What do you think? Does a book read just as well when the dialogue between characters is not literally spelled out, but rather described in a third person? The above example obviously doesn't work because simply quoting "Hello" or "Good Morning" conveys much more with much less words than "The blogger looked alternatively at his keyboard and then at the screen while typing a greeting to the future reader." And all the writer's manuals and guidebooks state if you have something you want the characters to say, say it, rather than describe them saying it.
I am reading the second novel in the 'The Mysterious Benedict Society' series and finding myself, as I do more often than not nowadays, examining the style in which the book is written. One of the things I've found is that the writer has chosen to write about characters sharing information with each other rather than writing what it is they are exactly saying. So as an example (not from the book by the way) read the following two passages:
Jane walked up to Jake and started about how she had come this far. She had found the door open, walked in and found her brother Jake. When Jake had questioned her about it, she said that he had left a trail of dirty footprints and when the door was unlocked she had just wandered in.
...and...
Jane walked up to Jake.
"Hey," she said. "Do you want to know how I found you?"
"I was wondering about that," Jake said scratching his head.
"Well, it was quite simple actually. I found the door slightly open, and so I walked straight in."
"Well, that explains how you got into the room, but how did you know that I was actually in the room in the first place?" Jake waved his hands around.
"I followed the footprints," Jane said shrugging.
"What footprints?"
"Those muddy ones on the floor," Jane pointed at a set behind her. Jake looked down and saw that he had indeed not even noticed he had dragged his dirty feet all over the room.
"And then you didn't even bother to lock the door, so I just wandered in," Jane crossed her arms with a triumphant smile on her face.
The writer uses the first form a lot, which for me isn't as disturbing as some of the guidebooks about writing indicate. It has the added bonus that it cuts down on words, something I am very aware about lately as the 1st draft is reaching War and Peace proportions. However on the other side, the second form feels more inclusive, more personal as it draws the reader into the very discussion. It also allows for more personal traits to shine through enhancing the characterization. I can add or detract as little or much from the conversation as I like. If one of the characters is not so smart or confused, you simply add more precise questions and clarifying answers to the discussion.
So even though I personally do not find it disturbing to talk about talking, I realize it diminishes the depth of characterization in a book. So maybe for 'catch-up' conversations (where one person repeats previously discovered information to a third party) it is good, but for moments of intense plot unveiling or character development I should write out the actual conversation. I don't know. Does that seem like a good idea?
No comments:
Post a Comment