Style…Have You Got It?

A recent link to a fun website prompted a discussion on Facebook. And it raised some interesting questions. Mainly this: do we ever adjust our style when we write a different genre, or do we write every genre in exactly the same style?

Here’s the link.  It ‘analyses’ your writing ‘style’ and then tells you what famous author you write like most. When I tried it I got one response for my historical novel, Sword of Mordrey, and another for a short dark metaphysical piece. So, this made me wonder: Do some authors write in the same voice and style, no matter what the subject matter or genre? And do others adjust their style to somehow better ‘fit’ the writing they are taking on?

Some people feel that changing sentence length or word choice is not changing one’s style. That using long flowing sentences would not constitute using a different style, for instance. But I think it does. Imagine if you read something by Hemingway that had long compound sentences and many esoteric four-syllable words. Would you recognize it as Hemingway? What if it was also written in present tense and utilized many semi-colons? What if it used parenthesis for asides? Starting to sound more like Neil Gaiman now, aren’t we?

Most published authors write within only one genre. It’s very common. And so perhaps their ‘style’ is one they’ve found works best for that genre? Imagine your favorite author. What does that author write? Probably s/he writes your favorite genre: horror, political thrillers, mystery, fantasy, whatever. Now, try to imagine that same author writing in a genre that is the extreme opposite. Would their exact same style work? I really want to know what you think, here. So please consider this carefully and leave a comment.

I recently had an interesting experience. For the past couple of years I have been working on Sword of Mordrey. It’s an historical novel set in 1100. So, it’s medieval. When I set out to write a medieval novel I had a certain voice in my head as to how the characters of this time period would speak, and also the voice I would use to describe events to the reader. Many of the folks in the writers groups I attended during the past two years know my writing only as this voice, having never read any of my horror, or literary writing. So, when I submitted a dark, literary, metaphysical humor piece, it was met with resistance and shock by a some. Which both interested me, and made me smile.

It interested me because it got me thinking about how easy it would be to get pigeon-holed into only one genre as a published author. Readers expect something familiar from authors they like. We want to know ahead of time just what we are getting. And this reaction made me smile because it reminded me there is not just one writer inside me, but many. My bag of tricks is so big even I can’t see the bottom. Which I find reassuring.

Still, I like to think that even if I changed my genre, changed my word choice and sentence length—someone who really knows my writing would still recognize it. And perhaps that is the illusive thing we call style.

Writers: do you write in more than one genre? Do you use exactly the same word choices, sentence syntax and length, etc, for each genre? Or do you adjust your style? How do you define style?

Readers: Are you ‘upset’ when a favorite author writes different than you are used to? Do you prefer reading authors who stick to one genre and don’t deviate from it? If so, why?

Here’s an interesting link to an article on writing style.

Dialogue: 4 Easy Ways to Improve Yours

There are a variety of mistakes to be made with dialogue. Thankfully, none of them are life-threatening. If you make them your neighbors won’t find you unconscious on the floor of your study and have to call 911.

These mistakes should still be avoided, however. They show up in most of the stuff I read by new writers. And they sometimes (cringe) show up in my own first drafts. But that’s before I have gone in after them, Bowie knife clenched between my teeth. (It’s a red pen, really, but I like to pretend.)

The first one of these boring little tension ruiners is dialogue that is too direct, as in the case of these two characters who meet in the break room where one of them is using the copier:

“Hi, Sandy. How are you?” Crystal put her papers in the copier and pressed start.

“I’m fine, Crystal. How are you?” Sandy walked over to the copier.

“I’m okay. I’m busy today.”

“Oh, you’re busy today? Me too.”

Blah, blah, blah…you get the idea. Who gives a hoot about these two chicks, right? This exchange doesn’t tell us anything about what’s going on inside these characters’ heads. It’s all surface. They sound like robots. And there’s no tension in their exchange. Tension comes from conflict. Conflict in dialogue is attained by showing that one character wants something that causes the other character to resist. Like this:

Man: “I think we should move in together.”

Woman: “I think you should put your shoes back on. Your socks stink.”

Okay, admittedly I am writing this late at night and am possibly a little punchy from lack of sleep. But you can see what’s going on here, right? He wants to talk about moving in together, and she doesn’t. They are in opposition.

To write interesting dialogue you must first know your characters, and you must understand what their motivations and desires are.  And then you must thwart them, as soundly as possible. And, while you’re at it, if you can amuse your reader or arouse some other unexpected emotion in them, so much the better.

So…dialogue should have conflict, and be interesting or amusing.

Another dialogue mistake I often see is the dreaded information dump:

“Hello. My name is Sam Brown and I have been sent by xyz detective agency, where I am the top P.I. to investigate the murder of the beautiful stripper who was killed here late last night when nobody was around to hear her screams.”

Ugh, right? Wouldn’t Sam be more interesting if he was portrayed as a cool cat with an air of mystery about him? And some of this could certainly be given to the reader as exposition or description. Like this:

A man in a black suit stepped into the back room of the strip club. Taking care to avoid the congealing pool of blood on the floor around the body, he withdrew an ID from his breast pocket and flipped it open for me.

“Sam Brown, xyz agency.” He lifted his chin in the direction of the girl on the floor. “Beautiful girl.” He flipped his ID closed and it disappeared back into his pocket. “Family’s hired me to find out who ruined her day.”

Leaving your reader wanting to know more is rarely a bad  thing. It’s what keeps them turning pages. We don’t have to front load every detail into a scene. Just give them enough to keep them reading, and to avoid confusion. More than that is too much.

So…have conflict and interest, but don’t spill the beans.

The third dialogue mistake I see in manuscripts is all dialogue, and no description or exposition or internalization. This can work for a while, but when it goes on for pages and pages, it’s boring. Not even Hemingway could pull this off. So, unless you are better at dialogue than the Grand Poobah of dialogue himself, best to steer away from endless dialogue. Give the reader some info about who’s speaking, what’s going on, and why the reader should care.

Lastly we come to the use of tags.

Some writers feel these should never be anything other than he said, she said. That we should never say she yelled, or he whispered, he whimpered or she cried. I don’t agree. I do think these should be kept to a minimum, however. And well written dialogue can make these sorts of tags unnecessary. But sometimes they are okay to use, and as long as they are not excessive I think most readers are fine with them.

No tag at all is the best option, as long as we don’t lose or confuse the reader. One of the best ways to accomplish not using a tag is to use an action to identify who is speaking:

“I think you should put your shoes back on. Your socks stink.” Jezebel held Fred’s shoes out to him.

“Won’t you at least consider moving in together?” Fred reached for his wingtips.

For the next few lines of dialogue you could get away without identifying the speaker. We are following their conversation and the opposing sides are enough to tell us who is speaking. But after several lines it is a good idea to add another action to verify for the reader who is speaking. If the reader has to stop and try to figure it out, that’s bad. We’ve lost her, and the flow is interrupted.

You could even add something to this scene by giving the reader a peek inside one character’s head. Like this:

“I think you should put your shoes back on. Your socks stink.” Jezebel held Fred’s shoes out to him.

“Won’t you at least consider moving in together?” Fred reached for his wingtips. He knew he should have done a more thorough search for the Camembert he’d dropped down the couch last week.

Puts a whole different spin on what’s happening, doesn’t it? Poor Fred. His feet don’t really stink. He’s just a shoddy housekeeper.

Still…I don’t think Jezebel should move in with him. Maybe it’s the wingtips.

So, to recap: dialogue should have conflict and should never be mundane or boring. It should not be used to give too much information. It should not go on and on for pages without any description or action to break it up. And should not distract us with the overuse of tags.

Dialogue should also move the plot along and give the reader insight into the characters. But if you master the four techniques I’ve suggested, then the rest will follow.

It’s none of their business that you have to learn how to write. Let them think you were born that way.
                                                                                                                                                                                          Ernest Hemingway

 

Writers: What things bother you when you’re reading dialogue? Is there anything you find distracting?  What dialogue situations cause you problems in your own writing? Do you prefer writing dialogue or descriptive passages? How do you know when you have the balance right? How do you feel about the use of tags?