How can I fix the stiffness on my dialogue?

Is this the sort of thing you were talking about?

The night was peaceful and perfectly clear except for a few clouds, and a gust of cold wind blew overhead. Moonlight shone on the few people unlucky enough to be out this late as they made their way around, thinking of nothing more than the workload waiting for them or what they’d have for supper. They certainly didn’t think to look above their heads, and if any of them noticed the young woman perched atop a lamppost, they paid her no mind.

She folded her arms and looked down at the waves of people entering and exiting buildings, observing each one. Had someone been watching her, they might have mistaken her for a statue. If they'd looked closer, however, they would've noticed the intensity of her stare. Her gaze darted from person to person, never wavering while on a single target.

She had to admit - if only to herself - she was a little surprised that humanity still thrived. After all, considering all the wars and attempted genocides, it was amazing that the human race hadn't wiped itself out. And a good thing too, she mused as she stood looking down at the glittering lights of the city, or she never would have been able to come to this fascinating planet.

And I apologize for plagiarizing you.

Yes. But the important thing is to understand when to recognise that you're being too formal, and what to do about it ( and both of those things will come with practice ).

Also, it's not plagiarism if I'm giving you advice or we're conversing ( you have nothing to apologise for ).

Here's another part of my novel. It's not too formal, is it?

Actually, fascinating didn't begin to describe it. In fact, perhaps the right word didn’t exist – in any language – for how she felt about this planet and its people, for how deep her yearning to visit had been, for how excited she’d been when the Council had chosen her for this mission...

The mission...

Well, my personal opinion is that it could very well be made less formal than it is, but it isn't necessarily too formal or anything.

That being said, is there any reason for the sentences being ... for a lack of better word, unfinished? Because I don't think there is one unless the character started feeling too pleasurable at the thought of it all occurring and lost coherence, but that is ... well, yeah. I mean, if you leave sentences unfinished then it's either that, the character wavering mid-sentence (clearly not the case here) or someone else interrupting (again, clearly not the case here); and while I really don't want to be a "grammar nazi" of any sort because that's not the way to go, in what you wrote it just feels weird.

edited 13th Feb '15 8:46:25 AM by Kazeto

Is this too stiff?

Silhouetted by the light of the moon, she folded her arms and looked down at the waves of people entering and exiting buildings, observing each one. Had someone been watching her, they might have mistaken her for a statue. If they'd looked closer, however, they would've noticed the intensity of her stare. Her gaze darted from person to person, never wavering while on a single target.

She had to admit - if only to herself - she found it a little surprising that humanity still thrived. After all, considering all the wars and attempted genocides, it was amazing that the human race hadn't wiped itself out. And a good thing too, she mused as she stood looking down at the glittering lights of the city, or she never would have been able to come to this fascinating planet.

If it is, what should I change?

Hey, I saw this in the Con-Crit thread!

So technically, this is okay. But rhythmically/practically, you need to fix a couple of big things.

You don't need to say "observing each one" when you're going to explain it in the next sentence.

The bolded part is confusing to me. Is she observing everyone closely IN GENERAL, or is she observing THE DETAILS OF EVERY SINGLE PERSON, ONE AT A TIME? If it's the former, then "her gaze darted from person to person, but never wavered throughout" would be clearer. If it's the latter, "her gaze darted from person to person, never staying long on a single target" is also clearer.

The second paragraph seems fine.

Which of these sounds better?

• Silhouetted against the light of the setting sun
• Silhouetted by the light of the setting sun
• Silhouetted in the light of the setting sun

edited 23rd Mar '15 2:31:40 PM by fruitstripegum

Unless you want to be avant-garde or have a reason to choose otherwise, you generally use "silhouetted against".

Why?

Because you are using "silhouetted" the same way you would use "outlined", and a shadow is outlined against light.

You could possibly use "silhouetted by", but that's when things get a bit more complicated, because if you do this you are not using the same meaning of "silhouetted" but rather one that is synonymous with "projected".

In that case you could have something projected by light, but it's probably not what you want unless your shadow is a vivid aurora due to some weird trait of the light in that place and you normally have no shadow or something. Yeah, it's as weird as it sounds.

edited 23rd Mar '15 2:46:58 PM by Kazeto

Ok.

How about she stood silhouetted against the light of the setting sun?

Ah, that one is a difference case, because the subject of the sentence is not a shadow but rather a person whose shadow we'd think would be silhouetted.

One option is to use "she stood silhouetted in the light of the setting sun". In this case silhouetted in is the one you use because it's a bit of an unusual case; to be specific, the word silhouetted is used to mean to have a silhouette, so she is standing in the light and she has a silhouette.

It's easier to understand the "why" of it if you write the sentence down as "she stood, silhouetted, in the light of the setting sun". I'd probably do that if I were writing it, but then again I like commas so that I would do it is not a reason for everyone to do it too.

Another option would be to change it to "she stood, her shadow silhouetted against the light of the setting sun". In this case I think (or at least I hope) that I don't need to explain why that would work.

edited 23rd Mar '15 4:09:11 PM by Kazeto

Well, that makes sense.

How about Silhouetted against the light of the setting sun, she folded her arms Does that sound ok?

edited 23rd Mar '15 4:11:26 PM by fruitstripegum

Sounds ... weird. Do remember that because there is no explicitly mentioned subject in that sentence, by default her shadow becomes the subject. And that means that the second part talks about her shadow but not here folding her arms, or that the latter part hijacks the subject of the sentence and she is the one silhouetted rather than her shadow.

I don't think I have to tell you why that doesn't look correct.

Sometimes the simple solution is the correct one. You seem to be trying to create a simple yet atmospheric description, which is easier to achieve if you use short sentences and flickering rather than constant information flow. It's also generally easier to achieve if you don't mix action and non-action in one sentence; instead, leave action for a new paragraph, or as a way to split longer dialogue into two parts.

Or so I say, but that's just my preference. You are free to take it or discard it, whichever you prefer.

And have this, just for fun because I have no idea what compelled me to write this:

She stood there, in the fading sunlight, as if waiting for something or someone. The silhouette of her shadow against the light grew longer and longer as the day slowly came to an end.
A gust of cool evening wind made her shiver, and she folded her arms in response. It didn't help much, she knew it wouldn't, but for some reason she could not leave, not yet.
She didn't quite know why she felt compelled to stay. By now it was cold enough to make her decidedly uncomfortable, and she would gladly exchange the view for a place to sit and a cup of tea. And yet, she felt as if watching the last of this day's sunlight was her duty, as if the dawn would not come if she left before it was time.
So she stayed, and watched as the day came to an end.

edited 23rd Mar '15 5:03:45 PM by Kazeto

I'm sorry, I should've been more specific. Here's the full sentence:

Silhouetted against the light of the setting sun, she folded her arms and looked down at the waves of people entering and exiting the buildings.

Does it sound ok?

With that, if you are intent on not saying anything about her shadow nor having anything that would be, so to say, above "silhouetted", it'd probably be best if you went with "silhouetted by the light of the setting sun, she folded her arms and looked down at the waves of people entering and exiting the buildings."

Which is the same as what you had earlier and what Sharysa had no objections to while giving you their critique, and now I am not really sure what this is all about.

Anyway, "against" is out because it's not about her shadow.

"In" is also out because you are trying to attach it to "silhouetted" rather than attach "silhouetted" to something else.

Therefore, you are left with "by", which in spite of potentially not being a good fit is the best fit you have. Essentially, something is "silhouetted by light" when it is directly between you and the light and you are in that thing's shadow.

edited 23rd Mar '15 5:41:02 PM by Kazeto

At the risk of upsetting someone with my constant questions, which of these is more accurate?

• From her perch atop the statue
• Perched atop the statue

"Accurate"? Both are. But most spoken english is "perched atop" or "perched on" depending on the slang of the character.

"Sittin' on", "On top of" etc, if you really wanna get slang-y...

You aren't upsetting anyone, fruitstripegum. The very fact that we are answering means that we are willing to give answers, and though sometimes we might be confused by something or not understand the "why" of it, there's no need to be upset either way. Especially since you asking means that you have a reason to do so, and that you are willing to ask instead of assuming that you are the best person at it ever automatically puts you on a level "above the common masses".

Not everyone can accept that they might use advice, after all. There are people who could have been great writers but aren't because of their delusions of unquestioned superiority.

Well, that, and I have the ability to appear grumpy when I'm not, so don't mind me if I appear that way.

Leaving that behind, as TairaMai had already said, in this case both are correct. Which one will fit better is a wholly different question that I presume you meant to ask, either "instead" or "too". If that indeed is what you want to know, then I say this:

Perched atop the statue is, out of the two, the one that sounds simpler. It has one word ("perched") instead of three ("from her perch") and as such is probably the natural choice.

From her perch atop the statue, on the other hand, is more verbose-sounding. Generally, I'd consider this version if using the other one resulted in the whole paragraph feeling too short and I had to somehow enlarge it without adding more sentences. It also appears more ... let's say "atmospheric", so it is more appropriate to use if you are writing someone that will feel not unlike Film Noir in written form.

But then again, that's just what I say. Whichever you should use if both are correct is the one that feels more "you" to you. It's a matter of finding your own style and refining it as you progress ... but I guess I'm going on a tangent here.

It's not just the author, but the style of the character.

When Rp-ing, I grew to hate on character's use of long verbiage and Spock Speak. With carpel tunnel it was a pain to type out.

But I stuck with it because it fit her character (think a Gothic Lolita lovechild of Spock, Data and Starfire).

But even cool lines can grate even the author (yeah, character development, she started using contractions...and on a tangent...ow my tendons!...now back to the thread..).

As "the narrator", fruitstripegum, feel free to use whatever style fits you or the story. If you like a more Grammar Nazi third person, so be it. If you want to get "into character", adjust your style.

Some people like reading lines aloud, others just go back and see if the dialog still meshes with the character.

edited 25th Mar '15 4:06:01 AM by TairaMai

And I'll just be a Nazi from Grammer and point out that it's "Grammar Nazi", TairaMai.

Sorry but I couldn't resist that one.

Oh ... and it's "carpal" unless you are part-flower. Which admittedly would be fairly amusing and all that.

Since I'm already pointing it out and all that, I thought I'd point that one too as you either don't mind and thus won't mind or you'll kill me anyway and thus I'll just be more dead.

But yes, you are very much correct in that it is not only the style of the author but also the style of the character. When a character, any character, serves as the narrator or as the point to which you attach the narrator, then the character's personality and style of being is pretty much supposed to bleed into it; and if the narrator is merely orbiting the character but not actually attached to it, then it's whatever the author prefers.

And, as you'd said, in the end it all boils down to whatever the author feels like writing. We're all biased in various ways and there's no point in denying that it affects the things we create.

That being said, I do recommend reading the lines aloud, at the very least the dialogues. It's a rather basic method of finding out when the dialogue is decidedly unnatural. For bonus points, you could force (well, ask persistently, or bribe them with chocolate) other people to read the dialogues for you, which is especially useful if you have a kid character and you can get a kid to read it to you because it really helps with noticing when something you wrote just doesn't fit at all.

edited 24th Mar '15 9:29:28 PM by Kazeto

I would also like to ask for some advice on my writting dialogue: Have some out of context dialogue:

"She is pretty, brave and courageous, But I am very scared. That the bad guys will harm me, that you won't think of me as a hero again. Because I am her...,"

(transformation sequence revealing adult secret identity)

"....But I am more scared of my friends getting hurt. I don't want Karkull to harm you or anyone else ever again."

edited 23rd Apr '15 8:34:30 AM by RPGLegend

Basically, the main point is using contractions. Native speakers rarely use non-contracted words, unless they're emphasizing something important.

"She's pretty, brave and courageous, but I'm very scared. That the bad guys will harm me, that you won't think of me as a hero again. Because I [am] her...,"

"Because I am her" could go either way—either you emphasize "Because I AM her," to show that this is important, or you contract it and then emphasize it to "Because I'm her."

"....But I'm more scared of my friends getting hurt. I don't want Karkull to harm you or anyone else ever again."

The lack of contractions is a very small detail that can make dialogue sound stiff and awkward in a lot of cases.

Thank you very much sarysa.You have inspired me to study and practice contractions, I have learned a lot.

edited 23rd Apr '15 4:25:16 PM by RPGLegend

Realistic Diction Is Unrealistic:

This trope is an Acceptable Break from Reality; real dialogue can be unreadable. Journalists know that an interview subject can be made to look stupid by simply repeating their speech, word-for-word.^note A detailed exploration of this can be found here We enjoy the fruits of scriptwriting and acting more when they are free to be polished. Part of the reason is to make speech come across the way it's heard rather than the way it is; humans are well-adapted to interpret speech, and as a result what we experience is an interpretation of speech rather than a recording of it. Also falls under The Law of Conservation of Detail - because the time it takes for a character to correct themselves could be used for more dialogue.

Well said...

Yes, pretty much that. People generally sound a bit ... let's way "wackier", when they say things real-time, than they do when they write what they meant to say down. They repeat themselves, insert pauses in places where you wouldn't normally pause because their mouths were too fast, use weird speech patterns, and so on, and so on.

And that, on its own, is enough to make any apparent stiffness of the dialogue itself, rather than of what surrounds the dialogue in question, pretty much a moot point. Because it might or might not be how the character is actually supposed to speak; that is if the character has some sort of ... let's say "style of speech", because if the author is instead writing dialogue as if they were the ones who spoke and it's just that the character's mouth are getting used, then it goes back to the initial issue.

I don't know about everyone else, but the way these sentences are divided feels a little off.

"She is pretty, brave and courageous, But I am very scared. That the bad guys will harm me, that you won't think of me as a hero again. Because I am her...,"

... could work better as...

"She's pretty, brave, and courageous. But I'm very scared that the bad guys will harm me. That you won't think of me as a hero again. Because I am her...,"

Here, the first sentence ends at "courageous" because it's the end of a complete thought.^note I also added an Oxford Comma, because superior.

"I'm very scared" is more related to "that the bad guys will harm me" than "that the bad guys will harm me" is to "that you won't think of me as a hero again." This way, it's also a complete thought ("But" stays there as a lead-in).^note And grammatically speaking, the period between "harm me" and "That you won't" should be a semicolon; however, nobody uses semicolons the right way. That, and it just feels more right to divide it with a period.

There are also some word-choice things I'd change for sentences to flow better, but I'll ignore that for now.

edited 24th Apr '15 8:43:45 AM by AwSamWeston