Puck Writes

I’ve always struggled with tagging dialogue. It’s such a small part of the story, that it seems like an easy thing to get right. 

Which makes it easy to get wrong. 

I know other people really struggle with tagging dialogue, too. I was in a workshop with a kid who received feedback saying he used too many attributions with adverbs and that he should generally only use said + an action. 

He submitted another piece, and they said his habit of using said + an action at the end of every line of dialogue was too repetitive and that he didn’t need to use that many dialogue tags at all. 

He submitted another piece, and they said he didn’t use any dialogue tags and they never knew who was talking. 

Then, he had a full blown meltdown in the workshop. Over dialogue tags. 

I want us all to avoid a situation like that, so I thought I would illustrate dialogue tagging rules with a sample from what is probably the piece of writing for teaching dialogue: Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants.” 

The scene is of a man and a woman sitting at a table, drinking: 

Wasn’t that bright? 

That’s good dialogue. It’s concise. It’s clear. It’s interesting. 

How does it manage that? Let’s separate the components of this except and find out.  

Here is just the dialogue:

It’s comprised of eight lines, with the woman speaking four times and the man speaking four times, in turn.  

Here are the dialogue tags. 

There aren’t very many at all. Three “she said”s and one action. 

This dialogue works well because Hemingway lets the dialogue speak for itself. Pun unintended. 

He does what every writing manual says to do. He follows THE RULES:

                                               THE RULES

Use “said.” Exclusively. “Asked,” is fine for special occasions. No adverbs. No fancy attributions. Just said the character. You know all of those lists with titles like “words you can use instead of ‘said?’” DON’T DO IT. DON’T TRUST THEM. SAID IS A PERFECTLY GOOD WORD. 

Only tag your dialogue enough for the reader to see who’s speaking. Once you’ve established who’s speaking, you don’t need to say ‘he said,’ ‘she said’ anymore, because it’s no longer very useful to your reader.

Only describe actions that are important to the scene. * Don’t feel the need to illustrate your characters’ every action. Only show what’s important to the understanding of the scene, the actions that build character and inform the dialogue. The girl putting down her glass shows us that she doesn’t like the taste of liquorice. It adds meaning to her words. Sometimes you can replace a tag with an action. For instance, you don’t really need “she said and put the glass down.” If you say “she put the glass down,” the reader will understand she’s the one speaking. 

Describe thoughts sparingly. When do you do most of your thinking about a conversation? When you’re actually speaking to the person? Or when you’re on your way home wondering if those words in that order means he likes you, or if he likes you? Or lying in bed that night trying to figure out why IN THE WORLD YOU SAY SUCH STUPID THINGS? Most thoughts can be saved for after the dialogue is finished and your character actually has time to mull things over. If the dialogue is doing its job, we’ll be able to see the characters’ gears turning by virtue of their words. 

I personally find it difficult to learn from just the good stuff. So now I’ll show you why these rules exist by completely ruining this dialogue:

This is so much worse than Hemingway’s version. I haven’t messed with the actual dialogue, but my tags have ruined it all the same.

Let’s go through just why it’s so much worse.

It’s redundant. If the girl is saying “yes,” we already know she’s agreeing. If she’s saying it tastes like liquorice and putting the glass down, we can see that she’s complaining about it. Saying that she hates liquorice just furthers that redundancy. This is why most attributions other than “said” are frowned upon. We don’t need “I am responding to your point,” they replied. Or “I LIKE CAKE!!” he exclaimed. Or “Really?” he questioned.

It assumes the reader isn’t smart enough to understand subtext. When writing, assume you’re readers are as smart as you are. “That was bright,” the man said sarcastically. “Cut it out,” the man said angrily. If you think you’d understand that the man is angry when he says “cut it out,” trust that your reader will, too. Because I assure you, they are smart enough to understand it, and when they do, that “angrily” is redundant and insulting. This is why it’s best to avoid adverbs at the end of your dialogue tags. Like fancy attributions, they tell what your dialogue has already shown.

The pace is wrong. Putting tags at every line slows down the dialogue. It clogs up the scene. This is a quick interaction. Most dialogue is quick. When we talk to someone, very little time tends to pass between our responses. This speed should be mimicked in the way dialogue is written and read. This is why you should keep your dialogue as streamlined as possible, and keep thoughts, actions, and tags to a minimum. 

It puts a focus on the writing. All of those fancy attributions, adverbs, and additional tags say: “this is not being said by these two people. I am the author of this text and I am describing what they are saying to you.” That’s a lot for an adverb to be saying. It takes attention away from what the characters are saying and draws attention to the fact that this is fiction. “Said” works well because it’s all but invisible to the reader. It keeps the attention on your characters’ words. 

Hopefully, this has convinced you that when it comes to dialogue, you should let your characters do all of the talking. (Pun intended.) 

This isn’t a definitive list of the rules, though. There are others. For instance: keep your speaker’s action with their dialogue. Don’t pair one character’s action with another character’s dialogue.

If you don’t exactly trust someone who admits to getting their dialogue wrong**, here’s a list of other resources that can help you improve your dialogue tags. These also go heavier into the grammar of tagging dialogue. 

He Said, She Said: Dialog Tags and Using Them Effectively

Keep it Simple: Keys to Realistic Dialogue (Part II)

Writing Fiction: Dialogue Tag Basics

Also: 

A list of attributions to never, ever use

*Many people will tell you that actions work better than “said” attributions in dialogue. People get this advice, like my workshopping pal, and end up putting “he/she smiled” after every line of dialogue. Action as attribution works, but can easily clutter the scene with unnecessary choreography. It’s more complicated and trickier to pull off than just putting “said x” after the first few lines of dialogue. This is why my advice is to only use it where the action is doing work for your scene. 

author: the title of the novel and the final line are one and the same

author: the starting line of the novel and final line are one and the same

when all of this is over i will drown myself in finery and fill my stomach until i am too heavy to move. a fine feast i will make. but i will come not as an angel, but as a free spirit, a small girl, a sleeping queen. wild with the sun and the surf and the possibility of what could become.

when all of this is over i will throw the words from my mouth, inject into them the feeling of being. they all say that you only life once, but it is harder than that. not abandoning the consequences but rather, doing everything as if it is your last. fully; wholly.

EXCEPT for basically….one myth. Where Loki’s instrumental in the death of Baldur and the gods are all WHOA TOO FUCKING FAR DUDE and send him to Hel to be tormented for all eternity, leading to his ultimate escape/release in Ragnarok to end all things and lead the army of the damned and his monstrous children to pretty much…eat all the gods, destroy Asgard, and burn the World Tree all to the ground so it can all start over.

Here’s the thing though. Norse mythology spanned centuries. The tales of Loki as the mischievous trickster god were told for centuries.

However, for most of that time, the myths were told as part of oral traditions passed down generation to generation, until they were finally compiled in manuscript form in the 13th century, roughly. This is when pretty much all the sagas, as Norse myth compilations were called, are considered to have been written down for the first time, and so they included thousands of stories that had been told over hundreds of years.

They were also regional, though there was a lot of overlap, given that the Vikings traveled widely and regularly across the various parts of Scandinavia. Still, different parts of Scandinavia had their own sagas. Norway had different sagas than Denmark who had different sagas than Iceland, etc. Even though all of them featured primarily the same figures, they each had their own unique stories featuring the gods. However, very rarely did they have radically different takes on those gods.

Now what’s significant about the fact that pretty much every saga we have, where these myths were all finally written down and preserved, is from the 13th century….

Is that pretty much all of Scandinavia had converted to Christianity by the early 12th century, with active worship of the Norse gods being scattered and mostly underground from that point on.

Why is this significant?

Because it means every Norse myth we have a written recording of was not written by people who still actively worshiped those gods. Nor were they intended to be read as such at the time. 

They were written down by Christian scholars who wrote them AS stories. They were intended as collections of their regions’ cultural histories, but not by or for people who still actively believed in these stories or the figures they featured. They weren’t like….TRYING to be super accurate, is the thing. The scholars who wrote these sagas were writing down the stories that had been passed down for generations, but through the lens of people who saw them as stories their ancestors once believed, not ones that pertained to their own current worldview.

And they were writing these sagas for an audience of people who similarly believed as they believed.

Which means that inevitably, some things got ‘adjusted’ to fit the current world view, the zeitgeist of the scholars writing down the stories and that of the people who would read or have the stories read to them from thereon. Because again, they weren’t aiming for being 100% faithful to the tales as they’d been told to them. They were just treating them as stories. And what do you do when the story you’re writing down has elements that don’t make that much sense to you because they were born of and aimed a worldview that doesn’t match yours?

Well, if you’re the Christian scholars writing the Norse sagas, you ‘tweak’ those elements until they make a story that fits your worldview.

So remember how I said the various sagas were regional and had a lot of overlap but some stories were distinct to some regions and didn’t show up elsewhere?

Yeah, Ragnarok is one of those.

Thousands of sagas encompassing centuries of Norse mythology and oral traditions were written down all over the various regions of Scandinavia in the 13th century.

Ragnarok only showed up in one.

The most famous, granted, but still. Everything we’re told in Norse myths about the death of Baldur and Loki’s role in it, leading to his punishment and torment in Hel and his ultimate release and bringing forth the armies of Hel to slay the gods and end the world?

Comes from the Prose Edda and the later Poetic Edda, from Iceland.

Which had primarily converted to Christianity as far back as 1000.

Now, the Vikings? Were actually surprisingly not a big doom and gloom people. Pretty much every assumption of them as such comes from how synonymous we regard Ragnarok with their culture.

It is after all, the ultimate Judgment Day myth, isn’t it? Right up there with Christianity’s Book of Revelations. An apocalyptic end of the world scenario, a war between heaven and hell, where everything is destroyed so that the world can basically start fresh with a clean slate. Nothing old ‘deserves’ to survive, pretty much the only way for a world free of sin and evil to arise is from the ashes of the old, after everything has been cleansed with fire.

Now contrast this ‘myth’ with pretty much every other Norse myth that’s survived. Larger than life tales of grand adventures, noble quests, gods walking among mortals in disguise and heroes fighting giants and stealing from dragons.

Where the closest thing the Norse pantheon has to a devil figure is Loki, the god of mischief….not even evil, but MISCHIEF, because a far more accurate representation of the Vikings’ world view is that sometimes shit happens, because Loki the god of chaos likes to make a mess of things. And what do you do when that happens? If you’re the Vikings, you basically just shrug, go “well, that’s Loki” for you, and drink some more mead.

Loki isn’t vilified in a single myth until Ragnarok, because the Vikings didn’t hate him. And they certainly didn’t fear him. They LAUGHED at him. In nine out of ten myths, Loki ends up the subject of ridicule himself, as he has the tables turned on him or outsmarts himself

Until Ragnarok.

Which, granted, could very well be another Norse myth that was passed down generation to generation in Iceland, land of frequent volcanic eruptions and likely inspiration for Musplheim, the land of the fire giants.

BUT. Which could equally likely, and far more plausibly given the overall context of Norse mythology, simply be a story the scholar who wrote the Prose Edda made up to ‘finish off’ his saga of the world according to the Vikings, from beginning to end.

An ending his Christian audience of the times would understand and identify with a lot better than they would understand the concept of a devil-figure that existed to be LAUGHED at, to show how little the Vikings feared some mythical figure with the power to lie and deceive them….the complete opposite of the way Christians feared Satan.

Basically put….Ragnarok, for all that we think of it as the ultimate Norse myth….DOES NOT MAKE SENSE in the context of almost EVERY single other Norse myth AND in the context of how Norse society viewed the world and their place in it, or their gods and their relationship with them.

Same with Loki’s depiction in Ragnarok.

What both Ragnarok and Loki’s role in Ragnarok DO make sense in the context of, however, is in a bastardization of Christianity’s own doomsday tales of a Judgment Day, stylized to fit the trappings of Norse mythology and feature their gods instead of Christian figures.

With Loki recast in the role of the Devil, as he was the closest fit they could find to that.

And with Baldur, god of light (a Norse god who is at best a footnote in Norse myths other than Ragnarok, and certainly was never the major pantheon figure he’s assumed to be), recast in the role of the Christ figure. Whose death starts the ball rolling for Judgment Day and who is destined to return for it, to triumph over Loki/Satan and preside over the new, purified world once it’s reborn from the ashes of the old one.

Snorri did write some interesting things, but he was still a christian man and edited the myths, even adding new gods and goddesses that were not previously there, when he was writing them in order to suit the society he was living in. Take his stories with a grain of salt when reading them, as they are not wholly accurate to the original myths that were passed down through time.

This is also available on wordsnstuffblog.com!

– This is a subject that I see brought up a lot in book reviews by readers, but not very often when it comes to the writing community. I decided to search the internet and my own experience for as many tips and as much advice as I could find to put in one place for you all. I also addressed a lot questions (in fact, more than usual because I know this is a weak point for most fiction authors) in the common struggles section. I hope this is useful to those of you who have a lot of trouble finding help on this. It should help me as well because I’m in the middle of tackling it for my own series. Happy writing!

Patreon || Ko-Fi || Masterlists || Work In Progress || Studyblr || Studygram

Know What Details Are Important

Not all aspects of a political system in a fictional universe are important to the story-telling, especially when the story is more character or plot driven, rather than driven by the world building. It’s important to deliver relevant information to your reader in pieces, and at a pace that enhances their understanding of events and meaning rather than their knowledge of trivial details.

Know Your Demographic & Your Genre

For certain genres and age-demographics, your world building in the area of political systems and implications should be matured or simplified. The majority of your readership should be able to understand what’s going on, and the way you makes sure of that is know who you’re writing the story for. Certain genres also require a lot less complicated detail in political world building. For instance, YA romance should have less political world building than, say, adult fantasy. Sure, maybe in the case of writing a YA romance, there could require some, but definitely not as in-depth as that of the latter. 

Choose A Model to Alter

If you’re going to do it, especially as a beginner, you need to pick some form of inspiration or something similar to what you’re going for. There are so many governmental systems out there that already exist, and if you should research plenty of them and them mix and match, add and subtract, and twist until you have something that serves your story.

Think of The Implications of Details

Every detail that you make prominent in the reader’s mind should be thought out in terms of the implications. Ask yourself how this affects different groups of people, how it’s evolved over time, what it means for the system as a whole, etc. This will make your story more three-dimensional in the reader’s mind.

Find Issues in Power Distribution

Most government tension (throughout history, at least) has come from inequality in the distribution of power. Whether it be between races, classes, branches of government, figures in politics, or groups of people with different opinions, or all of the above combined, most issues stem from the struggle for power, control, and influence over others. Explore this and find new ways to think of how this could be interpreted from your story.

Think of Culture’s Impact on Politics

Culture has a major hand in how politics works. A society’s values, religious majorities and minorities, gender roles, environment, what an average citizen looks like, how citizens are expected to look, act, use their time, etc. These things all impact political situation and how it changes over time with culture, so explore this heavily.

Common Struggles

– The common struggles section of my “guide to__” posts are general questions sent in by readers on the topic at hand. If you have a question that has not been addressed thus far, you’ll probably find the answer in this section. As always, you’re welcome to send other questions to my inbox if you don’t find the answer in this post. –

~ How do I illustrate the evolution of a society’s politics?… I would choose a few major events and make the causation behind them more prominent than the actual events themselves. History repeats itself, and that’s very important in political foreshadowing and often how a society deals with political situations.

~ How do I write conversations about my world’s politics?… It depends on the tone of these conversations. The way casual conversations about politics are written can tell the reader a lot about your world’s political climate, and can be a very useful device. Heated conversations can be useful in showing different passionate sides of a political issue in your world. I would say, write them carefully and with intention.

~ How do I make the reader invested/interested in the world’s politics?… Show the reader why they should care, make them relate to it, and then make them relate your story to their reality. You have to use literary devices as well. Show, don’t tell works really well here. Don’t show the main character reflecting that the conflicts at the war front are bad. Show the war front. Show the severity. Make them feel the heavy emotions of the people. Show them the real stakes of the political decisions being dealt with in the story.

~ How do I create believable racial tensions?… Again, just mirror reality. Understand why racial tensions exist and mirror that in your story’s context. Racial tension is majorly caused by fear, prejudice, and response to the “other side”. It’s often a long, ongoing battle because it’s rooted in the way people are raised and the constant environment around them. Racism is taught, so show it’s bigger, more outstanding moments, as well as its less prominent ones. No political issue arises exclusively from large, explosive moments. It’s made up of a few big ones, notable ones, and then the many, millions of little contributing moments and factors.

~ How do I write reasonable opposition groups?… You’re the author, so you have the unique opportunity of setting the reader up to see the reasoning behind both or all sides. You can show the evidence and logic behind each one, and make the reader understand why each side believes what they believe, and the personal engagement that leads each side to fight so hard.

~ How do I connect a caste system to political tension?… Political tension within caste systems are commonly caused by people’s natural desire for power and control, which leads to dissatisfaction in cases of being on the less fortunate side of inequality. Caste systems are also typically a pyramid, which means there’s more of the underdogs. These things combine to create political storms because on one side you have few people and lots of power that add up to just a bit more than a lot of people with less power individually, but more when pooled. 

~ How to I create a corrupt government without too many clichés?… The most cliché thing about typical corrupt governments is the one-dimensional evil figures that lead to corruption. Very few authors explore what leads a human who’s only job is to protect the people to turn against them. Explore their motivations and their personal struggle and justifications and you’ll have a more interesting and impactful corrupt government.

~ How do I illustrate a positive government that doesn’t come off as suspicious?… Work hard on perfecting tone, be very careful with what could be interpreted as foreshadowing, and show genuine goodness in not only the government’s words and actions, but actual results. Show your government talking the talk, and then walking the walk.

~ How do I set up the climax of a political issue?… Show the slow burn, and then the inciting events that set off the inevitable explosion. You need to establish to the reader that something is going to happen no matter what, but make the actual consequence and its place in time a surprise. 

~ How do I develop a governmental system from the ground up for the sake of the plot itself?… As I said in a previous point, use a model or several to take inspiration from. In the case of world building being the centre of your story, build your world and your plot together so they complement one another. 

Other Resources From My Blog That Help With This:

How To Write A Good Plot Twist

How To Foreshadow

Commentary On Social Issues In Writing

Tackling Subplots

How To Perfect The Tone In A Piece Of Writing

Tips On Writing About Mental Illness

A Guide To Tension & Suspense In Your Writing

Writing Good Villains

Tips On Writing Intense Scenes

Finding & Fixing Plot Holes

Resources For Crime, Mystery, & Thriller Writers

Resources For Writing Science Fiction

Resources For Writing Dystopian/Apocalypse

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: High Middle Ages & Renaissance

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: 1600s

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: 1700s

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: 1800s

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: 1900-1939

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: 1940-1969

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: 1970-1999

Useful Writing Resources

Useful Writing Resources II

Resources For Writing Sketchy Topics

Resources For Worldbuilding

Resources For Plot Development

Resources For Creating Characters

Mimicking Diversity In Science Fiction/Fantasy

Writing About Another Era

On Making Scenes/Characters Unpredictable

Info-dumping

Writing About Uncomfortable Topics

Support Wordsnstuff!

FIND MORE ON WORDSNSTUFFBLOG.COM

If you enjoy my blog and wish for it to continue being updated frequently and for me to continue putting my energy toward answering your questions, please consider Buying Me A Coffee, or pledging your support on Patreon.

Request Resources, Tips, Playlists, or Prompt Lists

Instagram // Twitter //Facebook //#wordsnstuff

FAQ //monthly writing challenges // Masterlist

MY CURRENT WORK IN PROGRESS (Check it out, it’s pretty cool. At least I think it is.)

Studyblr || Studygram