In the world of copy editing and line editing for fiction and creative nonfiction, professionals are moving away from attacking anything unusual or not completely buttoned up with red pens. At the same time, there is one convention that seems to stick around. It may be time soon for people move away from an overly-prescriptivist view of dialogue tags. How to handle dialogue tags are a hard-and-fast rule in a space that is not supposed to have hard-and-fast rules. Rarely has much thought has been put into why.
It is pretty clear we are in an intriguing era for editing. Book people are moving away from always expecting buttoned up, “presentable” standard English so writers can access and convey all parts of themselves.
You are here to help, not to be the “um, actually” police. Why fuss over ending a sentence with a preposition? These are the sort of topics we don’t need to argue over. Comma splices? They don’t bother me, it’s all good. Splitting infinitives? To be even somewhat bothered by this sort of thing feels frivolous to most everybody nowadays. Am I going to be bogged down by sentence fragments in a novel? Not a chance.
If you are editing a memoir or a fiction piece, the author—quite rightly—won’t appreciate attempts to convert a client’s historical fiction novella about a switchboard operator hungry for love into verbiage appropriate for a letter to the homeowner’s association disputing code ordinance fees.
The most key goal of a line editor or a copy editor is to alleviate confusion and help the existing writing strengths of a manuscript shine brightly. This is hardly news to the audience for a blog post about dialogue tags.
Fiction and creative nonfiction copy editors make possible juicy, bingeable fan favorites you love or the crisp and bold literary pieces you treasure. They make the book easy to pick up and hard to put down again.
They toss out or question distractions and mistakes. They protect a reader’s much overtaxed, vulnerable attention like the story’s troubled, rather tired bodyguard.
Amy J. Schneider, a copyeditor who can boast of a portfolio of down-to-Earth self-help guides, chilling suspense, and whimsical fantasy, wrote a guide to her life of work. She writes that “the copyeditor is like a continuity supervisor on a movie setup…the copyeditors job is to ferret out these errors and help the author eradicate them so they don’t pull the reader out of the story” (14).
Schneider makes it clear that copy editors need to strike a balance. They should not eliminate discrepancies simply because they are nonstandard. “Don’t fix it if it is intentionally broke,” she cautioned. “Overly pedantic copyeditors are the bane of the fiction author’s world. Don’t be one” (10).
Hold the phone? Hold the ponies in a stall right now, friend! Schneider cannot ‘caution.’ That is not an acceptable dialogue tag. There are no two ways about it. Using language in this way is simply not allowed, even though it is immediately understandable to someone with a native or intuitive grasp of English. Everyone listening knows what I meant, but that doesn’t seem to matter in this day and age.
While we weren’t looking, one specific wordsmithing convention took a dramatic, inviolable hold on book people everywhere, even as these same professional sing the praises of nonstandard English. Somehow, fussiness over use of unconventional dialogue tags has become the most pampered of editors’ sacred cows.
I believe fussiness about dialogue tags will become a zombie rule somewhat soon. Zombie rules, or outdated grammar and syntax rules, are proof that language use is always in flux. Not only does how we speak shift overtime. Assessments of what is and is not acceptable language use transforms over time. Former no-brainers for grammarians like “don’t ever end a sentence on a preposition,” and “don’t split infinitives” have dearly departed from us. I am confident that current sensibilities surrounding dialogue tags will follow its predecessors eventually to zombie law cemetery, even if it will take a decade or two to fade out.
To the uninitiated, a dialogue tag serves as a link between dialogue and the rest of the sentence the dialogue finds a home in. It often establishes who was speaking and commonly gives off other indications about what is going on—such as the speaker’s mood or how the words were said.
The most conventional, most ubiquitous dialogue tag is “said.” Dialogue tags can convey dialogue delivery, such as with “screamed,” “shouted,” “whispered,” and “muttered.” Other mainstays include “asked,” “claimed” or “questioned,” which are words rooted in how dialogue is an exchange of thoughts.
Bottom line, the most accessible dialogue tags have direct, no-nonsense ties to how people physically speak or how people think their thoughts. Many, if not most, copy editors (and a fair portion of editors besides) see these conventional dialogue tags as the only way to go. At least a few of these same professionals love Kormac McCarthy and James Joyce somehow, as well.
Don’t get me wrong, there’s are several dozen “acceptable” dialogue tags to choose from. A writer can get considerable mileage out of what is available and immediately acceptable to editors. Even so, a part of writing is about breaking boundaries and exploring new experiences— finding the puzzle pieces that fit just right into what a writer is trying to convey. Bending the rules when it comes to dialogue tags may just be what the piece needs.
Unusual Dialogue Tags Cut Fluff
If I say in your face, “go away,” you know I am talking to you. “Go away!” is understood to actually mean “(You) go away!” In the same frame of mind, consider…
“She is wearing makeup, dingus,” Lucy rolled her eyes. “Lots of it, in fact. I can’t believe my own dear little brother can’t see that—like you’re some 4chan basement dweller.”
It is pretty snotty to retort to such a sentence with “You can’t speak by rolling your eyes.” Such a statement is true, but I thought bookish-types liked writing that cuts to the chase. Don’t play dumb. You knew who was speaking and what the author meant. This unusual dialogue tag succinctly nails down how Lucy said her statement without more hokey adverb choices instead. Switching things to “Lucy said while rolling her eyes,” mars the sentence. It draws attention to the fiction as fiction. If ‘said while’ is added, it renders the readers more aware that we are staring at marks on paper rather than learning a story.
Some editors would expect this fix instead:
“She is wearing makeup, dingus.” Lucy rolled her eyes. “Lots of it, in fact. I can’t believe my own dear little brother can’t see that—like you’re some 4chan basement dweller.”
You can’t speak by rolling your eyes. That is so vitally important.
But, isn’t it harder now to attribute the dialogue to Lucy as intended instead of easier? Following the rules here just makes things more complicated for no reason. Even if the change only amounts to replacing a period with a comma, there is a shift. A shift backwards, I think.
Other Mediums Mess with the Act of Speaking and Being Heard
Unconventional dialogue tags often specialize in what is happening to parts of a speaker’s face outside of the mouth, what is going on in the speaker’s body, the energy in the room, or the relationship the speaker maintains with others. Part of the reason I am pulling for less stuffy handling of dialogue tags comes from my love of comics and poetry. The wide range of experiences these two storytelling modes specialize in can seep into prose as well if we actually allow it to.
In comics, there are so many different choices that alter how a piece of script is seen. From typeface to caption shape to character “framing” and “blocking,” comics writers have option after option to give a piece of text a whole host of different connotations. A sparce, simple “I’m fine” can be accessorized in all sorts of transformative ways.
In tiny text with cramped letters, a reader can surmise the speaker is whispering or does not have confidence. If the “I’m fine” text is bordered with flames, some sneaking suspicion tells me the speaker is not happy. Panel composition and facial expression determines whether this fiery passage is a brash expression of confidence or a homicidal warning—as well as how much danger the speaker’s adversaries are in. Whether the threat was delivered with quiet venom or was yelled out loud could also be customized through clever art direction.
There are so many bright, colorful options. More speech in prose books can be affixed to the world around it with flair, whimsy, and an openness to ambiguity. Imagine writing a novel in-verse and wringing your hands over conventional use of dialogue tags. Following convention would make most lines unwieldy and awkward. Ideas would not cascade in sequence in the way that best accommodates the comfortable, snug magic of contemporary free verse.
Writers Elsewhere “Get Away with It”
Words matter and editing matters. No one doubts that. Reducing complications in most instances makes the ‘seams’ of the story, the contrived aspect of staring at a piece of paper and enjoying the scripted daydream that comes pre-packaged with it, less conspicuous. Ruling out ambiguities as well can often make the resulting, more polished story a much more competent host to your honored guest. Using the immediately acceptable sort of dialogue tag continues to have its right time and place. Straying from this convention must be done carefully. The certainty, however, among people in this line of work about which dialogue tags are valid and which ones aren’t is what I take issue with.
Somewhere along the road, we book people decided there are two types of books. First, there is literary fiction alongside its cousin, the more polished, more flighty pieces of genre fiction (the ones that “elevate the genre” as it is so often said). Those brainier books get to be new and strange and ephemeral in their expression. For these golden children, quotation marks are optional and overstuffed paragraphs are fine. The tiniest glimmer of guidance for the reader as to what is going on is acceptable so long as much deeper is afoot.
In contrast, normal, more everyday ‘girl-next-door’ stories must follow pretty much every rule at all times with only minor affordances begrudged here and there. They are popcorn movies in print form and ought to know their place. Accessible storytelling can have a bit more flavor than it is currently allowed to have. A story does not have to be Finnegan’s Wake to take a chance or two.
Allow for the occasional unconventional dialogue tag. It will be ok. If these strange dialogue tags are all over the draft, slashing and burning them will only lead to clumsy, uninspired replacements.
Many Rules Are Made to Be Broken—Most Do Still Have Some Purpose
Focus entirely on if the unconventional dialogue would lead to excess confusion. “Excess” is the key here. This isn’t a manual we are working on, here. Is it truly clear who is talking? In a group setting, could the dialogue in question be attributed to another character present rather than the one intended. Is it possible that the figurative in your unconventional language could be read as literal? A ghost character probably shouldn’t metaphorically dissipate or float away. A plantlike being probably shouldn’t metaphorically wilt. A sentient crystal shouldn’t metaphorically shatter. Warriors shouldn’t battle with words before coming to actual blows.
By far, the most common, most serious problem unusual dialogue tags can cause is rendering it unclear who is talking. Is the character grimacing the one awkwardly giving the bad news or the one poorly receiving it? One fix is a more macro sort of thing. Clearer characterization elsewhere overall would make the answer to the reader intuitive. Revising the sentence immediately before or after may be the root of the offending confusion, as well. Having characters refer to themselves by name can help, too.
“Mom, you’re the best ever,” Lucy glittered as she pranced around the house feeling like a little kid again with her childish talk. Her dear mother braved the notoriously difficult baked Alaska recipe just for her daughter’s birthday.
Without this character addressing her mother by name, it may be hard to discern that Lucy is talking. But there is more than one fix out there. There is more than one way to skin a cat. It is much easier to reject a nuanced manuscript problem and put a Band-Aid on it rather than truly sit with the issue and sus out a more comprehensive solution. I just wanted to rattle this binary between acceptable and unacceptable dialogue tags. The difference doesn’t seem nearly as sturdy as I was promised.
Unusual Dialogue Tags as Figurative Language
Unusual dialogue tags are a form of figurative language. It is often best if the figurative language is so common and so flush with the way we go about life it doesn’t even feel figurative anymore—like how you might say “I see” when you’ve grasped a concept or say “That book is rather light” when the story is easy or pleasant.
Sometimes in books, a character’s eyes “darken.” Eyes don’t darken, but if your eyebrows are frowning, the eyes look darker. The grimace brings emphasis to and intensifies the shadows around your eyes.
Let’s incorporate that little tidbit into a piece of dialogue, perhaps:
“Another stunt like that—” Gillian darkened while clutching her clearly quite stupid charge close. “—is an easy way to get yourself killed, little man, along with everyone else here.”
Context tells us who is talking, and this dialogue tag clearly outclasses other potential replacements like ‘roared’ or ‘said with venom’ or whatever. No replacement I can think of delivers quite the same mood I imagine for this scene. ‘Darkened’ though, makes it clear Gillian cares and that Gillian is serious and that Gillian is genuinely wary.
Unconventional Use of Dialogue Tags Can Give a Fuller Picture to the Landscape
Now it was known for certain there was a mole in the most important case in this department’s organized crime efforts. The chummy mood at the precinct was only getting friendlier and friendlier.
“Now, my dear, stupid children—”.
At just the right moment, the door slammed opened and shut as if the thing was built just to undermine the chief.
“SIT DOWN RIGHT NOW OR I’ll BLUDEGNEON EVERYONE TO PIECES WITH THAT DOOR AND MAKE YOU BURY THE BODIES,” the chief scorched, his vision likely as red as his beety face. He singed flesh wounds into everyone—and we are no shrinking violets.
Threatening someone in a police department was probably illegal but the poor old man has been through enough today and might just make good on his threats if pushed.
This unconventional dialogue tag completes the picture of the police chief’s hot anger and its likelihood of fire to catch on the surface of any resistance he feels at the same time. This is clearly a volatile situation full of potential for emotions to get carried away.
Unconventional Use of Dialogue Tags Can Draw Upon a Reader’s Knowledge in a Lovely Way
Sandra Strand’s first day at Little Daisy Go-and-Grow Center had come with a few hitches.
Miss Sandy smoothed over her maxi-skirt while trying to not to think too much about how its hem was marred with bite after bite from “safety” scissors. All while another charge needed help with his insulin pump, no less. The pint- sized culprit took refuge under one of the tables.
At least one of this vandal’s peers would not stand for this treatment. “It is not nice when we hurt other people’s safety or learning,” the champion of justice toddler-mimicked in a coached, clearly borrowed cadence. “So…. YOU’RE BAD!” lil’ bossypants shouted right in his little face.
We have all heard the specific way someone young says something that was given to them wholesale from elsewhere. This unconventional dialogue tag draw up an exact mental image of how this little girl talked and tells you a whole lot about who this character is as a person.
Unconventional Dialogue Tags Can Reveal More About the Character’s Emotional World
“Are you sure it’s him?”, Molly deflated, clutched the shiny pins and dog tags in her little hands. Just 7 years old with her tear-ridden face and her stock-still look, her posture may as well have been bracing for a real impact.
“Are you sure he’s….gone? You need to check again. You have the wrong one, for certain,” Molly bargained. “You have the wrong guy, I’m certain of it,” she said, wilting. Saying this lie didn’t protect the way she had hoped. It didn’t do much good for Ben, either.
Here, the use of ‘deflated’ and ‘bargain’ show the evolving, constantly shifting manner this little girl is traversing as she comes to terms with her brother’s death. Readers are quite accustomed to seeing split-second shifts in emotional response on film and in comics. Following along with these unconventional, more malleable dialogue tags seems the best way to allow such a staple of other storytelling forms a place in the world of prose.
Readers Do Without Dialogue Tags Oftentimes Nowadays—They Can Stomach Non-standard Ones
In contemporary books for general audiences, it is more common to see the dialogue tags up and disappear rather than unconventional ones. I’d say it is more common than not that, if a writer wants to convey quick lobs of dialogue back-and-forth, that she would nix the dialogue tags and have context alone indicate who is talking. The only help is separating each passage with a new paragraph.
“Like this?”
“Yeah, exactly like that. Like we’ve seen in books a thousand times.”
“Oh, maybe we need to get back to the regular text.”
“Oh, yep, let’s head back”
Nowadays, novels in verse are far from uncommon and epistolary-type novels incorporate everything from emails to bank statements to text messages. On top of this, most everyone makes it through high school reading at least one play in script form.
Bottom line, audiences are better equipped to ascertain connective tissue between dialogue that does not stand up, dance, and announce its presence than they are given credit for.
Drive My Engagement Up—Where’s My Strongly-Worded Letters?
Perhaps some will reconsider at least a little of their practice? Just as likely, I will get hate mail crafted with impeccable syntax and written with grammar which is completely beyond reproach. That would make for an interesting read.
In writing, rules can be broken so long as the rules are considered. Know that a dialogue tag not rooted in thought or speech may be objected to on principle. More importantly, they may not be a practical idea in all contexts. At the same time, though, dialogue tags cannot be this magic exception to creative license. Choosing to be a stickler over one thing and one thing only isn’t sound logic.
Of course, it is easy for me to say all this. When it comes to books, I am a big picture thinker more than anything else. I have copyedited and line edited, and it does access a different part of your brain than developmental editing. My bread-and-butter is developmental editing and market research, but so many of the independent editors I know do line edits or copyedit. I am just wondering why this issue is such an open-shut case for many people.
“Who died and made the pedant behind this rule boss,” Rachel chafed indignantly. “Although, there is a point to be made here,” Rachel deigned to concede. “The fundamentals are, well, fundamental for a reason. Straying from the more accepted dialogue tags is always a little risky, but everything we ever do is a risk,” Rachel said, conceding for real this time. “But like most things, ‘it depends.’ It seems like pretty much everything boils down to ‘it depends’.” Rachel wrapped things up, a bit worried about her overdeveloped capacity to argue with herself.
