't even mind it if they don't really explain what that word was, just as long as you could kind of firgure it out.

My problem with his book was that the he tried way too hard to immerse yourself in this new world. Every sentence had at least three undefined words, and he never went back to explain them. I literally quit reading it before I even got to the third chapter because I had no idea what I had read. Luckily for me I did give it another try and forced my way through and and in the end it was a truly amazing book, you just had to grit your way through the confusion. 

I don't know, it's just been something that's bugged me for awhile.


----------



## Xanados (Dec 31, 2011)

Androxine Vortex said:


> Good points everyone. I again gave a terrible example but I've actually seen books where Everyone talked like that. I do know that language changes over time and but too many times in fantasy stories i read the dialogue and it just sounds really corny.
> 
> One book I recently read was called, Nagash the Sorcerer. The book mainly dealt with a lot of royalties and princes so I can understand how the author would want the dialogue to sound more proper but it was just terrible. Everyone always used over the top greetings with exaggerated responses, I can't really think of an example right now.
> 
> ...



Yes I know who Dan Abnett is. I know what the WAR40K books are like. Still, I just think it is your own problem if you dislike archaic langauge (even in the case of 40,000 years in the future.)
This is, again, going to sound terribly harsh, but maybe you just don't understand the story that well? Or perhaps you just picked up a book that was a sequal or something?


----------



## Leif GS Notae (Dec 31, 2011)

I think the OP brings a valid point that is creeping up in this day and age; the art of communication. I think it is vital for some writers to express themselves in their voice and have a certain feel, but there is something to be said about clarity.

The Dan Abnett example validates what I am thinking here, which is someone assumes the reader already is steeped in the lore of the world and doesn't bother to do much explaining. The obvious caveat here is it is a 40K book so you aren't just going to stumble into the world without knowing something or else you will get lost.

Yes, modern speak is a bit clearer and somewhat lazy at times, but this is where we live. Much like you can't go on for three chapters about the world someone lives in and drill down every paragraph until you start exploring the residue left on the glasses the protag drank expired orange juice from and the contemplations of his stomach after the contents molder in three hours so he could process his waste, you can't be so isolated from your readers when it comes to dialogue and speech.

Then again, i was dubbed THE WORLD'S WORST GOTHIC WRITER, so what do I know?


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Dec 31, 2011)

@Leif GS notae
I can understand where you are coming from about the reading would most likely already have prior knowledge before jumping into a WH40K novel. However, the author had to develope the entire society and culture, there wasn't any information on them prior to the books publication. He threw in literally hundreds of undefined terms and names and made it difficult to understand what was going on. It felt like the first 50 pages of the story were ripped out and I was starting in the middle, where I should know what these terms mean yet there is no explanation at all.

@Xanados
It was part of the Horus Heresy series but the book "Legion" itself told the story of the Alpha Legion during the heresy. (I'm assuming you understand all that because I know you understand warhammer lore, to what extent I'm not sure)

And what exactly do you mean archaic? Do you mean using "old" phrases such as, "My lord" and basically stuff you would see in a medieval book? I don't have a problem with that; no, not at all. I admire that the author has the power to give the reader the feel that he is in a time and place not like his own. My problem is that often authors (imo at least) exaggerate the dialogue. It's a hard subject for me to explain my thoughts clearly.

And that's kind of a bold statement of you to say "Anyone who dislikes archaic langauge in fantasy is a fool." while I do agree in the sense that archaic language-references help fantasy stories (especially fantasy stories) they are not necasary. But again, it does give the work a more powerful meaning, so to speak. Take latin for example. many consider it a foundation of many languages and whenever we try to give something signifigance or importance, we use latin (especially in books, movies, etc) It's on currency, names for elements, also names animals.


----------



## ThinkerX (Dec 31, 2011)

I actually gave up reading an urban fantasy novel a few months back because every character in the book - from cops to criminals to museum curators to well educated professional's talked in nothing but gutter slang.


----------



## mirrorrorrim (Dec 31, 2011)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> The word you're looking for is "modern," not "normal." Back in ye olden days, people talked differently than they do now. There's nothing wrong with writing a story set in a medieval-like society and having the characters use modern speech, but it will put off some readers who expect medieval-like stories to have medieval-like dialogue (even if what actually shows up in most novels is not actually realistic in the sense of what people _actually_ used to talk like; it just has to sound like what people have been taught to expect, by long exposure to other novels, movies, etc.).
> 
> And it doesn't all have to be as flowery as the example you gave. What you wrote there, I'd expect to hear from some sort of high servant in a palace, upon the arrival of a distinguished guest. But the stableboys and blacksmiths and farmers of that realm presumably wouldn't talk that way.



I, for one, am one of those who is a lot more thrown off by modern speech than by "older"-sounding dialogue. As a good example, I just finished _Game of Thrones_ for the first time (I know, I'm about ten years too late), and while I loved it, I definitely had to get used to the way people talked. In particular, it was a little jarring to hear all the modern profanities.

Eventually, though, as long as you have a good story and are a halfway decent writer, most any reader will be able to adapt to your style. By the end of _Game of Thrones,_ I wasn't bothered by the language anymore (well, I was, but not any more than I was by the violent deaths, graphic sex, or other brutalities). George R. R. Martin set out to create a fantasy world that was darker, crueler, and more "real" than those he'd read, and his language helps to capture that tone.

Another good example for me personally is _The Hunger Games_ series. At first, the author's constant use of sentence fragments drove me crazy. By the second book, though, I didn't even notice: I had grown accustomed to it as a part of how the main character thinks and talks. She is a very action-oriented character who has a hard time learning etiquitte and formalities; it makes sense that her thoughts would function in the same way.

It's often repeated on these forums, "show, don't tell." I don't agree with this adage in every situation, but here, I think it's a good one. It's one thing to write, "The king was feared by all." It's another thing to show the truth of it in word and deed. If someone is truly feared/respected, he _will_ be addressed differently. Most of us on here live in America, and all of us live in the 21st century, so few of us have any real exposure to immutable class distinctions. However, much of the fantasy we write does involve different hereditary classes, and to sound realistic, we need to be able to reflect that.

I would encourage any who haven't already done so to take the time to read the original dedication of the King James Version of the Bible. The language is so flowerly and formal it's ridiculous--even compared to the prose of the rest of this version of the Bible. But when you have a divine monarch who metes out life and death as we might "hellos", that's how you learn to address him.

Of course, this is coming from someone who isn't bothered by the fact that in fantasy/historical films anyone with a noble upbringing speaks in a proper British accent, so you might want to take it with a grain of salt.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Dec 31, 2011)

mirrorrorrim said:


> I, for one, am one of those who is a lot more thrown off by modern speech than by "older"-sounding dialogue. As a good example, I just finished _Game of Thrones_ for the first time (I know, I'm about ten years too late), and while I loved it, I definitely had to get used to the way people talked. In particular, it was a little jarring to hear all the modern profanities.
> 
> Eventually, though, as long as you have a good story and are a halfway decent writer, most any reader will be able to adapt to your style. By the end of _Game of Thrones,_ I wasn't bothered by the language anymore (well, I was, but not any more than I was by the violent deaths, graphic sex, or other brutalities. George R. R. Martin set out to create a fantasy world that was darker, crueler, and more "real" than those he'd read, and his language helps to capture that tone.
> 
> ...



Good point with the Bible. Yeah, reading it, the writing and language is very, very different. In my novels, there is a lot of involvment with various religions I invented. I think the funnest part (aside from designing the Gods themselves) would be deciding how to write out their holy texts. Just to give the reader some insight into their world. You really get be creative in your writting and designing. Aside from the Bible, I think i draw lots of inspiring ideas from the lyrics from the bands Nile and Behemoth. A lot of their lyrics have that sort of "bible-ish" feel to them, given them a sense of age, power, and divinity. Take a moment and follow the links; I try and make my "bible-ish" writitngs like this:

NILE LYRICS - "Those Whom The Gods Detest" (2009) album (Nile lyrics from the album Those Whom the Gods Detest. The lyrics to the Eye of Ra are really good)

BEHEMOTH LYRICS - "Demigod" (2004) album (Behemoth lyrics from the album Demigod. The lyrics to Sculpting the Throne ov Seth are good as well)

Again, I think when writting about deities and excerpts from holy-texts it calls for "over-the-top" writting to give it that grand effect


----------



## mythique890 (Dec 31, 2011)

I'd agree with those who've said it depends on the characters and the setting; sometimes an older, more formal English is appropriate, sometimes it's not.  However, having grown up in a setting where the King James Bible was read often, I'm mostly bothered by authors who try to write in Early Modern English and get it wrong.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jan 1, 2012)

mythique890 said:


> I'd agree with those who've said it depends on the characters and the setting; sometimes an older, more formal English is appropriate, sometimes it's not.  However, having grown up in a setting where the King James Bible was read often, I'm mostly bothered by authors who try to write in Early Modern English and get it wrong.



Could you give us an example of how one might get it wrong?


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Jan 1, 2012)

mirrorrorrim said:


> I, for one, am one of those who is a lot more thrown off by modern speech than by "older"-sounding dialogue. As a good example, I just finished _Game of Thrones_ for the first time (I know, I'm about ten years too late), and while I loved it, I definitely had to get used to the way people talked. In particular, it was a little jarring to hear all the modern profanities.



I'm not sure what you mean by "modern" profanities; f*** and s*** and the like are all hundreds of years old.


----------



## Xanados (Jan 1, 2012)

Androxine Vortex said:


> Good point with the Bible. Yeah, reading it, the writing and language is very, very different. In my novels, there is a lot of involvment with various religions I invented. I think the funnest part (aside from designing the Gods themselves) would be deciding how to write out their holy texts. Just to give the reader some insight into their world. You really get be creative in your writting and designing. Aside from the Bible, I think i draw lots of inspiring ideas from the lyrics from the bands Nile and Behemoth. A lot of their lyrics have that sort of "bible-ish" feel to them, given them a sense of age, power, and divinity. Take a moment and follow the links; I try and make my "bible-ish" writitngs like this:
> 
> NILE LYRICS - "Those Whom The Gods Detest" (2009) album (Nile lyrics from the album Those Whom the Gods Detest. The lyrics to the Eye of Ra are really good)
> 
> ...



Off topic, but: I was really surprised to scroll down and see Nile and Behemoth linked. I really, really was. Nile is one of my favourite death metal bands of all time.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jan 1, 2012)

Xanados said:


> Off topic, but: I was really surprised to scroll down and see Nile and Behemoth linked. I really, really was. Nile is one of my favourite death metal bands of all time.



Dude, me too (next to Amon Amarth. I actually got a TWTGD shirt for Christmas lol) They imo are one of the best lyrically written (is that how you spell that?) bands. Their lyrics are just very well researched and I love the way they they get really creative giving their lyrics a sense of divne inspiration yet keeping it dark and "metal."


----------



## Lord Darkstorm (Jan 1, 2012)

Dialog needs to fit the story.  I've read a lot of bad dialog, and most of that is people who try and write something that is supposed to sound lofty, and comes out like the original example.  The sad thing is that most don't read it out loud.  Dialog is supposed to be spoken, if the writer can't read it out loud without stumbling over the words, how does the character?

I think more people should just try and write in what they know, and if you feel it isn't what is needed, then study the style you want to write in.  I'll use a movie for an example.  One of the Robin Hood movies where no one had an british accent. It didn't ruin the movie.  Would the accent have given it a bit more realism...sure, but it did fine without it.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Jan 1, 2012)

Lord Darkstorm said:


> Dialog needs to fit the story.  I've read a lot of bad dialog, and most of that is people who try and write something that is supposed to sound lofty, and comes out like the original example.  The sad thing is that most don't read it out loud.  Dialog is supposed to be spoken, if the writer can't read it out loud without stumbling over the words, how does the character?



True, and reading your dialogue out loud to make sure it flows well is an excellent tool. Although most of the time, readers _aren't_ reading it out loud, which allows you to write dialogue in a way that isn't quite exactly the way people talk, for the sake of expressiveness or flavor.



> One of the Robin Hood movies where no one had an british accent. It didn't ruin the movie.  Would the accent have given it a bit more realism...sure, but it did fine without it.



"Realism" probably isn't the right word, considering that the "accent" people used back in the Robin Hood era apparently sounded nothing like modern British accents do now. (Also that they would have been speaking in, like, Middle English.) But I do understand your point; people will _consider_ it more realistic if it's what they expect (British characters speaking in British accents).


----------



## Kevlar (Jan 1, 2012)

mirrorrorrim said:
			
		

> I, for one, am one of those who is a lot more thrown off by modern speech than by "older"-sounding dialogue. As a good example, I just finished Game of Thrones for the first time (I know, I'm about ten years too late), and while I loved it, I definitely had to get used to the way people talked. In particular, it was a little jarring to hear all the modern profanities.



I've read in a few places that our modern profanities were commonplace back in the day. Men didn't go pee or urinate. They took a piss.

Anyway, I came back to agree with much of what has already been stated. The use of purely modern dialogue would be absurd in fantasy works, but period language would render the work unreadable. Find an Old English dictionary online. Not a Middle English one. True Old English. It is like reading an entirely different language. English has, over the centuries, been progressively Latinized. A good example, really, is to try reading Beowulf in its unaltered prose. For added challenge read it in its unaltered text.

If you've ever even taken a look at Beowulf, or even Chaucer, you can see how difficult it would be for the fantasy reader to understand period dialogue.

This does not, however, mean we should just throw in the towel and make our characters talk just as we do. The work seems simply shallow and unresearched if the characters are spitting out modern colloquialisms. Some good old flowery language can be a great asset when strategically placed.

Reality can appear unrealistic, so as writers we must blend invention and fact into what seems correct.


----------



## Lepton (Jan 1, 2012)

I understand what you mean, and I agree to a point.  I think that occasionally such dialog is called for in a story, but this is completely dependent on who the character or characters are talking to.  I believe that when each character in a story speaks with such formal words, and overall, gracious speech, that it becomes a bit unnecessary.  

Also, as a briefly wrote about about the characters, it does in fact, depend on the personality and history behind a character.  I do not find the dialogue unrealistic if the character did indeed, come from a family, or lived in a place of high formality.  

Although I absolutely love formal speech in stories, especially when in a different time zone, it can come to the point where it is annoying.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jan 1, 2012)

Kevlar said:


> I've read in a few places that our modern profanities were commonplace back in the day. Men didn't go pee or urinate. They took a piss.
> 
> Anyway, I came back to agree with much of what has already been stated. The use of purely modern dialogue would be absurd in fantasy works, but period language would render the work unreadable. Find an Old English dictionary online. Not a Middle English one. True Old English. It is like reading an entirely different language. English has, over the centuries, been progressively Latinized. A good example, really, is to try reading Beowulf in its unaltered prose. For added challenge read it in its unaltered text.
> 
> ...



Simply beautiful XD
I couldn't agree more. I think that's why fantasy dialogue is tricky to write. You want it to have that "old english" feel to it but obviously we do not use that sort of talk in modern times. So you actually have to think about how your characters would talk because it's not a normal conversation you would have with your friends, or even your boss at work. I'm sure he would be confused if you began a sentence with multiple formalities. I think that's why authors get dialogue wrong too often. We are almost in a way trying to write in a different language when you really think about it.


----------



## mirrorrorrim (Jan 1, 2012)

Kevlar said:


> I've read in a few places that our modern profanities were commonplace back in the day. Men didn't go pee or urinate. They took a piss.
> 
> Anyway, I came back to agree with much of what has already been stated. The use of purely modern dialogue would be absurd in fantasy works, but period language would render the work unreadable. Find an Old English dictionary online. Not a Middle English one. True Old English. It is like reading an entirely different language. English has, over the centuries, been progressively Latinized. A good example, really, is to try reading Beowulf in its unaltered prose. For added challenge read it in its unaltered text.
> 
> ...



That's interesting to find out, about the profanity. Thanks for correcting me!

Even when reading lines of Old English right next to their translations, I often can't see how one word got to another. To tell the truth, I even struggle with understanding Shakespeare, and he wrote in Early Modern English!


----------



## Erica (Jan 1, 2012)

I mostly write in a fairly modern tone, but I'm trying to spice my dialog up a bit by throwing a few colloquialisms in without going overboard (hopefully) to establish things about the character's class, education or culture. For instance, some of my people will use terms like lad or lass (which may conjure up an image of them speaking with a bit of a burr without actually writing it) or using terms like chap (upper class) versus bloke (working class) when referring to what we modern Americans would call a guy (as in a male somewhere between puberty and senescence).

But then, I'm American, so these British sounding terms are far more exotic and medieval sounding to me that "guy" or "dude" would be. And I sort of envision the part of the world most of my story takes place in as being a bit more like Britain than the US. Maybe to a British reader it would just sound silly.

And I tend to use some made up or archaic swear words to get around the fact that most people really do talk like that at least sometimes, but some people get offended if you're tossing F bombs and other 'cuss words' around liberally, even if it's in character.

Where I've had trouble is with one character who is sort of a Jeremy Irons style villain (in my head) and I try to make him talk that way, but some people think he sounds stilted. I can't exactly have a high inquisitor saying "Yo dude, I'm gonna go medieval on your a__ if you don't spill your guts."


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jan 2, 2012)

Erica said:


> I mostly write in a fairly modern tone, but I'm trying to spice my dialog up a bit by throwing a few colloquialisms in without going overboard (hopefully) to establish things about the character's class, education or culture. For instance, some of my people will use terms like lad or lass (which may conjure up an image of them speaking with a bit of a burr without actually writing it) or using terms like chap (upper class) versus bloke (working class) when referring to what we modern Americans would call a guy (as in a male somewhere between puberty and senescence).
> 
> But then, I'm American, so these British sounding terms are far more exotic and medieval sounding to me that "guy" or "dude" would be. And I sort of envision the part of the world most of my story takes place in as being a bit more like Britain than the US. Maybe to a British reader it would just sound silly.
> 
> ...



Jeremy Irons huh? So I suppose your villain would be something like this?
Jeremy Irons Cereal.divx - YouTube


----------



## karriezai (Jan 2, 2012)

Has anyone here ever watched _A Knight's Tale_? (With Heath Ledger, Shannyn Sossamon, Alan Tudyk, Paul Bettany...)

If so, have you watched the Director's Commentary bits? One of them talked at length about the stylistic choice they made in having the characters use very modern speech patterns and even music. They pointed out that there must have been equivalents back in the day. That changed the way I view my writing. I mean, it's all supposed to be a translation, anyway; I'm not expecting that my characters speak English. So I can assume that the translation includes turning their colloquialisms into equivalents we would better understand.

I do have my limits. But there are certain phrases that I'm pretty sure wouldn't have existed back then that I include for simplicity's sake. Such as "shooting the breeze."

I like it much better this way, because before I settled on this style I'd be paralyzed over the decision of whether or not to have a character say "Okay" because it seemed too modern. Haha.


----------



## Erica (Jan 2, 2012)

Lord Darkstorm said:


> Dialog needs to fit the story.  I've read a lot of bad dialog, and most of that is people who try and write something that is supposed to sound lofty, and comes out like the original example.  The sad thing is that most don't read it out loud.  Dialog is supposed to be spoken, if the writer can't read it out loud without stumbling over the words, how does the character?



Haha, I often read passages aloud when I'm writing. My poor husband is sitting behind me on the other computer playing some game, and here I go and ask him 'does this sound okay to you?" repeatedly. No wonder writers always acknowledge their spouses.

And I had forgotten about the Jeremy Irons cereal from Family Guy......that's too funny.


----------



## SeverinR (Jan 3, 2012)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by "modern" profanities; f*** and s*** and the like are all hundreds of years old.



I do not believe S*** was a profanity, a low class word possibly, it was simply another word for dung.

We must balance our modern language with the style of old, because while more true to the period, I doubt many fantasy readers would tolerate Shakespeare's style of speaking/writing for long.
"O happy dagger!
This is thy sheath; there rust, and let me die."

( I would change this to; Cold dagger, my heart is thy sheath; find home and release my sorrow.)

I do believe there was different uses of profanity in history.  There are obvious 21st century style speaking.
Watching Sparticus over the weekend I was impressed at how the artful profanity flowed from all the classes of people.  It was believable in that setting, a fat, lustful, lazy society with nothing to interest them but the basic raw emotions-sex, death, lust and power.


----------



## Ziggy (Jan 3, 2012)

Style is certainly something to consider, but it doesn't make dialogue "good" or "bad".

I think a lot of people mistakenly analyse bad dialogue in terms of _how _things are said rather than _what _is being said.

Good dialogue, or even great dialogue, can be of any "style" from any "era". Be it Shakespeare, Jane Austen, Oscar Wilde, Pratchett or JK Rowling. What matters is the meaning that is conveyed, how it fits into the story and that it originates naturally and consistently from its speakers.

There is no doubt that bad dialogue often comes in the form of people trying to sound "formal" or "Kingly". Again I think this is because they are focusing too much on how they think a King should _sound_, rather than what a King would _say_.

For any of you that have watched the West Wing, there is an Episode where a PR Consultant (Amy) is trying to to teach a candidate (Santos) the "Presidential voice". And I think it's Josh who says, "I always thought it was the President who made the voice, not the other way around", which I think is very astute. It's what they _say _that is important, the "style" is very much secondary imo.

Accents/colloquialisms, etc are only elements of their background/environment, it doesn't define them nor make their dialogue good or bad. Of course you need to assign styles appropriately and be consistent with them, but I feel that goes without saying.

You don't need to give medieval era characters a "Shakespearean voice". Shakespeare had his own very unique and distinct style which was not at all "realistic". I think it's unwise to use too many words that are out of common usage today. I don't see that there is any need for it and feel it serves only to frustrate readers. Someone else mentioned before that they see dialogue as a "translation", which I think is a very good way of looking at it. I also don't think it's a good idea to have too much of a gap between the style of the characters dialogue and the narration.

Conveying whether someone is "simple" or "intelligent" should firstly come through the complexity and intelligence of the ideas they express. The words that they use are simply an extension of this. I want to stress that using "long words" does not necessarily make someone sound intelligent. It's quite easy to tell when a writer has abused their Thesaurus.

A character's choice of words _is_ important, but it requires more thought than some people give it. For instance, a less intelligent person might use longer, more complex words incorrectly because they're trying to "fit in" with intellectual superiors. Or a very intelligent person might use simple language to explain very complex ideas to someone who is not as well educated. Rulers can tend to use colloquialisms and such when addressing a populace to engender camaraderie, a sense that they are "one of the people", etc. It's pretty complex when you really break it down and analyze it, but I think it's just something that comes naturally the more you write (and read, and listen) and the more the character's develop.

There is nothing that makes me cringe more than badly placed "winks" to accompany artificially "playful" dialogue. Unnatural dialogue sticks out like a sore thumb. I especially hate it when I find myself thinking of a section of dialogue "What the hell was that?" And then later the reason for it becomes obvious. When you can identify a specific reason for an author to place a certain conversation in a certain place, _that _is bad dialogue. That brings you right out of the story.

When dialogue feels unnatural, or when it does not fit with the character/s, that is bad dialogue.

In the end dialogue is simply another element to story telling. There is no one thing in particular that can make a story "bad", nor is there one thing that makes any piece of dialogue "bad".

But again I stress the importance of substance over style. Shakespeare is not great because he uses "fancy words", he is great for the ideas and meaning those words carried. And style is not just about what words you use. It's about sentence structure, grammar and fluidity. When you're talking about the style of your work as a whole, I don't think it's wise to stray too far from what comes naturally to you. Don't try to deliberately emulate anyone. Just write, and eventually you will develop your own style that will inevitably be a mish mash of everything you've ever read/heard/written.

So in summary, don't be worrying too much about trying to make your character "sound" like a King (or a President, or whatever), concentrate on _making_ them one. Don't try and make your work "like Shakespeare" or "like JK Rowling", just write your story and your own style will develop.

Sorry this post is so long, rambled a bit


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jan 4, 2012)

Ziggy said:


> Style is certainly something to consider, but it doesn't make dialogue "good" or "bad".
> 
> I think a lot of people mistakenly analyse bad dialogue in terms of _how _things are said rather than _what _is being said.
> 
> ...



Good points. I like what you mentioned about abusing a thesaurus, although it's not a bad idea to broden your vocabulary. Whenever I read or just happen to come across a word that's new, I make a note of it and then learn what it means later. I try to always make my vocab more colorful as to not having to stick to the same old words that everyone else uses.

One might say I have a most voluminous vocabulary lol


----------



## Telcontar (Jan 4, 2012)

A big vocab is good, certainly. You have to be careful to only use words that you _know_, and not just words that you know _about._ I know a lot of words that I wouldn't feel comfortable using in a sentence, because while I basically know what they mean I don't know it well enough, and furthermore, I don't know the connotations. This changes. Sometimes I think of a word that I know in such a shallow manner, and I look it up to further acquaint myself with it. I sometimes even google it to find instances of other people using it. See what kind of people use it, and for what purpose, such as formal vs. informal writing.


----------



## Ziggy (Jan 4, 2012)

It's more that people often take words they consider "plain" and _right-click, synonyms_ to try and find a word that they think sounds more "sophisticated". As though by doing this they are making their character, or themselves, sound more "intellectual" or more "Shakespearean", etc. This tends to lead to "over description" where they get _Thesaurus happy_ and sound off long/obscure adjectives.

In dialogue some people search for words they think will make their king sound "kingly", and so on. Which is fine, within reason, but is often exaggerated to the point where their characters become _caricatures_. The purpose of a broad vocabulary is to more accurately and/or more succinctly express yourself.

I don't want to discourage anyone from broadening their vocabulary, but don't do it through a thesaurus, do it through _reading_ (or listening). Telcontar is right, you have to _know_ the words you are using and how to use them in context. When you read you see words in context, but when you _right-click, synonyms_, you see them in isolation.

The point I was trying to make with that is that there aren't "Kingly words". Making a character's dialogue sound "Kingly" is more complicated than that.


----------



## Erica (Jan 4, 2012)

I think the problem with using archaic language is if it is overdone, or done badly, it can be painful to read. There are some authors who are good at capturing a particular dialect, but overall, less is more. It's not a fantasy novel, but I have always loved the James Herriot books. He had a gift for portraying the way some of the old Yorkshire farmers talked without bogging you down in the dialect. But he didn't go overboard by trying to write every little thing about the accent in every situation (or it would have been as incomprehensible as some are in real life to those of us speaking American English). And he lived among them for most of his life, so he had a pretty good sense for how they really sounded. Someone who hadn't spend 40 years in the Yorkshire dales would probably fall flat trying to do what he did without consulting with a linguist and getting a lot of proofreaders who knew the dialect.

I read a book recently where one of the characters had an old style Cockney accent, and the author did a good job with it. But she mentioned a linguist in her acknowledgements. 

For a typical fantasy novel, it's probably good to decide on a few turns of phrase or words that denote different status/backgrounds in your world or society...ones that capture the flavor you're trying to get across without going overboard. What you don't want is to make it too much work for your reader. I remember trying to read a book once that was written in 'old west' style dialect (thar ain't a baar on that thar hill over thar is thar?) I couldn't get past the second chapter.


----------



## Ziggy (Jan 4, 2012)

When you're talking about accents, you really have to consider your point of view. Which language is the base from which others will have an "accent"? For instance, if you're writing a story about French people, in English, you wouldn't give them "French accents". It's a _translation_, you would give an _Englishman trying to speak French_ an accent.

If you're writing about "Ye Olde England" there is no need to use "archaic" language at all, because it's a _translation_. You can throw in the odd word to give a "flavour" of that period. But it's more important _what _they're talking about rather than actually trying to emulate the speech of that era word for word, or god forbid... phonetically.


----------



## M0nkeyF1st (Apr 29, 2013)

Personally, I don't feel it necessary to include profanities just because it's 'supposed to be realistic'. I think that you could indicate his way with words outside of dialog and let the reader insert their own local jargon. It will feel more natural to them that way too, IMHO. So what I mean here, is that you write the dialog as clearly and as 'in character' as you can - give him or her some 'hook' phrase to use now and then, to identify him in the reader's mind - but you only need to indicate a few times just after you've introduced the character that he has a tendency to be loud, vulgar, and fling profanities about like a sailor. Just make sure the point is made and then forget about it and focus on what the character is actually saying.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Apr 29, 2013)

Wow I forgot about this thread. One of the first ones I made.
THREADOMANCY!


----------



## Sia (May 27, 2013)

Hmmm ... on the note about sounding like a 'king' or whatever, I wouldn't worry.  Let's say you're writing a king...  I think one of your first jobs has to be to define what a 'king' is to King Richard III or whoever.  A God? The noblestman? A parent to the entire nation? How he sees himself is going to affect how he speaks.


----------

