Characters are at the heart of all good stories. I've previously looked at the topic of how to write realistic characters, avoiding cultural appropriation or lazy stereotypes (#TuesdayTips77). Over the next few posts, I want to look a bit deeper at the words we place in our character's mouths.
Writing realistic dialogue is essential. It serves numerous roles within a story. In fact, I would go as far as to say that it is perhaps the most important tool in a writer's toolkit. Radio plays and low-budget stage shows have proven that you can tell a compelling story with almost no need for description. There are countless highly effective dramas told with no props and little or no sound effects, just characters talking to one another. Now try and think of a tale with no speech. They are few and far between.
Dialogue tells us so much. Characters can verbally tell us what took place. It can convey the emotions that they are experiencing. The interactions between multiple people during a conversation can tell us what is happening, with no need for us to use our other senses - imagine eavesdropping on a conversation in the next booth in a café. You can't see who's speaking, yet the tone of the voices, the pitch and the cadence can tell us what they are feeling and allow us to determine the relationship between those involved. Listen to the dialect or the use of language and you can infer their age, their education level, their class (which we in Britain are so obsessed with), their upbringing, or where they are from. Similarly, as speakers, we can modulate our language and accent to influence the impression we wish to portray or to match the situation.
And so dialogue should be something that all writers take great care with. In this series of posts, I am going to focus specifically on the language we use inside the speech marks. I will be posting a separate article about dialogue attribution- the stuff outside the speech marks, about who is speaking and how they are saying it.
Characterisation:
Dialogue tells us about the characters. Who are they? The most obvious thing here is their vocabulary, and the way they structure their sentences.
Get the region right: Different people use different vocabulary. Part of this is dialect - the specific words and the way they are used in different parts of the country/world. At its most basic level it can mean using the correct word for an object. Bread rolls are a terrific example. Travel up and down the UK and what the locals call these varies enormously. Most Brits will understand what you mean by a bread roll, but can be baffled when somebody in Manchester asks for a barm cake or a local in Coventry asks for a batch. The question is whether you, as a writer want to use these local terms for your character and if you do, how much you are willing to explain what you mean to non-locals. If you have an omnipotent narrator, you can do this by using the more common term immediately after the character uses it in dialogue.

Warren looked at the menu above the deep fat fryer. He only had a couple of pound coins in his pocket.
"I'll just have a chip batch," he said.
His stomach rumbled as he watched the server split the soft, white bread roll, slather it with margarine and shovel chips in.

Another example that can catch folks out is the use of shortened terms for mother.
In large swathes of the UK, you call your mother "Mum" or "Mummy". In the United States, the term is more commonly "Mom" or Mommy". Yet this is also how some parts of the UK Midlands (especially Birmingham and the Black Country) refer to their mother, although the accent tends to make it sound a little different. If you want to be accurate, your Brummie characters should use this term. In the North of England and Northern Ireland, "Mam" or "Mammy" is more common.
When I see a character talking about their Mam, I'm already starting to make assumptions about where they are from. If they call her Mother when addressing her, I may assume that they are more formal or perhaps quite posh. If they call her Mummy, I will usually assume that they are either very young, or again, quite posh.
Of course, you can't tell a whole lot about a person from a single word, but if you pepper a few of these throughout a person's speech, you can portray a person's background quite easily. On the flip-side, if you have already told the reader where they are from, then you should try to ensure the dialect is consistent.
Getting this wrong can take a person right out of a story, and is a great way of signposting that the writer is not from that region or country. If you tell me that a character is a proud Scouser from Liverpool, they aren't going to use Cockney rhyming slang!
The same goes for foreign languages. If you have a character speaking in a foreign language, then you have two choices  - render it in the original, then provide a translation - OK for short sentences, but can break the flow and be frustrating for long stretches. Or have your characters speaking in English, but sprinkle in a few words for flavour that readers can interpret from context.
Tom Clancy and his ghost writers are very good at this. His globe-trotting thrillers often have Russian or Chinese or North Korean generals deep in conversation, which is rendered in English but with appropriate curse words or terms of address in the original language. Anyone reading or watching Scandinavian crime dramas will usually be familiar with yes, no and thank you by the end of the story. 
The caveat:
Be wary about overdoing this. If you are writing for a broad, mainstream audience, you need to balance the need for authenticity with readability. A very well-known best-selling author was recently castigated over their use of dialect that some felt was verging on parody. Doubtless it was accurate, but many readers found it baffling. Much of my family is from England's West Country; for fun, they sometimes text each other in Devonshire dialect. I struggle to understand it; my partner who comes from a completely different part of the country hasn't got a clue!


Next week, I am going to focus on age, background and education level.
Until then, what tricks do you use to make dialogue realistic for your characters?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
Best wishes, Paul.

Welcome to this week's #TuesdayTip!
This week, I want to examine the right of a character to exist.
It sounds rather brutal, and I suppose in some ways it is. But the nub of what I want to discuss is whether or not a character belongs in a story. Have they earned their place?
I have just completed structural edits on a forthcoming novel and one of the questions asked by my editor was whether we could trim the cast somewhat. It was a very valid question and one that made me go through the manuscript with a critical eye, asking if individuals were absolutely necessary to this story (or were present because of their role in the series as a whole).

Characters in crime fiction can be roughly divided into three groups. A character is not limited to one group - indeed an individual might fall into more than one category, or may move between groups as a story, or even a series, progresses.
Broadly speaking there are:
Protagonists: Crudely put they are the "hero" of the story. That doesn't mean they are necessarily the good guy, but they are the ones that we are following, and often cheering on.
Antagonists: These are the characters that act as a foil to our protagonist.
In a classic who dunnit, the protagonist might be the detective, and the antagonist the person they are seeking to bring to justice. But the wonderful thing about this genre is that characters can move between the two camps as the story twists and turns, and they might be complex enough that the protagonist is a bad person, whilst the antagonist that they are chasing has admirable motives. And of course, your story might deliberately keep their role ambiguous, only choosing to clarify their role in the big reveal.
The third group are the secondary characters: These are those people that don't fall easily into either of the first two camps, but without whom the story doesn't progress. In a book with twists, a secondary character might suddenly become a protagonist or an antagonist, perhaps surprising the reader.

Regardless of their role, each character needs to justify not only their existence, but also how much space they take up on the page. When it comes to "killing your darlings" during the editing process, it may be necessary to excise the character completely, reduce their role or perhaps reassign or distribute their functions and actions to other characters.

So why would we do this to a character?
First, space and pacing. You might just need to trim some words or speed things up, in which case cutting down or excising the richly-described person that serves our hero their coffee - no matter how much you like them - is low-hanging fruit.
Second, your readers need to remember all of the characters. In a genre such as crime, where many of your readers will be paying close attention to every person that crops up, in case they are the culprit, too many characters can make things confusing. You don't want to excise all of these characters - obviously, you want to keep a few red herrings so readers are kept guessing - but ask yourself if there are too many? One trick is to remove their name. Instead of talking in detail about Kelly the barista, perhaps just acknowledge that your character is served coffee by someone. If your officers find a dozen folks out and about without an alibi the night of the murder, only one of whom was the killer and three of whom are persons of interest and will become red herrings, why not cut a couple, or at least describe them in the sparsest of terms and then rule them out ASAP?

So how can you decide who to cut or trim?
Presumably your protagonist(s) and antagonist(s) are the backbone of the story. So their existence is pretty secure. But they can take on additional duties. In one of my books, a previously unknown officer made a useful suggestion that the team followed up on. The officer doesn't feature again and losing them would have no impact on the story. So at the suggestion of my editor, I cut them and "gave" their idea to one of the established characters. It saved a couple of hundred words, and my readers won't spend the rest of the book trying to remember their name.

So for each character, ask yourself these questions. They are not intended to tell you who to cut - that's an artistic choice to be made by you - but what they can do is help you make that choice. You don't have to answer every question for every character, but I would suggest that asking them of a few, especially secondary characters, can help you justify their existence.
What would happen to the story if they didn't exist?
Do they play a pivotal role? Can that role be assigned to someone else?
Are they necessary for later stories?
If you write a series with an ongoing story arc, do you need to introduce a character in a previous book, even if their role is tiny? There is a running joke that in Star Trek, any red-shirted security guard that is played by an extra that you've never seen before, will be dead by the first ad break. If you decide that in book 5 one of the police officers will turn out to be corrupt, try not to introduce them in that book! If possible, introduce them - perhaps in a minor role - in earlier books, that way readers are used to them being around and are less likely to suspect them.
Does their importance to the story justify their wordcount?
How you define 'important to the story' is a matter of perspective. In my books, Warren's in-laws feature regularly. They rarely have any role in the crime being solved. However, they impart an insight into Warren as a person, and are a source of internal conflict for him. So in that way, they are justified. For narrative purposes, they can also act as a page break to slow the pace of the story, or add humour if it is too bleak.

Cutting a character can be hard, especially if they have been in the book since the first drafts. But sometimes we have to make hard choices for the good of the story. As a sweetener though, there are some crumbs of comfort. First of all, if you really like the character that you've crafted, save them for another book. The film industry is full of examples of actors who failed an audition, but were called back and offered a different part or cast in another production. I wonder how many interesting, quirky characters started life as a well-crafted secondary character who couldn't justify their place in the original book but were so good the author recast them in a different role in their next book? And of course, if you have already come up with a great name for them, you can use that name in a different book!

How do you decide if a character has earned their place? Have you ever reused an excised character in a different project?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
Until next time,
Paul.

Today's Tip is another suggestion to help move you on if you are suffering from writer's block.
Writer's block is a funny old thing. Sometimes it's more about getting your head in the game and starting your day's work than what you actually need or want to write.
I liken it to a sportsperson warming up before a match. It's all about stretching those writing muscles, ready for the game.
In this case, a simple free-write exercise can be enough to get you going. These sort of things are popular in creative writing classes. Regardless of the topic being studied that day, the class often starts with one of these. It helps you mentally switch to writing mode, rather than whatever other things your mind is on today.


Googling "Writing Prompts Generator" delivers dozens of hits, but here's one that looks quite nice.
https://randomwordgenerator.com/writing-prompt.php
Don't worry if the prompt doesn't relate to what you are writing. This isn't about adding to your manuscript's wordcount. If you watch a training session for an athlete, their warm-up exercises don't always link to the sport they are competing in. The goal is to get everything running smoothly.
And don't worry about "wasting time". When writer's block is really entrenched, you can spend all day writing, re-writing, deleting and stressing, with nothing to show for it at the end.
If a few minutes writing something that you'll junk at the end is enough to start you working productively, there's a net gain there.

Setting some constraints can be useful.
Give yourself a time limit. What can you get down in 10 minutes?
Don't lift your pen. This is a classic in creative writing classes. The rule is write any old nonsense, just go with the flow. Don't stop and start to overthink it. Obviously, this is better suited to a pen and paper, but if you are a reasonable typist or use dictation software, you can still do it.
No editing. Once it's down, it's down. Own your previous choices!
Don't spend too long choosing a prompt. If you do this, you can waste even more time. Pushing yourself to write something outside your comfort zone can be good - and remember, this is just for you. If the end product is gibberish, who cares? Nobody minds if a goalkeeper looks a plonker during warm-up, if the end result is a clean sheet at the end of the game.

At the end of the activity, open the manuscript you are working on and start. Get at least something down whilst you are still warmed up. Hopefully, it'll be like jump-starting a car - once the engine is running, you just need to drive it for a bit to charge the battery up.

Good luck!
Have you got any suggestions about overcoming writer's block?
Feel free to comment here or on social media.
Happy writing,
Paul
​If you are a writer and have a tip you'd like to be featured on my blog, please don't be shy. Contact me on social media or using the email link above.