Dialogue . . . Hmm. I don't know if it's just me, but dialogue seems harder to write than monologues. You need two contrasting voices (which you can have in monologue form as well), and in order to keep the flow of the scene going, you need to write them concurrently (at least, in my opinion). It's much harder for me to write two voices at the same time; it's easier to write a monolgue, where only one character is in your head at a time. I guess dialogue is much more schizophrenic. In my past experiences (which, honestly, isn't a whole lot), whenever I've tried to write dialogue, it's turned out as the same voice arguing two seperate points.
One thing I found in reading these scenes is that many of them are very stage-direction heavy. I think this is helpful to the actor as well as the playwright, because it helps both parties visualize the character. Even the simple stage direction of Roy (in Plaza Suite) saying his line calmly and softly helps us visualize the humor. And when he isn't freaking out when he says "Call the doctor", it's even funnier.
Also, the use of pauses is helpful for a dialogue scene. I tend to think of "Good Dialogue" as being snappy, witty, fast-paced, and plowing through a scene. In comedy this is great. Sometimes. This is great in drama, too. Sometimes. But comedic pauses can add so much humor to a dialogue, and even in reading it it's funny. Dramatic pauses are good too, and I am a firm believer that just as much is said through silence as it is through words. But the danger with any of these pauses is that is can slow down the scene, and that can be dangerous.
One scene I really liked was the one from Closer. It was naturalistic dialogue about heavy stuff, and each of the characters seemed to be handling the tough situation in their own way. Something that was slightly reassuring to me was that the characters didn't seem inherently distinct. That is, there was nothing about them on the page that made them stand out to me in my mind. I mean, they didn't all have the same mannerism or anything, but they didn't seem completely different, either. This was refreshing to me, because I realized that when actors who have distinct voices act this out, it's going to sound like they're very different people, even if you can't quite tell on the stage. Martin McDonagh is really good at giving the actor a distinct voice to work with, and each of his characters has his/her own way of speaking, and that's great. But I'm no Martin McDonagh. So it's nice for me to realize that I can make two similar-sounding characters and have them end up distinct by the time it's actually performed.
One last thought: dialogue, in its most simplified form, is two people talking. DIalogue. But the scene gets altered quite a bit when a third person enters the mix. It's even more voices in the schizophrenic world of playwriting. I have yet to try it, but I think it would be so difficult to keep the flow of a scene going when you're constantly changing characters while you're writing. As an actor, one of my favorite roles was TV Man in Captive Audience by David Ives, because I was constantly shifting characters all the time. I was able to rehearse that, though. When you're writing, it seems like it should flow organically, and that seems tough to achieve when you're constantly stopping yourself to get into a different character. I guess it would be like trying to read through Captive Audience, doing all the voices on the first run through. It's doable, but very tough. (And I'm saying all of this as though you can't go back and re-write. There's nothing wrong with re-writing, but it seems like it's hard to be creative in the first place when there are so many road blocks slowing you down.)
So yeah. That's my deal with dialogue.
KG
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Ahh, KG, you make many good points, but first I must disabuse of something: writing, alas, rarely flows organically. And that notion of rehearsal isn't necessarily a bad one. Writing, especially writing voices, takes practice too, and the process of revision is very much like reading and rereading a line in rehearsal to see which way works and how to best block it and such.
ReplyDeleteHooray indeed for pauses -- in comedy and drama. They're as useful a tool for you as writer as for you as actor, and they are so powerful and so funny. You are right though to be wary of slowing the scene too much. I hate slow theater.
You're right too that the challenge is differentiating voices, especially since good writers often have such distinct voices. Actors will do some of that differentiation for you. But you have to do some too, and it's not easy. Some of the point with Closer I think is these people are supposed to seem overlapped and indistinct. That's part of that play's conceit, but it's probably not yours. That said, characters with wildly different identities will talk differently -- your two monologuers for instance. As you develop the characters, their voices will start to stand out to you, and it will feel less frenetic. Harder than monologues though for sure.
I fully agree with you Matthew! Dialogue is hard. I am absolutely dreadful at dialogue. Your observation that running two distinct voices at the same time is a particular challenge may be the source of why dialogue is so difficult for me to write.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I'm going to take a moment out of what you wrote in your blog to say that your two characters in The Celtic Cross have VERY distinct voices. So I think you may have a larger grasp on different voices running together than you give yourself credit for :)
But getting back to your blog, as that is what I'm supposed to be commenting on...
I like what you noticed about Closer. The fact that they are so similar is an interesting choice, and one that works. Plus, you're right, it is refreshing to know that character voices don't have to be enormously distinct in order to differentiate character. And as for pauses- I love pauses. But I also agree wholeheartedly that pauses run a very dangerous risk of slowing a play down too much (Come and Go anyone?). While I as a director like it when a playwright gives me clues as to the way they wish their dialogue to flow - through the use of pauses - I also think that there is a fine line between useful hints and too possessive. While stage directions are great they can be stifling. We didn't have any examples of too much stage direction in the dialogue snippets but I have definitely seen my fair share of plays that do (basically every play on the syllabus for Contemporary Theatre). However, one of my new absolutely favourite playwrights (Enda Walsh), is ALL about the stage directions.
But in the end, dialogue is tricky. Very very tricky. If we give too much characterization we risk loosing our audience, not enough and the audience cannot tell the difference between our characters. If we put in too many pauses we start slowing down the action, not enough and dramatic or comedic content can be lost. I guess all we can do is just try and have faith in the fact that practice makes perfect (or at least- makes dialogue easier...)
It's definitely more difficult to write from two voices at the same time, switching them back and forth. The tricky thing is, if you resign to writing them similarly the first time and then go back and change one voice later, it never turns out well, because then the change in the voice sounds really fake. It's that sort of dichotomy where you just want to get it down on paper, but it won't be good unless you do it right at the moment inspiration strikes.
ReplyDeleteI guess it is a little bit schizophrenic. Haha
I love me some stage direction. I think I do it too much, coz I imagine myself directing the things I'm writing, anyway.
I agree with you about pauses. They often seem to be overlooked, too. That's definitely a good thing to keep in mind when writing, and particularly so with dialogue.
I really liked Closer as well -- you make some great points about it; I found myself reacting the same way when I read it. Too bad I'm apparently not as articulate as you. ;)
I haven't tried three characters at once in a long time. It's definitely difficult. Not only do you have to worry about voice, but you have to pay attention to how much each of them is talking so one doesn't get stranded onstage with nothing to say, or, more importantly, do.
Also, I absolutely loved you in Captive Audience. I saw it in rehearsal very early on, and then when we were doing dress, I was blown away by how much it had changed and how much better it had become. It was amazing. I always went up early for the Time Warp so I could watch that play. :)
As a last note, I think we, both coming from an acting background, need to not cut that part of ourselves off -- we need to realize, like Laurie pointed out, that actors will do some of the work for us -- it's their job to bring characters to life. When writing, I think it'd be a good idea for us both to stop and say "How would I play this having never read it before?" And, "How do I think other people I've seen would play this?" The critique groups definitely help some with that, but it also helps to imagine full-blown acting, also with people's acting styles you're familiar with so you can visualize them.
I hope that helps; I don't know if that made any sense.
Matt,
ReplyDeleteI feel the need to clarify what I was saying about dear keanu: I was agreeing with Grant (was it him?) in his dislike of keanu, but also remarking that I think hating him is an established part of acting culture as actors who aren't him, actors who are out living from audition to audition watch him and think "jesus, how is he getting paid so much to DO NOTHING in a movie. And cool movies too. I know so many people who could not only do exactly what he's doing but actually far surpass it. Bastard." So, yes I think there is actor envy there, but stemming from the viewpoint of the tragic injustices of the world -- not his chops.