How to write good conversations?

observe and listen to the way people speak in real life

>>9341920
I recorded people talking and had to transcribed it, you can't write like that, nobody write like that

Realise you're made up of everyone you've ever come in contact with and have those parts of you talk to one another.

>>9341920
No. There's a comicbook writer who does this and it translates so awful to page.

>>9341885
Read some of Bukowski's novels. They have some good examples of dialogue in them.

Celine's work tends to have some powerful dialogue scenes in them.

Generally, just read more dialogue heavy material. You should also try and become more familiar with your characters. You should understand and know how they speak to people and what their thoughts would be when conversing.

>>9341954
That's interesting, can you give me an example? Like someone buying bread

>>9341963
>Bukowsky
>Celine
Thank you but sorry I'll never read them again honestly (or at least not for the next ten years or so), do you have other examples of good conversations?

>>9341971
Neil Gaiman's Neverwhere.
It's been a while since I read it, but it was written for the purpose of being used as a radio play. I remember the dialogue being quite good in the book.

In fact. Radio plays and radio dramas are probably a good resource to look at for dialogue.

But try not to focus on what dialogue you want to be there. Because you know how it is when people come to talk and already have what they want to say planned out. It isn't a conversation.

You need to consider how each character is feeling at that particular time. What have they seen or experienced recently? How do they feel about the other person?

Conversation is about reacting to the person you are conversing with. It is not about the words that you say.
Sometimes actions are better than words. If someone gets bad news in real life they usually just groan and say nothing.

Keep trying dude.

>>9341995
Ok but what about balance between an actual conversation transcribed and pure focus on sharing information? Like "b-but an- ooon wwwwhy argh wuut di dio saaa with -to my-mmmmee huh?" Vs. "What"

>>9341940
you can learn a lot by studying real conversations, but you need to cut out all the extras from conversation in prose, and just have the essentials of what they are talking about

>>9341885
>>9341920
This. People don't actually talk about what they talk about. Hemingway's dialogue is exemplary. I also recommend Faulkner (the "lack" of substance in AILD's monologues works the same way as real, good dialogue), Alice Munro, and Raymond Carver.

Hope that helped.

>>9342047
Well.
The exchange of information is pretty simple. It's literally just one person giving facts to another.

When it comes to general chitchat you want to avoid pointless dialogue.
The way to do that is to use dialogue to reveal something new about your characters personalities and/or the way they think.

So when two of your characters are sat by an open fire roasting chestnuts. You can have them talk about an event that happened last scene or maybe a few scenes back. This will be your opportunity to develop the readers understanding of a character.

So if someone broke a leg in the last scene and you have Brian the pugilist and Jameson the alcoholic sat down. Now would be a chance to maybe show some of Brian's hidden qualities by having him express concern for the injured person. And then maybe Jameson can retort dismissively which will further strengthen his uncaring nature.

As a rule general chat isn't there to bring story progression into a scene. But to develop the readers insight into what makes each of these characters unique and to increase the interest in them. The character's personalities basically.

It can also be used to change the relationships within the cast of characters. Bringing a new meaning to future events. Or, if it's important enough, it can be the energy change of the scene. Where a major character forgives someone for a bad deed or even starts to take a dislike to a friend.

In regards to how you write the dialogue better, again, You just have to read dialogue heavy novels or scenes. And just keep rewriting the scenes until it sounds right to you.

The worst for me is when every character sounds essentially the same, almost as if the writer can't bear to write any words assembled in a style different from their usual prose.

Another notable awful thing is when characters have their accepts rendered with tons of apostrophes and dashes and other punctuation.

Corny I know, but if you actually listen and digest, rather then listen so you can speak, your conversation will bounce back with fluidity and with a sense of normalcy.

>>9341885
Make some of them absurd. It always gives a nice touch. See how Bret Easton Ellis does it.

>>9341971
>given great examples
>nope.jpeg

Fuck yourself

>>9341885
>>9342067
>>9341885
On this note, read "Hills Like White Elephants" by Hemingway

>>9342102
This guy has then right idea. A useful tool in finding each characters unique voice is to figure out what it is they want, and what they're willing to do to get it. Once you have that down, consider the character's personal history, education level, and relationship to the character they're talking to.

>>9341964
>hello I would like to buy a loaf of bread
>that's 3.99
>thank you goodbye

>>9341964
>>9342516
>wait,you forgot something!
>what?
>here s your cent back!
>are you kidding me?

>>9342601
Bane?

>>9342627
>yes
>did I forget something else?
>or are trying to prevent me from leaving?
>is it because you want me or that cheap bread?

MFA teacher once told me that when two characters are talking, they aren't talking to one another, they're talking to themselves. It sounds stupid but on my last fiction workshop I wrote every piece of dialogue like that and people said it was very realistic dialogue.

On another note though, there's a DFW essay (please no hate) called "Joseph Frank's Dostoeyevsky" where he brings up the point that dialogue is harder than ever to write because it must remain under a mask of irony. Where in all lit pre-1900 characters were free to voice opinions freely and genuinely without criticism from other people, dialogue now can never be written as genuine reflection of a character's inner monologue except in extreme cases or to very close friends.

DFW gets lots of hate for a reason, but he has a good point here.

Just stating that dialogue is much harder to write these days. Good luck my pal.

>>9342699
e.g. people always hold 'Hills Like White Elephants' to the highest regards, and the characters in that short story never say what they mean. It's the fact that Hemingway hides everything under that mask of irony so well that makes the dialogue believable--this is how people talk now.

>>9342691
>NO
>I have to return the cent to you, its a new policy, I have return you back unless you verbally reject it
>you have to be kidding me, right?
>I dont give a flying trump about some cent, just keep it
>k thank you goodbye
>*screeching* bye
is the world getting more and more mad, or is it just me?

>>9341885
Have them.

>>9342516

>I WOULD LIKE BREAD
>THAT IS 3.99
>THANK YOU. GOODBYE. BREAD SUPERIOR, AUTOBOTS INFERIOR. 101010101

>>9343715
you are my favorite costumer

How has Gaddis not come up once here?

JR is literally the bible of dialogue.

And I don't think dialogue has become difficult due to some sort of contemporary veneer of irony, but rather because verbal communication has regressed with the advent of textual communication. Speech is more sparse, empty, and awkward because people now avoid it at all costs.

>>9342699
>when two characters are talking, they aren't talking to one another, they're talking to themselves

I'm intrigued, but confused by this. On one interpretation, are you saying that there are two people, but they are talking to themselves (plural entities talking each to themself)? Can you give an example and run through the mechanics if this is the case?

Or on another interpretation, are you saying you write two characters as if it is a single person having an ongoing conversation alone (singular entity, that is stylistically two people)?

>>9344662
I'm not the person you were replying to, but I think the general idea is that there isnt a unified conversation-topic with both people contributing equally (so it's not the second interpretation you had). Each person has their own idea of the conversation's context,purpose, and direction.

It's better stated as they talk at each other instead of to each other. But maybe that's a different idea than the person you were replying to had.

>>9343715
>>9344503
kek

>>9341920

better advice observe how people speak in movies or TV shows or plays instead because the way they always write dialogue in those is essentially realistic but is also not so realistic that it becomes annoying or tedious
it has to be like that because people actually have to recite the lines
this is why its very important to only watch good stuff because bad stuff actually will have badly written dialogue which becomes even more apparent when the actors actually recite it
basically don't fucking watch The Room to learn how you should write dialogue or maybe do because it will show you exactly how not to write it