Is dialogue necessary? | Writer Questions #2

"Poppy Field" by Claude Monet. Image courtesy of Pixabay.com.

To dialogue or not to dialogue? What does dialogue do for fiction? Is it necessary? Generally recommended? Vital? Or is it completely optional and its absence has no bearing on the quality or palatability of the writing?

********

Dear Writer,

Nonfiction writers regularly do not include dialogue in their work. In many cases, we would find it strange to do so.

The core question, as with any craft-related issue, is what is necessary for a given work to succeed. This is largely dependent upon the goals, skill, and style of the author.

In fiction, it behooves most writers to include dialogue since stories are told from the perspectives of sentient characters or through anthropomorphized, otherwise inanimate, characters. (For a great example of this, see the old Animaniacs episode, "A Gift of Gold.”) Failure to do so for avant-garde reasons will likely isolate a large portion of your potential audience.

Renoir and Monet, each famed French Impressionists, had opposing views about the color "black" in their painting. Renoir said it was the "queen of all colors" and Monet refused to use it. But look at Monet's paintings, and you'll see black. This is because he found other ways to achieve the effect of black without directly using it.

Is dialogue "necessary" in fiction? No more than black was for Monet, but the question itself is deceptive. Consider the ways in which we can leverage passages that rely on narration and action vs. always defaulting to dialogue. Plot can be advanced and character can be revealed with or without dialogue. We should avoid dichotomies; "What works best here?" is a more salient question.

Over time, all of us develop the writing instincts necessary to determine if we've swung too far away from what we need to do good work.

Best,

DR-M