If there’s one thing that immediately puts a reader off about a novel and novella, it’s badly written conversations. Even if the book has the most intriguing plot and beautiful narration, the dialogue is where the true genius of an author lies. Dialogues give readers context, character dynamics and clues for what is to come, or sometimes swoon. But if the conversations feel rigid, or few and far in between, or robotic, especially in a romance, it hinders the overall reading. In fact, it just might be a reason why some people stop reading the book altogether. But is the flow of dialogues that crucial for the narration? Is it really something one needs to stress on when you have some idea of where the story is going? Here is The Bombay Circle Press’ take on how conversations in books affect the flow of narration.
One of the major reasons why dialogues fall flat or lack depth altogether is due to a lack of dialogue tags. Sure the actual conversation and its context is important to further the plot and the overall narration in any novel and novella books. However, with the lack of dialogue tags, the reader cannot differentiate between the tones, the character’s feelings and thought process. In doing so, it also becomes difficult to keep track of who is saying what and why. While a simple dialogue like “That’s enough. We will finish this conversation tomorrow” will have multiple meanings, a lack of dialogue tags can fail to denote the severity of the situation. So, the dialogue could have been said angrily might be read as calm and vice versa. When that happens there is a good chance that they cannot distinguish between the individual voices of each character.
This brings us to our second reason—no difference in voice. A lot of the time writers fail to distinguish between the characters through their words, literally. A writer, while describing a character, might suggest that they are witty and eccentric but the same isn’t translated when they talk. So, the reader never really gets to see how the character uses wit to solve a mystery, sweet-talk their way through things, or worse say anything of value to show just how eccentric they are. This leads to a lack of distinction between characters. Sure, not every dialogue has to be a stark contrast but if a flirty character does not flirt or an old person doesn’t use lingo from a particular time, the writing all seems the same and the reader cannot distinguish between the characters’ motives.
Another thing is that the surface level writing is excess of small talk. Now we do not mean that small talk is forbidden or hampers the reading experience. In fact, in certain scenarios, it adds to the humour, establishing character dynamics and even establishing the novella book’s plot. The problem arises when small talk overshadows the actual conversation that furthers the narration. This also extends to the unrealistic and mechanical conversations some writings possess. Look at this conversation, for example between a couple who have been married for twenty years in a contemporary novella:
‘How are you?’ Ashley said.
‘Fine.’ Max replied.
‘How did you sleep?’
‘I slept quite well. Did you sleep well?’
‘Yes.’
Would you like some breakfast?’
‘Yes.’
What has this conversation told us? It’s morning and Ashley and Max woke up and are now going to have breakfast. Now there is nothing wrong with the conversation but would a couple married for twenty years talk like that? No. Not only is it unrealistic, the conversation is also almost mechanical and doesn’t add to the plot. It doesn’t tell us anything about the characters, much less the nuance and familiarity of being married for two decades.
Now, the other side of this spectrum is too much exposition. Have you ever picked up a novella book and are just bombarded with information and all the context in the world. In other words more tell and no show. When that happens, the reader is left with chunks of texts with context to understand and connect the dots. Not only that, this disrupts the flow of narration because the conversation rather than flowing like a dialogue, feels like a guide or a wise owl telling the reader clues or information. More importantly, it feels out of place and makes it seem as if there was no other way for the characters and the readers to know the context. As mentioned before, this narration also falters because one, conversations aren’t always based on ranting about a certain topic, and second, it creates a drastic difference in the description and other dialogues between the characters. Having said that, not all exposition is too much exposition. At times, characters do need to give context and be the bearer of the message (context). But the problem arises when everything is provided in one go and various intervals between scenes that feel like checkpoints in a game where one is given context for each level.
Writing conversations that feel realistic and read well can be difficult for even the most experienced writers. But there are things one must absolutely avoid to ensure that the writing doesn’t fall flat or seem mechanical. Investing time to flesh out the characters, their tone, expression and even their voice adds to a more nuanced and layered writing. Dialogue tags and appropriate exposition with the right interruptions make it more realistic and readable.