On "cringey" dialogue

[unholyGhostwriter]

I've been thinking about this particular topic for a while, but it came back to the forefront of my mind around last week, a few days after I finished reading "They Both Die at the End" by Adam Silvera. I listened to the audiobook, and one of the things that stood out to me was the way certain characters' dialogue was written, specifically Rufus and his family-friends, the Plutos. For anyone who hasn't read TBDATE, I won't spoil (though the book came out in 2017), but to be brief, the characters spoke using a lot of terminology that most people would deem cringe or annoying; lots of "yo"s, using "mad" as an adverb a lot of the time. I picked up on it, but I actually really liked the way these character's talked. Not just because it set them apart from the characters that spoke in a more normal(?), less slang-y way, but also because I thought it worked for their characters considering their background? I'm a POC and I know a lot of people who unironically talk like that. Doesn't make it not weird sometimes, and I'm definitely not judging anyone for finding it annoying.

So I was actually genuinely confused when I read some reviews of the book and found that a lot of people like, actively detested the way these characters talked, to the point where I read some people saying it pulled them out of the story or that it was so jarring that they hyper-focused on it and "barely noticed the plot", which. Okay.

I can understand character's talking in an annoying way or using terms or slang that most people find weird or cringe, and I do know that sometimes dialogue like this can be executed so poorly that it drags the reader out of the story. But this also made me think. There's sort of a baseline mode of speaking in (English) fiction, specifically in genres like YA or slice of life. I'll put down an example:

"Hey, Stu! Over here. Your house is the old one with the scarecrow in the front yard, right? Yeah, I need to talk to you about that for a sec."

I'd say that's generally the structure of speaking of the main character of the average YA fiction novel. "Yeah"s instead of yeses, contractions and not using perfect English grammar--not formal, but not obnoxiously casual. Most dialogue from books I've read sorta stays within this general field (with variations depending on the author's style of writing, of course), unless there's a specific tone or affectation of a character's voice that translates into how they say things. What I'm getting at is, I think "cringey" is being attributed to a lot of dialogue that strays just a little farther than this general characterspeak structure.

Here's an (original) example of how the aforementioned characters in TBDATE spoke:

"Yo, Tommy! Did you see Louise back there? Bro, I told you that girl is mad beautiful, but I guess you had to see it to believe it, huh? I'm gonna hit her up later. You think she'll dig this outfit or nah?"

... Is it just me or is that somehow not completely fine dialogue for a character? I would write a character that speaks like this if I wanted to And characters like Rufus that spoke like this in the book didn't even speak like this all the time. I've even seen people say that it's not realistic for Rufus to talk like this because he rides around on his bike with his helmet on. Like. Like speaking in slang automatically means you're a reckless individual??? How is that a rational thought process?

Again, I'm not judging because I know everyone has a different range of tolerance for super-casual dialogue, but I've seen people act like it's a massive problem, and not just with this book. I find it interesting that so many people find characters talking like this distracting or even taking away from the plot of a book when like--sometimes people just talk like that?

I'm curious as to what others think about this. Is my perception of the general structure of dialogue in YA fiction flawed, or just straight-up wrong? Maybe I'm reading into it too much? Maybe I've just been surrounded by people who just tend to have this opinion? Or maybe I'm just on a particularly inflammatory side of the internet that gets way too extra when talking about things that they hate. I thought that was just Twitter, but apparently not, lol.

 

[Finchbearer]

That wouldn’t be something I’d enjoy reading. The author must have tried to include what they thought was realistic vernacular, but it has just ended up coming across as cringeworthy.

Accents are a fine balance to work with IMO. If you read any Irvine Welsh book, that is an example of local vernacular taken to the extreme, but in general fiction most authors will take the character ‘voice’ into account and give them appropriate dialogue. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.

I think it must be harder to write for a younger audience, getting the balance of realistic dialogue versus what you think young people want to read.

 

[Penpilot]

I think sometimes it's just about different strokes for different folks. There's this author Guy Gavriel Kay, award winning author with a bibliography to kill for. I tried reading his first book, and couldn't connect with it. His prose is dense, and you have to work for it a bit, so my pea brain wasn't up for the challenge.

See, I can acknowledge that Kay is a great writer, with wonderful stories, and I can articulate why I can't get into his books. Not everyone can or is willing to do that. If they don't like something, it automatically becomes the worst thing in the world. If they like something, it's the best thing in the world. The internet is a spawning ground for hyperbole. And sometimes that hyperbole makes its way into the real world.

 

[unholyGhostwriter]

That wouldn’t be something I’d enjoy reading. The author must have tried to include what they thought was realistic vernacular, but it has just ended up coming across as cringeworthy.

That's fair. I guess a bit of my thought process is, I think it's totally okay to find certain vernacular usage obnoxious while reading and then move on with the story, even if I find that dialogue cringe. I know a lot of people don't, and that's absolutely valid but I also find it interesting that that specifically is such a dealbreaker for a lot of people. I haven't imagined being so irritated by how one character speaks that it taints the rest of the book for me.

Accents are a fine balance to work with IMO. If you read any Irvine Welsh book, that is an example of local vernacular taken to the extreme, but in general fiction most authors will take the character ‘voice’ into account and give them appropriate dialogue. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.

That makes sense. I suppose it depends on both the writer and the reader, but does that mean that dialogue that reads like that should be avoided because of the possibility that it'd be cringe? Or that there needs to be a balance between character voice and local slang? I'm of the opinion that the cringe is sometimes okay, since real people do speak like that and some books want to go for that specific kind of depiction. But of course, I'm only speaking for myself, cause at the end of the day it is subjective to each person.

Thanks for your thoughts!

 

[Ban]

Going against the overseas dogma; The customer is not always right. Using dialectical lingo is a wonderful way of immersing a reader into a setting and the cast of characters traversing it. Language is the method through which our inner world is externalized. Why then, should it not differ immensely between differing groups of people? Teenagers in Saint Louis shouldn't have the same vocabulary and manners of speech as Liverpool geezers (to pick two unrelated yet native anglophone populations). The main problem I see here, aside from possible problems regarding the execution of the idea, is that a significant portion of your mentioned works' audiences likely had expectations that didn't align with the author's vision. If someone expects a casual read that requires little to no effort, they may be dismayed when that expectation isn't realized. The author could remedy this by writing more apt descriptions of the novel, so prospective readers alter their expectations.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

Yeah, I've got to say that dialectical speech is a very fine wire to walk. Even if one is a native speaker of a particular dialect, it's easy to screw up, and then you just have a mess. When I'm drafting, I will change how the narrative feels and flows, depending on which character has the PoV for that chapter. Still, extremely delicate. And also, I've got to come on and say that I never recommend trying to replicate a dialogue to reflect the race of the character. For starters, that's not how dialects work. One doesn't pop out of the womb with a dialect under the tongue, waiting. And trying, and failing, can leave an unfavorable taste in the readers' mouth, and they'll likely DNF the book.

We do have a lot of characters from different cultures and languages, and with that comes speech patterns. Here's where most mistakes happen. What's important here isn't replicating the dialect so much as it's getting the flavor of the dialect right. and that just takes a delicate hand. This bit involves a group of friends from England.

~~~

The headlamps carved out his path through the moonlit night up the I-5 through Washington State, the tires gripping the road remarkably well at two hundred and twenty kilometers per hour. Alerich came up behind a lorry and an SUV just as one was moving to pass the other and floored the gas, darting between the other vehicles like they were standing still. His passenger gripped the bar and made a small squeaking noise. All he had to remember was to stay on the right and the wide median helped with that.

Bloody Americans. Madness.

Moments later another sports car shot around the slower lorry, engine screaming, and a voice sounded through Alerich’s speaker phone. “Rick, suicide is not going to get you out of marrying Celia.”

Alerich laughed at Thomas, sweet adrenaline coursing through his body. “I didn’t know that was even an option.”

Elspeth let out an elegant snort of the sort Celia was famous for. “Thomas is right. I don’t think even killing yourself would save you.”

He glanced at his twin as she unwound her fingers from the passenger door’s grab bar, her short, chic, black hair barely brushing her ears. “I think you two are envisioning a zombie version of me shuffling down the aisle.”

Thomas chuckled. “Yeah, I wouldn’t put necromancy past her.”

Alerich grinned, thinking of himself gray and green, flesh decaying, his black leather jacket the only thing keeping him intact… All right, that was disgusting. But anything to keep his mind off the wedding.

Off Celia Carralond.

He felt the smile slide from his face. Celia was everything a wizard could want in a wife. She was both politically and magically powerful, the only child of the Archwizard of the Wizards’ Council. She was brilliant. She was beautiful. But beauty wasn’t everything. “‘Sweetest things turn sourest by their deeds,’” he said with a bitter edge to his tongue.

 

[Mad Swede]

I would never use dialectal speech as such in a story, mostly because it dates so very fast. But that doesn't mean you can't dialectal words or subtle variations in sentence structure and phrasing to convey differences between characters from different places in your setting

 

[Diana Silver]

I love reading books written entirely in unfamiliar dialects, slang or any form of non-standard language. I love it as much as reading books in various languages. For me it adds layers and layers of imagination, immersion. I read fiction to get out of my own head and world, into the heads and worlds of others.

Of course this is all my personal tastes, but to generalize a little: I think the world would be a poorer place if we all strove to hit some sweet spot or thin line of the exactly correct enough form of any language. Even if it turns out it might not be to everyone's taste; which book is?

The active detesting bit feels like coming from a gross place of the human brain. Maybe visiting that part of the internet a bit less, as you said, is a healthy idea.

 

[Diana Silver]

I would never use dialectal speech as such in a story, mostly because it dates so very fast. But that doesn't mean you can't dialectal words or subtle variations in sentence structure and phrasing to convey differences between characters from different places in your setting

Have you never had the experience of finding and enjoying an old & aged text precisely because of the quirky old-fashionedness of the language?

 

[Finchbearer]

There’s a difference between writing in vernacular and writing in ordinary language though. I think you can still achieve a distinct ‘voice’ using either.

 

[Mad Swede]

Have you never had the experience of finding and enjoying an old & aged text precisely because of the quirky old-fashionedness of the language?

I read a lot, despite my dyslexia, and I read widely. The prose can be old fashioned (and trust me, older Swedish writing styles are very different to the modern ones) without distracting from my enjoyment of the story. But for me there is a difference between that and using (or misusing) modern vernacular in order to aim my story at a particular audience.

 

[Diana Silver]

I read a lot, despite my dyslexia, and I read widely. The prose can be old fashioned (and trust me, older Swedish writing styles are very different to the modern ones) without distracting from my enjoyment of the story. But for me there is a difference between that and using (or misusing) modern vernacular in order to aim my story at a particular audience.

That's interesting. I'm not sure I see the difference you point to. Modern vernacular for particular audiences today is the old-fasioned writing style of tomorrow, insofar as the old-fashioned writing styles we can read today were modern vernicular at some point in history.

And even if you don't agree there, my comparison was really meant as that: a comparison. I enjoy writing styles from various ages in the same way as I enjoy modern writing styles from different origins.

But then, to each their own of course. Or did you mean to say it is in the intention - the 'using or misusing to aim for audiences' - that the difference becomes important for you?

 

[pmmg]

This vernacular only appears in the dialog?

I give a lot of room for anything goes if its between quotes, but not if its spread all through the prose. If I read this, I would assume 1) something about the characters and/or 2) something about the author. (And later, something about the reviewer who tags it).

If it bothered me, I'd just stop reading it.


I did not find the example 'cringy'. I've heard people talk like that IRL, so....seems like an attempt to capture the dialect of a cultural group.

But...It could be cringy if I was more versed in that dialect, maybe I just cant tell.

Im'ma say, not cringy. Least for that example.


Addendum:

I could see, if I adopt my easily offended mind, that if all of the prose is in straight boring librarian English, and then characters pop up in dialog with those types of sentences, people may feel like it was someone trying to mimic a culture from the outside, and thereby cringe worthy as I felt they should stay away (something along the lines of cultural appropriation, or stereotyping or such), but I don't easily share that sentiment.

 

[Mad Swede]

What we as writers think is acceptable vernacular dialogue may not be seen that way by others, now or in the future. This touches on a debate we've been having on and off on this site for many years.

The example I will give here is Ian Flemings's James Bond books, particularly Live and Let Die, Doctor No, Thunderball and The Man with the Golden Gun. The vernacular expressions and attitudes shown by some of the characters are accurate, both for the period and for the setting. Yet Fleming and his books are now criticised for racism, sexism and homophobia. Yet the literary character James Bond is a very complex person, with feeling, beliefs and regrets. Does this balance out his attitudes?

How do we deal with this as writers? Do we ignore potential criticism and write what we feel is best or should we make some changes before we publish to avoid the most obvious criticism? Or do we seek to justify it by producing deep and complex characters with believable flaws and strengths? Can this be reflected in the way they speak without causing unneccsary offence?

 

[skip.knox]

There has to be a match between character and character voice; there also needs to be congruence between that character's voice and authorial intent.

So, if this is a comedy or satire, and the character is meant to laughed at to some degree, and their voice is intentionally stereotyped or exaggerated, then that's fine. I as reader should be able to pick up on the intent and the execution. I may still not like the story, might not like that voice, but I can at least acknowledge that the author did what they meant to do.

OTOH, if the book is meant to be dramatic, or high epic, or ... well, you get the picture, then that's a poor choice and it won't matter how genuine is the writing. I don't read YA, so I can't guess whether this particular voice is genre-appropriate or not, still less whether or not it's done well

There's one statement in the OP I want to speak to, though.
>... does that mean that dialogue that reads like that should be avoided because of the possibility that it'd be cringe?

Do you mean "should be avoided" by someone as an author? By someone as a reader? It really does depend, as you said, so the answer is clearly no. It might be avoided by a reader because they already know they don't like that particular style. An author should avoid it because they don't feel they could do it properly, or because they already know it won't fit the style of book they're writing.

But it sounds like "should be avoided" implies "because people will criticize me". That's an easy one. Never worry about that. Or, if you do, then you must worry about everything you ever write, because there will always be someone who criticizes it. The writing is on the author. The cringing is on the reader.

 

[JBCrowson]

That wouldn’t be something I’d enjoy reading. The author must have tried to include what they thought was realistic vernacular, but it has just ended up coming across as cringeworthy.

Accents are a fine balance to work with IMO. If you read any Irvine Welsh book, that is an example of local vernacular taken to the extreme, but in general fiction most authors will take the character ‘voice’ into account and give them appropriate dialogue. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.

I think it must be harder to write for a younger audience, getting the balance of realistic dialogue versus what you think young people want to read.

I'm with you in that I wouldn't want to read a book written with dialogue like the OP is referring to.

Trainspotting was a tough read for me, even though I had been living a while in Edinburgh when I read it and was used to hearing people talk that every day. The rendering of the surly gardener / manservant in Wuthering Heights (was he Joseph?) is another. I find flipping my inner voice into the relevant accent / dialect helps enormously.

 

[Prince of Spires]

How do we deal with this as writers? Do we ignore potential criticism and write what we feel is best or should we make some changes before we publish to avoid the most obvious criticism? Or do we seek to justify it by producing deep and complex characters with believable flaws and strengths? Can this be reflected in the way they speak without causing unneccsary offence?

We can't. There is no way to tell what future generations will and will not consider offensive or unbelievable. You can only really reflect the time you live in. While the James Bond example might have been something you could have realized was offensive, there are plenty of examples of what people find offensive today that people didn't even consider might be offensive even just 10 years ago.

And then there's the vocal minority problem. Sometimes you will get a very vocal minority who takes offence with something, while the majority of the populace has no problem with it. Just because one voice is louder doesn't mean that voice is right. Now, I'm not saying that it's fine to just offend minorities because they're a minority. However, at some point it's hard to tell what is actually offensive and what is simply a case of people shouting because they want to be heard. Also, you can't please everyone.

So just write. Be true to yourself and your characters. That's all you can do. If it's good, then it will offend someone. There's no getting around that.