Let me start by saying that if you didn’t read this WriteOnCon post about dialogue, you must go there immediately. Done? Okay.

The topics I choose for my blog are usually based on my current struggles (in writing, that is. No one wants to hear about what my cat did to the toilet). My latest one is with transitions between dialogue of different characters. For example, say you have this:

I held the hat out to Bob. “Is this yours?”

He shook his head. “I think it’s Jane’s.”

I returned it to the hook. “Oh. Thanks.”

In addition to being, perhaps, the most boring dialogue ever written, the problem with this is that it is very much like reading a game of ping-pong. We’re the MC, we’re Bob, we’re back to the MC.  This isn’t a problem if done occasionally but can get very tiring if done for long stretches of dialogue.

The other problem with this dialogue is that the tags are acting like bumps. It reads kind of like this:

BUMP. “Is this yours?”

BUMP. “I think it’s Jane’s.”

BUMP. “Oh. Thanks.”

So how can we fix this? Well, we can eliminate the tags all together (if they’re not necessary) or we can re-position them so the transition is, well, less bumpy. For example:

“Is this yours?” I said as I held the hat out to Bob. 

He shook his head. “I think it’s Jane’s.”

“Oh. Thanks.” I returned it to the hook.

The difference here is that, by putting the tags back to back, we’ve merged two bumps. It now reads more like.

 “Is this yours?” BUMP. BUMP. “I think it’s Jane’s.”

“Oh. Thanks.” BUMP.

And now, back to the cat.

Every plot line in a novel has five major points:

1. beginning (aka inciting incident)
2. first plot point (1st turn)
3. mid-point (2nd turn)
4. climax (everything goes to Hell)
5. resolution (big sigh)

So if you have 5 major plot lines, that would mean you have 25 plot points in your novel. Note that I’ve picked 5 just because it’s a pretty number. I usually have more like 10. But then, I also usually have cheese for dinner.

If you were to write each of these 25 points on pieces of paper and then plot them on the three-act structure, placing them in the order in which they appear, you’d come up with something like this (note that I’ve used different colors to identify different plot lines):

Still with me? Good. I would HIGHLY recommend you create one of these for your novel. Why? Because if you do, you will discover the following:

1) If you’ve included all of your plot lines on your graph, every scene in your novel will correspond to one of these boxes. Why does this matter? Because, if you can find a scene that does not correspond to one of the boxes, or connect two of the boxes, you should delete it. It’s not moving the plot forward which means it’s useless. Sorry. I know that hurt. If you think I’m wrong, then maybe you need to re-think whether or not you’ve forgotten a plot line or layer. But if the point of your scene is just to provide elevator music between plot point 2 and 3, you need to kill it.

2) There are times when one scene can be used to move multiple plots forward at once (in the graph above, these are the ones that have the same numbers such as 13 and 15). These are referred to as “big” scenes. At the beginning of your novel, you don’t want too many scenes like this, but as the novel moves forward, you want more of them. When you reach the climax, there is nothing better than if you can get as many plots to intersect as possible. This creates what Blake Snyder calls the “All Is Lost” feeling. If you’ve drawn your graph and can’t find any overlapping numbers, try to see if you can combine two by making two things happen at once (or by making one thing create two outcomes). This will tighten your plot.

3) Plots generally need to open and close in a nested fashion. You will notice above the the B plot (in black) opens later in the novel and closes earlier. Conversely, the BIG plot (green) opens at the very beginning and closes at the very end.

4) There is nothing more confusing to a reader than a book that constantly hops between different plot lines. This is why you want to see “chunks”. For example, in the graph above, you will see that 7-10 and 13-16 relate to only two plot lines.

If you haven’t done this before, I would HIGHLY recommend you try it. I would also HIGHLY recommend you try gorgonzola. To die for. Seriously.

At the university I attended, it was a requirement that all Arts majors take a first year Philosophy course called Reasoning and Critical Thinking. While I enjoyed this course, at the time, I didn’t see how it could possibly be useful in my future. I was wrong. Dead wrong.

The main point of the course was to teach students how to recognize errors in reasoning or “fallacies”. Fabulous but how was this supposed to help me write a novel? Well, in most novels, there is some kind of mystery that keeps the reader hooked. Something like, Why did Bob leave a great job to take a crappy job? While there are other plots going on, the point of this one is just to keep the reader interested in the answer. Because of this, you have to do everything you can to NOT give away the secret until the end or near end. After all, it wouldn’t be much of a mystery if you asked why Bob moved on page one and then told us it was because he got fired for stealing on page two. At the same time, it is not very interesting to just have the mystery unsolved because the MC doesn’t try to solve it or because no one will tell her the answer. You need it to be a quest for the answer. A quest with twists and turns; times when she thinks she know but doesn’t…that kind of thing.

So how can you prevent your MC (and reader) from finding out the secret? You can use a fallacy in the MC’s reasoning. There are many fallacies you can use (I’d recommend reading this page  if you want to see them all) but I am going to concentrate on four for now:

1) The Red Herring: This is a fallacy in which topic B is presented in order to divert attention from topic A. For example, maybe your MC wants to find out why Bob took this crappy job when he had a great job before. The logical assumption is that Bob did something to get himself fired, but then Suzie comes along and implies that Bob had a relationship with Linda, forcing your MC to divert her attention to Bob’s personal life rather than his work performance. The main character then spends the entire book trying to find out what happened to make Bob want to get away from Linda, only to find out that his departure had nothing to do with Linda.

2) Guilt by Association: This is a fallacy in which a person rejects a claim simply because it is pointed out that people she dislikes accept the claim. Using the same example, the MC wants to know why Bob left his job. MC’s worst enemy is Peter and Peter says Bob left because he stole money. MC dismisses claim because she hates Peter.

3) Poisoning the Well: This sort of reasoning involves trying to discredit what a person might later claim by presenting unfavorable information about the person making it. Using the same example, your MC wants to know why Bob left his job. Suzie lies about A, B, and C, so when she tells the MC why Bob left, the MC doesn’t believe her. This is very similar to #2 except the information is dismissed because of Suzie’s credibility rather than a dislike for Suzie.

4) Circular Reasoning (aka, Begging the Question): This is a fallacy in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or indirectly) assume that the conclusion is true. Using the example above, Peter tells the MC that he is sure Bob was fired because everyone believes that Bob was fired. When the MC asks everyone why they believe it, they say because Peter told them it was true.

In all examples above, the MC needs to break down the fallacies as the novels develops. Using #4 as an example, Peter might tell her that Bob was fired in Act 1. Then, in Act 2, she might get suspicious and ask Peter how he knows. He would tell her that Suzie and Barb believe it, so it must be true. MC then goes along thinking she has solid evidence, but something makes her question it again so she goes back to ask Suzie and Barb how they know. That’s when they tell her that Peter told them and the whole thing falls apart.

In my next post, I will discuss how Trigonometry can help you with your character arc. Okay, maybe not…

Giving descriptive text of the character who is speaking is a great way to add further detail to dialogue, while at the same time letting the reader know who is speaking. For example, you could write:

“That’s my cup,” said Bob. “Give it back.”

But it would be better if you wrote:

Bob narrowed his focus on the chipped, blue mug in my hand. “That’s my cup. Give it back.”

The second example gives the reader more information about the situation between the main character and Bob. There are three possible placements for descriptive text within dialogue:

1) Before the dialogue

Bob narrowed his focus on the chipped, blue mug in my hand. “That’s my cup. Give it back.”

2) After the dialogue

“That’s my cup. Give it back.” Bob narrowed his focus on the chipped, blue mug in my hand.

3) In the middle of the dialogue

“That’s my cup.” Bob narrowed his focus on the chipped, blue mug in my hand. “Give it back.”

You can and should use a variety of these placements in your writing, but note the following rules:

a) Before the dialogue is the best choice if the reader has no idea who is speaking as you want to give that information as soon as possible. Otherwise, the reader has to rethink the dialogue after they figure it out and this pulls them out of the flow.

b) After the dialogue is the best choice if you want to go on to a longish description of Bob’s actions. But if what you are giving are physical actions (like above) consider the placement carefully. People tend to physically react before they speak. For example, if something shocked you, your eyes would grow wide before you said “Wow! I can’t believe that!” You wouldn’t say “Wow! I can’t belive that!” and then widen your eyes when you stopped speaking. But if you put the physical description after the dialogue, that is what it means.

c) In the middle of the dialogue is the best choice when you want to break the flow of the dialogue in order to slow down the pace or give the reader time to consider what has been said. This is not a good choice when the speaker is supposed to be saying something that needs to remain unbroken (for example, a screaming rant) because it essentially acts like a pause.

If you are ever unsure which of these to use, take your dialogue and descriptions and act them out. The one that feels most natural is probably the right choice.