Dialogue Scenes with Little Action

I have a lot of scenes in my story that take place in settings that don't require a lot of action (two chars in the Cafeteria eating lunch, two characters discussing politics in a conference room) where the only thing happening are the characters exchanging dialogue to move the story forward and develop their characters.

Between the back and forth dialogue, I don't have anything to insert between the scenes other than "I disagree, that would cause mayhem." said Senator Balsalmic Drizzle.

Filling the dialogue spaces with their body language reactions and setting descriptions doesn't seem to go far, as there is more dialogue than action.

Is there a way to remedy this?

The easiest way would be to skip the discussion altogether unless the specific wording is in some way meaningful, and only give the readers those lines that are important; the lines that are only there to pull the discussion forward and have no use can be told about by the narrator instead, via a summation of some sort.

Pretty much . Include the lines that are meaningful, entertaining, et cetera. Otherwise, relay the general gist of the conversation to the audience, and instead focus on something else that's more meaningful for the scene. (For instance, the general reaction of the room or the characters; if a character is being platitudinous, windy, and boring, it can be more fun to focus on the other characters' reaction thereto—I recall Sir Joseph Blaine sketching on his notepad the growth of larva, pupa, imago, Rear Admiral, as a particularly dense and stubborn member of that esteemed species addressed the meeting.)

I had that same problem with a story a few months back. I just took a break until my subconscious re-calibrated the balance of the scene.

But I guess you could...

• A.) Chalk it up to your own personal writing style. Megan Mc Cafferty threw in the towel in Perfect Fifths when the main couple does a sort of Before Sunrise talking heads thing. Ayn Rand does the dialogue ping-pong match too in Atlas Shrugged and that's the least worst thing about the thing.
• B.) Introduce a barrier to the characters talking, forcing them to non-verbalize the messages.
• C.) Re-write it as exposition only, and shuffle it in with the same event scene that you wrote as dialogue-only.
• D.) A couple of helpful things I read is about dialogue. First, dialogue is when your character can tell the story better than the narrator can. Second, dialogue is usually not only information, but relationship. When there's dialogue, the speaker is trying to distract, disguise, intimidate, persuade, flatter, ingratiate themselves or something to whoever is listening. That means there could be body language to go with that as well, or reactions from the listener, or reactions to reactions, or even a change in a tone of voice (or a deliberate attempt to keep the tone of voice consistent.)

I'm terrible for writing vast tracts of dialogue and little action - seriously, I should write scripts, not prose!

What I find useful if there's a lot of dialogue that's merely exposition or explanation, I write it out in full to get the feel for what's said, how they each react to whatever it is etc, then I recast it as reported speech:

Joe then embarked on a lengthy explanation of... Bill, understandably, was quite surprised to hear that... and asked... Joe impatiently pointed out that.... before resuming his explanation of... "and that's why you'll never find unicorns running around in downtown Manhattan," Joe concluded. Bill nodded. "Just as well, from the sound of it."

That tactic doesn't completely stop me from having vast tracts of dialogue, but it does reduce it.

You're worried about talking heads in a cafeteria?

There is always something happening, even if it's at another table. Somebody might rudely shove past their chairs. The noise level rises, so characters have to talk louder or stop. There is sometimes a lull across the whole room.

The characters, you said, were actually eating. So use that to punctuate the dialogue.

You have plenty of ways to keep it from being vast tracts of dialogue. Just because a cafeteria is mundane doesn't mean it's completely uninteresting.

Same for the conference room. It's a bit more difficult, but doable. You never said if there were other people, but if it is at a meeting you can have the other characters scan the crowd for reactions, and so on.

edited 22nd Jul '15 8:52:19 AM by Leradny

I disagree with the idea of cutting it down to reported speech if its plot important. There are times and places: you don't need to see the hero buy the flowers, he can turn up with them. However central stuff does need to be there: its what demonstrates the characters.

However the wider scene is your tool here - how would you direct and edit it if it was filmed is something I use. I've been known to act out entire scenes with invisible actors and me as the lead (pro tip - make sure wife and kids are out or in bed, or they will think you have finally lost it!). What actions are the characters taking. BSOD them, and show their ineffective gestures rather than them say 'I'm unhappy'. A shrug can replace a sentence.

Compare

This is lifting for 2, as there are subtle hints in there about things in the rest of the book.

Use Scenery Porn to tug at emotions, and to demonstrate the general setting, as proxy's for the characters or their situation. A long conversation between husband and wife splitting up starts

[Lead] stood at the French windows, looking at the snow covered patio and garden. The crisp white evenness covered the dead winter disorder.

and ends

[Lead] stared at the dead, sterile garden.

Have them open their mouth, then think better of it. One of my Lead females is forever giggling at the Lead Male's unawareness, but hiding it behind drinks, forks, anything she can get to her face.

Costume Porn - Gabe points out we judge people on their clothes (yes you do).

A change of clothes can mean more than somebody pointing out the change of personality: take Eggsy in Kingsmen, wearing the suit marks a major change in his life, so much better than saying 'You are now ready'.

And don't forget, your characters have a MAJOR advantage over you. They have a script that someone has revised. You don't. You are writing on a word processor. You can draught and re-draught, and then go back and insert stuff when you realise in a hundred pages that that little note about hair colour can be a big neon arrow to the reader.

edited 22nd Jul '15 11:49:23 AM by Last_Hussar

Meaningful =/= plot-important. A scene can be meaningful if it holds thematic import, or reveals something of a character, or helps to set the mood. That it might not contribute directly to the plot, does not mean there is no reason for the camera to linger on it. Dialogue is no different in that regard.

Agreed. Though the case could be made that if it is important to the character it is plot important, if it is a characteristic that informs the reader as to how the character may react.

I think we'd all be surprised if we went through a movie and cut out all extraneous dialogue. Not just how much there is, but actually how the movie suffers. Harry Hart's 'I'm just going to finish my lovely pint of Guinness' isn't needed, but it makes the scene better.

How much these rules are not set in stone can be seen by watching 70s thriller shows such as The Sweeney or The Professionals. Bodie and Doyle are basically
ACTION Exposition in 5 lines
Plot in 3
ACTION
Snark snark
ACTION
Exposition - he did it because...
ACTION
Snark

edited 22nd Jul '15 5:15:21 PM by Last_Hussar

And I've just broken my own rule.

This is because all the actual plot has been done, its just to say to the reader 'Everything is good'

Rules are important. It makes you stop and think before breaking them