⪠!
⪠- How do you decide on your museâs dialogue?Â
It's funny, because I was actually thinking about this earlier today!
So for those who don't know, I have five (well, four and a half) muses: Garland, young!Garland, Lyte, Achtung, and Frannie. They all have different dialogue and narrative styles, and it's something I sometimes struggle with, because my tendency is to lapse back into Garland's style if I'm not paying attention.
So the characters' voices are as follows:
Garland: Prone to long pauses for thought, considers each word carefully. Sometimes his speech becomes a bit grandiose. Quietly sarcastic. Narrative: in his own head a lot, prone to careful analysis of the other person's words before responding. This is because he's used to having all the time in the world to get something done. He takes his time to speak, but at the same time, he's capable of sharp responses.Young Garland: Stilted, almost robotic in speech and mannerisms. Sometimes talks around a topic before finally reaching it, because he's still trying to draw connections between concepts. Can be very easily confused, and at this point he starts talking in circles even worse, often repeating the same thing several times in an attempt to better understand it.
Lyte: For Lyte, there's usually a very smooth flow from thought to speech; she's not caught up in her own thoughts very often. Her speech is surprisingly modern, despite having traveled five hundred years into the future - possibly due to her exposure to Memoria.Â
Frannie: Almost disgustingly chipper, full of endearments like "dear," "darling," etc. Her dialogue is often quick and to the point; Frannie is surprisingly blunt, particularly when she wants something (or wants something done). Narratively, however, she's slower: Frannie considers things carefully, taking all details into consideration. By the time she speaks, she knows precisely what she wants to say.
Achtung: Achtung is my biggest problem, with regards to "slipping back into Garland's style." The problem is that they're both calculating bastards who think extensively before speaking, and they're both prone to eloquent speech. The difference is that Achtung is much more likely to drift toward the dramatic than Garland would ever be: he's not ignorant of the impact speech and word choice have on an audience. Narratively, Achtung tends toward "hidden depths." He seems very shallow on the surface, and likes to keep it that way.
