#Love how I said sentences can't just have 24 commas shoved into them & then took that advice not at all huh 😂

[sothischickshe]

Writing ask games are so fun!!

Dialogue or description? Why is the other one so hard?

I was JUST talking to a friend about this! Do you have a preference for narrative versus summary styles? Is either more challenging than the other?

Thank youuuu 🥰🥰🥰🙇🏼‍♀️ & 🤝I agree they are fun (+ maybe capable of shaking something loose 😅)

Although coming in hot with the hard question/s I see! 😅😄

Okay: dialogue vs description... I'm not sure I have a preference?! I like writing both, and I think both are challenging, especially to do well/succinctly.

And... ~it depends!! I find writing dialogue pretty fun generally, but if I'm writing Beth & rio speaking to each other my face gets grumpy & lots of stuff ends up crossed through bc I tend to violently dislike it when they speak (🤯🤯🤯) & also they're so taciturn, nonsensical, insane etc.

And description! I mean what even is that! Of settings, of ppl, of outfits, of how ppl are speaking (eg volume, pitch, facial expressions & movements etc)...? It's a huge topic to lump together as a preference no, and not to be that guy (just kidding! I love to be that guy!) there's no reason dialogue couldn't be descriptive eg 'what did the man look like?' '18ft tall with 7 feet and bright purple scales'.

So first of all: kinda false dichotomy maybe? But most of all: deffo false dichotomy, in that I think the really hard bit is knitting them together! Just back and forth dialogue btwn (espec only 2 characters, particularly of different genders so you can rely on pronouns as identification) isn't so hard, and neither is finding ways to describe whatever needs describing: and even if the latter doesn't come super naturally, I think if you can identify what needs more detail to bring it to life, that's a workable challenge. The heavvvvy difficulty is tying them together dynamically, & unforcedly!

~conversations (I'd say beyond only dialogue, bc there could be unspoken communication via say eye contact, body language, movement etc) can be a great way to pepper in descriptive texture (eg of the environment, the objects characters are interacting with, the characters & their physical responses) but it's a fine balancing act!

Typically when I'm reading a conversation, I want to know what the other person says next in response!! I don't always want a lot of superfluous detail abt where their fingers are dallying!! That can take the reader out of the rhythm of the dialogue! If there's a paragraph of motion and detailed description btwn each spoken line and/or relevant gesture, I might simply forget what the heck they're responding to by the time we get there!!

So I think ^structure & rhythm/pace (as well as what pov it's filtered through) become v important. If it's a "dialogue" scene btwn oh let's say 2 v taciturn annoying insane etc chars where actually only about 3 lines of speech are exchanged, having a lot of additional descriptive texture can help. If the responses are being eked out, then a lot of glaring & gesturing & looking away at other stuff indeed makes sense to be happening & makes sense that it would be noticed by the pov character. Whereas if it's a rapid fire screaming match, too much detail & motion can slow the scene down, be distracting for the reader & easily seem unrealistic for the pov character (eg why are they staring at the actions of each individual finger when it was established a moment ago they were glaring into another character's eyes? How are they taking in & enumerating micromovements when they're established to be apoplectic with rage & incapable of focus?).

I'm trying to type up a ragged paper first draft atm, and what I've been struck by for the dialogue + description sections is:

too many dialogue tags! In order to convey who is (still, sometimes) speaking + shove in some relevant description, there can end up being too much he says she says where it doesn't need to be specified, which can get clunky & repetitive, and inevitably slows scenes down

Too much/fussy visual detail -- description can be fun, but ultimately writing can never convey visuals the way TV/film/comics can. It's easy to fall into the trap of trying to make the reader 'see' the story, but again I think this runs the risk of slowing things down too much and also if everything is described in detail, it makes it difficult for the reader to pick up on what's important (but conversely, if only the important things are described, it can make it too obvious what's plot-critical)

Beth and rio are... There I guess? And... Wearing clothes maybe? And rhea is there!! Let me describe to you her entire outfit, including each pocket in vivid detail 😂 (the author might like one character more than the others and maybe she should just leave it like that cos she's right!!!!)

Sentences aren't that load-bearing!! You can't realllly just throw 24 commas into one and pray it makes sense, which can make knitting dialogue + description together more challenging, espec in terms of trying to keep sentence structure varied (eg not 12 in a row starting with a pronoun or name, or SVO generally)

I'm looking fwd to one day being at the editing stage to find solutions 😊 & I don't know if I'm cheating but I deffo vote for an idealised seamless combo as the really challenging bit!!

Which leads clumsily onto your second q, narrative vs summary styles, to which I'll start by saying (since it is the brand): false dichotomy...?

Firstly cos I'd probs term it ~scenic vs summary (given that I think summarisation IS still [or does still have? 🤔] narrative), but also bc they frequently operate in combination, and, as ever, ~it depends.

Dialogue (+ description) scenes are probs the perfect vehicle for the combo! In order to keep dialogue snappy & engaging, over realism, things like pauses or repetition are often culled from the genuine "spoken bits", and summarised eg 'he agreed & they organised the next meeting', 'he said her name again', 'she ummed & ahhed, until eventually admitting it'.

Additionally, I generally prefer summarised dialogue when characters are remembering something from the past, rather than them apparently having perfect recall of a conversation from ages ago. This also allows for them remembering in full detail one or two choice lines that were yelled @ them to stand out!!

Likewise, this switch is a device that can be employed to display information about the pov character/'s ~mood eg is there a full record of conversation with one character vs with others it's simply summarised? Or are their scenes with character/s when they're on good terms detailed vs ones where they're on the outs just staccato summaries? Or indeed vice-versa! What are they paying attention to, and what are they comfortable expressing even to themself?

Ppl talk about the difference btwn the two styles (& indeed showing vs telling) as if they're absolute, but I'm not sure I adhere to that. If you have a character who is v matter of fact (at least in some scenarios), their pov might come across as summarisation rather than scenic; if you have a character that doesn't want to engage with their interiority (at times anyway), scenes might veer twds the telling side. That's not necessarily bad!

Ultimately I think it depends on the type of story! Many will have both 'proper' scenes & summarisation, and I think they work particularly well in concert bc of the contrast! The latter is often used to convey the passing of time succinctly (although I think that can be done scenically too, eg with the length of them, or bg deets), and I'm a proponent of allowing things to be glossed over which arent super relevant bc the reader doesn't need to be bombarded with too much (as that makes it difficult to pick out what matters) & also cos otherwise it gets too bloody large (hell for author).

A seamless transition btwn the 2 styles (ie from general to specific) can be one of my fave narrative tricks to experience as a reader eg (à la 85% of dh Lawrence stories) 'he lived in a cottage, with a long lane behind it. Every day he took that route to work, climbing over the tall gate. The sun was shining, hot on his head & bright on the clover as he panted along', like oh OK we've arrived at the action in the middle of the establishing detail have we!!!! Conversely, it can be one of my most hated experiences to read (what! I contain multitudes 😂) eg a couple of proper scenes suddenly descending into summary with not even a line break between 🤯 (I suppose it comes down to whether it feels intentional, vs messy? 🤔)

& I think both have challenges! A story purely composed of 'real' scenes runs the risk of putting too much onus on the reader -- can you know that you've conveyed what you wanted accurately as the writer? And to whom? What implicit references could be clear universally? (is an audience of a different generation or region or experiences going to pick up on things the same way?) plus a bunch of similar scenes can become repetitive -- do you need to slog through each weekly meeting, or do you just want to display one or two, then establish that they keep going on? (repetition CAN be really powerful, bc if it's established then the breaking of that routine may be v striking, but you probs don't want eg the minutiae of several similar council meetings if they're not super plot relevant.)

But is summary too simplistic? Is stating things removing needed ambiguity? Are these things which could have been displayed elsewise and/or earlier?

I'm not sure I have a preference, and I'm not sure they can realllly be separated out (most proper snapshot scenes will have some degree of summarisation to them), and I think ~summarised storytelling gets a bit of a bad rap & is unfairly seen as juvenile where it can be such an effective way to move through time, can certainly be told v much via the pov character's lens, allows authors to skip over stuff which would bloat the story (or indeed paper over weaknesses) & can be so so effective in short stories.

Especially where the two are used in combination, I think it comes back to structure & pov for me. What's actually relevant to the story? What would the ~narrator bother to dwell on? How long do you want this monster to be?? What needs to be clear to the reader? If everything else is the other way, does diverting here feel weird or does the difference underline a change in mood/focus/whatever?

And ultimately: trying things out is the best! The more comfortable I've got/ten with being able to do different things, even if not to a very high level, the better I feel about the ability to utilise them as a tool!

Writing asks