Responding to a couple of specific critique comments

[ThinkerX]

Hmmm...

'They had to shout at each other to be heard above the storm.'

-=-=-

But then:

"Damn, that hurts!" screamed Ike as the knife entered his side, face contorted in pain.

Somehow, 'said' or even 'yelled' just doesn't seem to work there. Guy is in a great deal of pain, afterall, anything coming out of his mouth is going carry some of that pain with it.

-=-=-=

Or...

"Wass slup?" slurred the drunk, just before he fell off the bar stool.

Might make a good argument for 'said', but a pretty good case could also be made for 'slurred'.

-=-=-=-=-

"But I don't want to," whined the little boy.

Maybe

The little boy whined "But I don't want to."

 

[BWFoster78]

ThinkerX,

I hold no illusions that I'm going to convince everyone that my position is correct. I've come to believe it and will continue to utilize it.

The context and the words are supposed to convey the emotion, not the speech tag. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it.

Given that viewpoint, it's okay to break the rules sometimes, and I'm trying to figure out where I think the exceptions are.

I do not like slurred, whined, or screamed as speech tags. They're good action verbs and should be used as such.

 

[Caged Maiden]

I think that anytime someone adopts an all-or-nothing sort of view, there is a cost, and for me, it isn't worth it. For me, writing in one way throughout an entire novel would be like eating mac and cheese every night for dinner. I love it, but after a time, it could become bland. It sounds like a great idea, but theory and practice are two different things. The problem with writing is that there are many theories to improve story telling, and I'm not sold on any theory having more merit than an equally solid contradictory theory.

My writing could vary a lot depending on the scene I'm writing, so I'm not sure that for me there can ever be a one size fits all answer. If for instance, I want a scene to flow quickly, I use tags like muttered, growled, hissed, whispered. If however I am taking my time and developing an ambiance, I use a method more like Ankari posted (well done, by the way).

So I have a new question. I read once that you always should write like this:

"Get my shoes," Tina said.
"Get them yourself," Bob replied, angrily stomping out the door.

Rather than:

"Get my shoes," said Tina.
"Get them yourself," replied Bob before stomping out the door.

Any thoughts?

Also, I wondered about this:

"Water," the old man gasped in a raspy voice, crawling on the floor.

Is that well done or do we need to write:

The old man crawled forward on the floor, his eyes sunken from dehydration. "Water," he gasped in a raspy voice.

Okay so I'm not sure which would be better, just wondering. I tend to alternate these sorts of things depending on the speed I want to set for the scene, but I was just wondering in general which reads better for a reader (or agent).

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

"Said" is the best speech tag but the idea that it's the only one you should ever use is preposterous.

Remember, it's all about goals. Most writers want to please most readers, and the overwhelming majority of readers have absolutely no problem with other tags:

"The countess will not be pleased," John murmured.

And rightly so. There is a storytelling difference between using the words "said", "murmured", "laughed" or "shouted" there (if John shouts it, maybe the countess overhears him and gets angry--which is why he murmurs it). It turns out that most of the time, "said" is good enough, and it can be distracting to use other tags too often.

There are ways to convey the manner of someone's speech without using a dialogue tag. Describing their expression, or their movements, can inform how their dialogue is received; but it can only go so far. And all these things can be combined.

John half-covered his mouth with one hand. "The countess will not be pleased."

Plus, you can look at professional, big-name writers. In a single page of A Game of Thrones, GRRM uses the following tags: snapped, said, commanded, replied, insisted, demanded. Maybe some people don't like this sort of thing, but look at most major writers and you'll see that they do this all the time.

 

[JCFarnham]

Also I am a firm believer that verbs need to be properly utilised and in doing so agree with what happens in the clause. Therefore I would be wary writting "What's the problem?" said John. The inquisitive tone in the dialogue and the said conflict.

Again though, that's my way of doing things. An exagerrated example could be "Be quiet," yelled John. Firstly because it breaks Brian's rule I would find myself wondering why? I trust the writer I'm reading to be clever and in full command of language so I know it can't be JUST a mistake. What in the context agrees with the mismatch of tags?

Most of the time either said, or action is fine, but some times it can be worth switching it up. I hope I've made my point clear enough there heh It might not be ... ah well. Life goes on

 

[BWFoster78]

So I have a new question. I read once that you always should write like this:

"Get my shoes," Tina said.
"Get them yourself," Bob replied, angrily stomping out the door.

Rather than:

"Get my shoes," said Tina.
"Get them yourself," replied Bob before stomping out the door.

Any thoughts?

I always have thoughts

I vastly prefer the first. Why, though? I'm not sure. Maybe because it's what I'm used to?

The only advice I've ever read regarding this issue, however, is that you need to be consistent. If you start out with "said he" instead of "he said," carry that style throughout the piece.

Also, I wondered about this:

"Water," the old man gasped in a raspy voice, crawling on the floor.

If it were me, I'd do it:

"Water." The old man gasped in a raspy voice, crawling on the floor.

 

[Steerpike]

The context and the words are supposed to convey the emotion, not the speech tag. T

I think this is true in general. In some cases, you might want to express that a character is reacting differently than might be conveyed by the context and words themselves, and that it when other descriptors, in addition to the speech tag, can be most useful.

 

[ShortHair]

I too became a convert to the Church of Said. Then I started to ask questions. If there are no rules but only guidelines in writing, why can we never use anything but "said"? How can I indicate that a character's voice has changed in a way that the speech itself can't possibly indicate, such as whispering? What if my style demands descriptive speech tags, and my readers like it that way?

I say, "said" is supposed to be invisible, so use it when the speech it's tagging can stand alone, but use something else when you feel it's necessary.

 

[Steerpike]

I too became a convert to the Church of Said. Then I started to ask questions. If there are no rules but only guidelines in writing, why can we never use anything but "said"?

The words "never" and "always" don't work too well when giving writing advice. The advice concerning the use of "said" as a dialogue tag is generally sound, but should not be taken to mean an author can never use anything else. As with most such things, once an author understands why "said" is usually best (if a tag is needed at all), then she will better understand when to use something else.

 

[BWFoster78]

Two basic thoughts on rules:

1. When referring to a rule, it's much easier to simply say "don't do this" or "never do this" than it is to give caveats every time.
2. It's always okay to break a rule as long as a) you know you're breaking the rule, b) you understand the consequence of breaking the rule, and c) you feel that the benefits you're gaining by breaking it outweigh the consequences.

Just for the record

 

[Lawfire]

When reading for pleasure, I can honestly say that the word "said" becomes all but invisible. If another speech tag is used it tends to jump out. If other speech tags are used too frequently: it (in my opinion) becomes annoying, lowers the quality of the writing, and becomes less pleasurable to read.

Well written dialogue (especially between two characters) could often stand on its own, without tags.

 

[Penpilot]

Penpilot,

Thanks for the comments. I leaning in those directions for the most part. Still struggling with the incomplete information. I don't want to confuse the reader, but I want to allow for them to interpret on their own. Not sure exactly how that jives with your answer.

Actually, could you define what you mean by interpret? Maybe I'm not understanding what's being asked. Sometimes for effect you can leave things ambiguous. Like a girl laughing after being asked out. Is she laughing in a good or bad way toward the person asking? That works. But if you want the reader to interpret emotional states and dialogue in a specific way or direction like the frustration and big bear cave examples, there has to be enough cues to lead the reader down that path. If there isn't then the reader is lost. Not a good thing.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

When reading for pleasure, I can honestly say that the word "said" becomes all but invisible. If another speech tag is used it tends to jump out. If other speech tags are used too frequently: it (in my opinion) becomes annoying, lowers the quality of the writing, and becomes less pleasurable to read.

Well written dialogue (especially between two characters) could often stand on its own, without tags.

Can you give an example of some well-known books that you like that only use "said", or at least use other tags infrequently enough that it doesn't bother you?

 

[BWFoster78]

Actually, could you define what you mean by interpret? Maybe I'm not understanding what's being asked. Sometimes for effect you can leave things ambiguous. Like a girl laughing after being asked out. Is she laughing in a good or bad way toward the person asking? That works. But if you want the reader to interpret emotional states and dialogue in a specific way or direction like the frustration and big bear cave examples, there has to be enough cues to lead the reader down that path. If there isn't then the reader is lost. Not a good thing.

I'll answer your specific question about how to define interpret, but, fair warning, I'm gonna ramble a bit first.

This discussion is good to help me define exactly what I mean (which started off as kinda nebulous for me). Two principles of this "rule" for me:

1. When you're talking about what is happening, the reader needs a clear picture in their heads. They need to see the guy climbing the mountain or swinging the sword. When you're talking about why something happens, it's okay to leave the reader wondering somewhat (I agree that a lot of caveats are needed here.).

2. As to the question of why something is happening, you should try to lead the reader to the proper conclusion, but I'd rather leave it open to interpretation than overexplain. I think its more distracting/annoying to tell too much than it is to risk confusion.

Finally, to answer the actual question (if you haven't fallen asleep yet...), I'm not sure I can do it in the abstract. Another example:

"Get out of my way!" The character performs an action meant to convey that he is in a hurry.

I think it's okay to do it this way:

"Get out of my way!" Jimmy Joe Jim Bob shuffled his feet quickly.

Rather than needing to add this:

"Get out of my way!" Jimmy Joe Jim Bob shuffled his feet quickly trying to get around the large woman in front of him.

I'd rather keep my writing concise and risk the reader not knowing exactly why JJJB is shuffling his feet.

Some specific examples from my book:

I describe the character acting furtively, pulling out this bottle of pills. He looks all around the room. He tips the bottle up. Then, he puts it back down and heads to the door to look outside. I leave the text there as "He peered outside." My commentor wants me to add: to look for possible intruders who might catch him in the act.

In another place, I've described in some detail the effect of this drug and why he uses it. I'd prefer to leave the text as "Some licuna seeds (what I called the drug) would sure help." My commentor wants me to add: to clear the fog from my brain.

Again, this is an issue of style between me and him. His background is technical writing, and he wants everything spelled out. I think he goes to far.

Did that help clarify it?

 

[Penpilot]

Did that help clarify it?

Definitely.

For the most part, I'm on board with you with the two principles of the "rule". The only difference is in the last part of principle two of where it says its more distracting/annoying to tell too much than it is to risk confusion. My philosophy is I'd rather err on the side of telling a little to much and as you've said you'd rather err on telling a shade too little.

Fair enough, I respect that.

 

[Lawfire]

Can you give an example of some well-known books that you like that only use "said", or at least use other tags infrequently enough that it doesn't bother you?

I opened the book I just finished, "Buried Prey" by John Sandford (not fantasy), to a random page in the middle. The next five pages included 44 uses of "said" and 5 uses of "asked." There are 4 instances where action was used to indicate the speaker. There were 16 pieces of dialogue that flowed dynamically in response to other pieces and had no tag. There was one use of the tag, "agreed," and one use of the tag, "suggested."

 

[JCFarnham]

In all honesty, it's a matter of how tolerent you are towards these things. If you've always had people telling you said is evil, you'll probably not think twice about reading a book which alternates between different tags. And vice versa of course.

I've seen advice pushing "only use said", I've seen a lot of "switch it up" from teachers and the like. Philip Athens (not only a writer but a respected editor and publisher of sorts himself) for example doesn't care for the "said only" advice. He'd rather you make it interesting. Then there's the Fowler's, minimalist, conservation of words, invisible author point of view that's really popular.

So really, no way is better... as such. Just depends on your preferences and tolerences. Same as anything else in writing and reading. If you don't like mystery you don't write it, right?