Novels with little dialogue?

[scfirenice]

My new WIP is probably going to be women's literary when it grows up and I have been intentionally skipping dialogue. My mind doesn't work right (3 weeks max of this left) and I can't recall whether or not I've read other novels that took this route. Thoughts?

[aspiringwriter]

If it works, and keeps the readers' attention I say go for it :) Besides, it's your story :)

[maestrowork]

I have picked up exactly one novel (literary) that has no dialogue (because of the subject matter). Sadly, I couldn't get past chapter 3.

My opinion: whatever works, but novels without dialogue is a hard sell (especially commercial fiction) and it's difficult to keep up the pace. It also depends on how you do it, too. Is it all summary? Is it all first person? Is it mostly internal monologue? Are you compensating with gorgeous prose? Remember, too much of the same thing (such as internal monologue) gets boring really quickly.

[scfirenice]

Can the same be said for sparce dialogue? I could manage that.

[aspiringwriter]

Certainly...:) It's your novel and if you want to write it... do it :) After all, it's your story and you tell it how you want.. Stephen King's "The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon" has very little dialouge in it... :)

[maestrowork]

Well...

Yes, it's your story and you should write it the way you want. But to say "to hell with the readers" would be a mistake if you want to get published and sell books. So you need to look at all aspects and make a decision.

Stephen King is not a good example because: a) he is Stephen King -- he can do pretty much what he wants; b) Stephen King has already mastered his craft and he could easily pull off something like that. Imagine he wrote Carrie without dialogue... he probably wouldn't have been where he is now if he had done that.

So yes, do follow your dreams and visions, but you also have to be realistic about market and readership. Would your readers want to read a novel without (or sparse) dialogue? There's only one way to find out: write it and see what your beta readers think.

[Jamesaritchie]

My new WIP is probably going to be women's literary when it grows up and I have been intentionally skipping dialogue. My mind doesn't work right (3 weeks max of this left) and I can't recall whether or not I've read other novels that took this route. Thoughts?

People talk. Most people talk a lot. If you want realistic characters, they're going to have to talk to each other.

Very little is impossible, but some things are considerably more possible than others. I think you're on a very tough road here.

[nevada]

They've done studies and found that people often skim ahead when reading, sometimes even skipping whole sections. The only thing they don't skip or skim is dialogue. So basically you're writing a book that just invites people to skip completely.

[SpookyWriter]

Try to imagine sitting at a bar for seven hours, describing the events, while nobody talks to you. I don't think narrative or prose can carry the whole story. Dialogue helps to move the story forward. It also helps that the characters have feelings and emotions that are expressed through their spoken words. Action is also used in dialogue "Get going!" and the story would be weak without direction. Sparse is probably acceptable provided that the story doesn't get bogged down with description.

Just my two kopec worth.

[MidnightMuse]

This is an interesting question - because I can't honestly recall ever having read a novel, or even a short, that didn't have at least some dialogue. What style are you writing this in, I wonder?

[O hAnnrachainn]

I don't think there's any dialogue in Colm Toibin's The Master. Which I didn't finish because it did get dull.

[DamaNegra]

Yes, lack of dialogue often gets dull, because it's hard to make a change in the voice of the book (or something). So everything seems the same, the same, until the reader starts skipping entire paragraphs, then chapters, in search for something better.

One literary book I remember reading with scarce dialouge is Maria, by Jorge Isaacs. That's the only book EVER I haven't been able to finish.

[Patricia]

Well...

Yes, it's your story and you should write it the way you want. But to say "to hell with the readers" would be a mistake if you want to get published and sell books. So you need to look at all aspects and make a decision.

Stephen King is not a good example because: ... he probably wouldn't have been where he is now if he had done that.

So yes, do follow your dreams and visions, but you also have to be realistic about market and readership.

My current WIP is an excellent example. It is basically finished--but the first few chapters have sparse dialogue. And, even I know they drag and could lose some readers. So I'm re-writing and cutting like heck, to get past the dragging parts, because once the readers do, I think the rest of the novel will "sing" for them.

I could gamble and let it go as is, because the subject matter alone could keep the readers interested. But I don't want that--I want my readers to enjoy all of my novel. And, of course, I don't want to lose a potential agent, acquisitions editor, or publisher.

[Patricia]

They've done studies and found that people often skim ahead when reading, sometimes even skipping whole sections. The only thing they don't skip or skim is dialogue. So basically you're writing a book that just invites people to skip completely.

Are these types of books mostly from well knowns, or what? How do they get past agents or editors, if not?

I'm in the middle of a book by a well known, that I used to "couldn't put down." With his latest, I'm struggling just to pick it up. It's a $24.00 first edition hard back, so I'm determined to finish the thing, even if it's to learn what not to do!

[Joanna_S]

I'm one of those guilty parties who tends to skip ahead if I see too much description and no dialogue. Usually this happens if I've read too long a stretch without any voices. I tend to be strongly focused on voices.

That said, I did experiment once by writing a short story with no dialogue. However, it was written in 1st person using a very young, distinctive voice. Because it was short, and because she had a conversational narrative style, the lack of dialogue didn't appear to strike any of the people who read it. The story isn't published.

[nevada]

Patricia, it's any book. Doesn't matter who wrote it, good or bad. If there is a lot of narrative with no dialogue people skim. When I read Name of the Rose, a great book, I skipped pages and pages of description, six pages describing a church door, that kind of thing. It's the nature of people.

I bet only the most dedicated techno-geek reads every word of Tom Clancy. And even then they're skimming forward to see when the story starts again. It's just the way people are.

[Patricia]

I understand what you all are saying. I was just wondering with all the talk and teaching we hear about "hooks," holding the editor, or agents attention, etc.. How even some of the better books get through.

Must all be geeks? :) Just kidding.

[nevada]

they get through because they are good. Despite all the rhetoric, if you write a good book, a genuinely good book, not one that just your mother loves (although she might be right, you never know), if you can write a book like that, then you will be published. Thousands and thousands of books get published each year. Thousands of new authors get picked up each year. Forget hook, forget platform, write a good book and it will happen.

Sorry to hijack the thread. I think people want dialogue and expect it and a book without it has a huge uphill battle and it doesnt matter how gorgeous the prose is. I'm sure there are exceptions, there always are, but they are called exceptions for a reason. The fact that none of us can point to one successful book that doesnt have dialogue proves that.

[scfirenice]

You know what? Maybe I'll post the beginning in SYW and let ya'll tear it up. Maybe you'll see where I'm going. I will have dialogue, I'm just not sure how much. My other three novels you can't shut anyone up, this one just feels different.

[maestrowork]

Another thing to consider is characterization. People talk, and that's one of the best ways to do characterization, to develop your characters. We know people by the way they act and also speak. If the novel is mostly narrative, yes, you can describe the action and what they say, but it's not the same thing. So you will have to do much more, and better, to bring your characters to life.

[PeeDee]

The only time I find that having no dialogue at all works out well (sometimes, almost works better) is in things which are set in first-person mode.

That said, first person could really be considered an entire book of dialogue, a conversation between the narrator and the reader. So that doesn't necessarily apply.

I would think it'd be a very difficult read, and a very hard sell. That said...I do think it could be done.

[maestrowork]

Even first person can be tricky. How long are you going to be willing to listen to the narrator saying "I this, and I that..." without another character speaking? "He told me this, and she said that to me" could get old quickly. To pull it off, you really have to do some prose work -- it's possible, but not easy.

[Alan Yee]

Try to imagine sitting at a bar for seven hours, describing the events, while nobody talks to you. I don't think narrative or prose can carry the whole story. Dialogue helps to move the story forward. It also helps that the characters have feelings and emotions that are expressed through their spoken words. Action is also used in dialogue "Get going!" and the story would be weak without direction. Sparse is probably acceptable provided that the story doesn't get bogged down with description.

Just my two kopec worth.

Yah, the dialogue is a very important part of the story/novel I'm writing. That's what adds some of the emotion throughout the story. If you didn't read the dialogue in my story and how my character reacts to it, the characters would be completely flat and unrealistic.

[Jamesaritchie]

The only time I find that having no dialogue at all works out well (sometimes, almost works better) is in things which are set in first-person mode.

That said, first person could really be considered an entire book of dialogue, a conversation between the narrator and the reader. So that doesn't necessarily apply.

I would think it'd be a very difficult read, and a very hard sell. That said...I do think it could be done.


I've never even seen a first person novel without dialogue.

[SpookyWriter]

I've never even seen a first person novel without dialogue.That would be a first for me also.

[maestrowork]

I've never even seen a first person novel without dialogue.

I have. The literary fiction I mentioned earlier was written in 1st person.

[PeeDee]

I didn't say it would particularly work, I just said that I thought it would be easier to do. I still suspect it would just be different shades of the same failing.

[kristie911]

Off hand I can't think of a book I've ever finished a book that had very little dialogue in it. It doesn't work for me. I like to see people interact and talk, it builds personality in characters without actual description. I don't want to be told that she has quick wit or a great sense of humor, I want to see her use it. But then I generally have characters that won't shut up...must take after me.

Just my two cents.

[Jamesaritchie]

I have. The literary fiction I mentioned earlier was written in 1st person.

How well did that one sell?

[maestrowork]

Not very well, and I don't think the author published another book since then. Like I said, I couldn't read past chapter 3.

[jerewrites]

I just finished reading The Life of Pi which contains almost no dialogue because the poor guy's stuck in a boat with a Bengal tiger for 85% of the book, yet I found the book a great read. I'd agree with most of the postings here, that dialogue is essential if you want a marketable piece of fiction. Readers expect it, like baseball fans expect beer and hot dogs at the park.

[maestrowork]

The Life of Pi is a good example, and it's an unusual book, every well written, but also very philosophical and challenging. It's not a breezy read, but it's worthwhile. And the story calls for that kind of writing... If you can write like Martel, more power to you. :)

[Josie]

Interesting thought, about the first person story with no dialogue. Have to think about that.:)

I am writing a romantic suspense 30,000 word novella in first person right now. In the first draft I'm trying what a published writer said she does. She writes first draft dialogue only and then goes back to fill in action etc.

At least I'm trying it, but sometimes I feel like putting some action in, if I am so inclined, while first drafting. Nothing is written in stone I'm anxious to finish it to see what happens.

Cheers ;)

[blacbird]

My new WIP is probably going to be women's literary when it grows up and I have been intentionally skipping dialogue. . . Thoughts?

The first one that comes to mind is Why? I've seen manuscripts where people took certain unusual approaches because the story seemed to demand it; I've also seen manuscripts where people did unusual things as a gimmicky affectation. I think you need to be able to articulate to yourself exactly why you're avoiding dialogue, and to be able to communicate in the story to a reader why doing that is an effective means of conveying the story. Otherwise it runs the danger of being perceived as a literary conceit.

caw.

[CaroGirl]

The Life of Pi is a good example, and it's an unusual book, every well written, but also very philosophical and challenging. It's not a breezy read, but it's worthwhile. And the story calls for that kind of writing... If you can write like Martel, more power to you.
Oh I agree. No one writes quite like Martel. Beautiful, terrible, exciting, challenging. Even though there are people who didn't like it (can't imagine why), it's undeniably a great work of imaginative fiction. And it sold VERY well.

[scfirenice]

I'm thinking The Crimson Petal and the White by...oh....Scott somethinorother had very little dialogue, it was Literary fiction. I could be wrong, my copy is packed somewhere. Anyway, the point is for this character is to really get inside her head. Like I said, maybe I'll post the first few pages.

[janetbellinger]

My new WIP is probably going to be women's literary when it grows up and I have been intentionally skipping dialogue. My mind doesn't work right (3 weeks max of this left) and I can't recall whether or not I've read other novels that took this route. Thoughts?

I have to go back and put dialogue into almost all of my novels. My current novel was written with the inclusion of a lot of interior monologue which makes it too passive and uninteresting. I have been working very hard at making it active through dialogue and actions.

[Selcaby]

There's The Cold Moons by Aeron Clement. The characters are badgers (it's rather like Watership Down). Badgers can't talk, so I guess that's why, although they communicate between themselves a lot, they do it all in indirect speech. I think it must have made the characterisation harder. To me the characters all seemed very serious. It's hard to be funny in indirect speech. It didn't make the book hard to read, though.

The Outsider by Albert Camus is another one, as far as I remember. It's in first person and narrated the way people actually talk - people telling stories about things that happened to them don't tend to remember precisely what anyone said, so they quote most of it in indirect speech, like the badgers.

[Tracy]

As a reader, I wouldn't read a book without dialogue. Dialogue is what, above all else, gives you that delicious 'fly on the wall' feeling about reading books. Of course I'm just one person ...

[ViatMortege]

Dialogue is the best part of the story, man; how do you get away with characters that don't express?
Just wrong!

[Kentuk]

Off hand I can't think of a book I've ever finished a book that had very little dialogue in it.

That pretty much says it. If you write a novel without dialogue you will have to sell it to people who mostly read nonfiction.
I read mostly nonfiction and wouldn't have a problem with no dialogue, it would not even have to be a quick read.
Selling and marketing would be a different matter. The critics would have to already love you and to get an editor to buy it you would need to demonstrate the ability to genre hop.

Hey! Maybe this is the reason people don't like poetry.

Kentuk

[Imelda]

Being completely different to most people, I'm more likely to skip dialogue than prose ... :D

I wrote the first few chapters of my last book with no dialogue (for good reason--my main character is very shy, hardly talks, and no one will talk to her) and people said it was very good, interesting, yadda yadda yadda ... but it needed dialogue. So I put some in, and now they think it's much better.

I don't see anything wrong with leaving out dialogue, but it seems I'm one of the few, and the critiques I recieved only go to prove that.

Good luck with whatever you decide.

[RG570]

I read Milan Kundera's The Unbearable Lightness Of Being not long ago, and there is very little dialogue. It's also all "telling", and calls attention to itself as being fiction.

I loved it. So I don't know. Anything is possible.

[Bartholomew]

I've seen Second-Person... "novels" (if we dare sully the term) without dialogue.

But those things are absolutely unreadable, so...

[Stacia Kane]

And here I have the opposite problem, and worry my books are all dialogue!


I think it would have to be pretty amazing (story, writing, voice) to work. don't skim description much, butI think it would be hard to get into the characters without seeing how they interact with other people. But, as others have said, it has worked.

I just wonder, does writing dialogue make you nervous? Why are you avoiding it?

[Carrie in PA]

I just wonder, does writing dialogue make you nervous? Why are you avoiding it?

That is my question. Is it that your story doesn't require dialogue, or is it just something that you are avoiding?

If it's just something you feel is a weak point for you, you can work to fix that. I have this book: Dialogue: Techniques and Exercises for Crafting Effective Dialogue by Gloria Kempton (http://www.amazon.com/Dialogue-Techniques-Exercises-Crafting-Effective/dp/1582972893/sr=8-2/qid=1160329298/ref=pd_bbs_2/104-3464750-5555146?ie=UTF8&s=books), and it's been helpful.

Personally, I don't think I've ever read a book that didn't have dialogue. And I can't imagine I would, unless it was super, super spectacular.

[rugcat]

It's possible that the amount of dialogue in any particular work has much to do with what the writer is good at. Some people are best at description, setting mood, playing with language, etc. Others, maybe not so much, but they have a special knack for creating entertaining and believable dialogue.

What you're good at tends to mold the shape of your novel. This could be seen as avoiding weaknesses in your writing, but it can also be seen as going with your strengths. If what's easiest for you is to illuminate character through dialogue, why not? If you can do the same thing a different way, one that you're stronger at, go for it, I say.

[Homer]

"Memoirs of Hadrian" (first person) by Margaret Yourcenar is a classic that has no dialogue. William T. Vollman's "Europe Central," which won the National Book Award last year, has no dialogue. Nobel Prize winner Elfriede Jelinek from Austria never has dialogue in her novels. Obviously these books are in a class by themselves. I wouldn't try it with commercial fiction.