Our guest today is Paul D. Marks, author of over thirty
published short stories in a variety of genres, ranging from noir to straight
mystery, satire to serious fiction, including several award winners. In a
previous life, he was a script doctor and is also the last person to have shot
on the fabled MGM backlot before it bit the dust to make way for housing. Read
more about Paul at his website. -- AP
Did Ya Hear the one About the Two Navy Seals?
A Different Take on Dialogue
A Different Take on Dialogue
So, one Navy SEAL says to the other as they're free falling,
hurtling toward earth, "Well, Joe, that's your ripcord and it's what you
pull to open your chute, and if you screw up the ARR kicks in– "
"ARR?"
"Automatic Ripcord Release–"
"What's that do?"
"It opens your chute if you don't do it at the preset
altitude."
"Altitude? What's that?" (And with the state of today's
schools that could be a serious question.)
Much has been written
about expository dialogue, in which two or more people pour out gallons of info
and back-story because the author needs to get that info to the reader. But one
of my pet peeves is when you have two characters who explain things to one
another that shouldn't need explaining. Like one SEAL telling another how to open
a parachute, a silly example maybe, but I've seen it happen frequently. These
two people should both know this stuff from the get-go. But because the writer,
for the screen or book, needs to get some info out, they have these two people
telling each other what they should already know. And believe me, if you don't
know how your chute works when you're screaming toward Earth, you're in deep $#*@&#$.
Another example of
this might be where you have two supposedly experienced bomb squad disposal
techs and one explains to the other how to disarm a bomb. I hope by the time
they're out in the field they both know what the hell they're doing. Still, another
example of this is when one character says to another "Remember when you
_____" (fill in the blank), simply so the writer can get info out to the
audience in an "infodump".
We can see examples of
this in both the recent mega hit Avatar
and the classic sci-fi noir Blade Runner.
And though the examples I cite below are from films (as that is my primary
background,) it happens in novels all the time as well.
Selfridge, the project
administrator in Avatar, explains to
Dr. Grace Augustine things she would already know: "This is why we’re
here. Unobtanium. Because this little gray rock sells for twenty million a
kilo. No other reason. This is what pays for the party. And it’s what pays for
your science. Comprendo?" Well, duh, at least from her point of view.
In Blade Runner, Captain Bryant gives Rick
Deckard, a replicant hunter, a lecture about replicants, something the
experienced Deckard would easily already know. Isn't he like the best replicant
hunter around?
There are ways to
avoid doing these things. For example, have a trainee or novice along and the
character(s) can explain to the newbie what's going on as in my example below
from my novel White Heat. Determine
if it is really necessary to explain all the details or does the writer just
want to show off all that research and esoteric knowledge?
Or go inside the characters' heads as they talk themselves through the steps or remember back to their first time doing it. There are also other ways to get things across, for example, a news story on television, an unslept-in bed, a picture frame turned upside down, an open suitcase. A gun in a drawer. Why is it there? Will it be used later? But the bottom line to remember is to dole things out in small doses. Also, while you as the author may need to know everything there is to know about your characters and their back-stories, your reader doesn't. They only need to know what is pertinent to the story.
Or go inside the characters' heads as they talk themselves through the steps or remember back to their first time doing it. There are also other ways to get things across, for example, a news story on television, an unslept-in bed, a picture frame turned upside down, an open suitcase. A gun in a drawer. Why is it there? Will it be used later? But the bottom line to remember is to dole things out in small doses. Also, while you as the author may need to know everything there is to know about your characters and their back-stories, your reader doesn't. They only need to know what is pertinent to the story.
In my new thriller, White Heat, Duke and Jack, the two
detectives, are ex-Navy SEALs. And though one might have more expertise in one
area and the other in another, they both went through the same training. Have a
similar understanding of weapons, explosives, tactics and the like. (Diving and
parachuting as well, though those skills aren't needed in the story.)
Since guns and weapons are second nature to both Duke and
Jack, it wouldn't make sense for them to discuss what kind of gun is best for self-defense
with each other. So instead, I had Duke take his client Laurie to a gun range
and teach her how to shoot. Here is an excerpt from White Heat that gets across info to a character who needs to know
it so she can protect herself.
She had planned to buy a short
barreled .38 Colt revolver. Not a bad choice for someone unfamiliar with guns. A
revolver is good since it's easier to use and clean than a semi-auto. .38's not
a bad size bullet, especially if you go with a Plus-P. If she'd asked me, I
would have recommended a .357 and maybe a little longer barrel. Short barrel's
good for concealability, which she wanted. But less accurate. Everything's a
tradeoff.
I want to get the
above info out. But if Duke or Jack were to explain this to each other it would
be silly. So Duke explains it to someone who doesn't know much about guns or self-defense.
Yes, it's still exposition – and you do have to have exposition – but it's not
as forced as it would be if Duke and Jack were saying it to each other. Also
notice that I didn't use direct dialog, instead the narrator, Duke, who is also
the main character, summarizes the things he told Laurie so we avoid a boring
question and answer session between them.
Yes, there is information that needs
to be imparted to the reader. But out and out exposition can be deadly, whether
in dialogue or description. So it needs to be doled out in small doses and only
what's necessary. The reader doesn't need to know that on Friday at 5:15pm the
character bought a mocha Frappuccino® with a soupcon of caramel, a dollop
of whipped cream and a light dusting of nutmeg, unless of course that character
is Niles Crane, or the time they bought the Frappuccino® is relevant to the plot – maybe
it's their alibi?
There is, of course,
so much more to say about dialogue, good and bad. What are some of your pet
peeves?
Thanks for joining us today, Paul! -- AP
Thanks for joining us today, Paul! -- AP
