On Wednesday, we workshopped the first drafts of our Joining the Conversation Step #1, the dialogue or play. Each member of our inquiry group received suggestions from the group after we read (or in the case of my crazy-long dialogue) skimmed each other's rough draft.
1. Josh talked about the flow of my paper, stating that he thought it flowed well and worked. He suggested that I use more stage directions to make it more like a real play, as well as more slang so as to give the characters more personality. He also thought that I could stand to shorten the play, but that I should do so carefully, because it seemed to flow okay as it was. Lynnsey said that she thought I needed to have the characters interact and say that they clearly disagree with one another. This would make my dialogue more like an argument and make the characters share differing opinions more clearly. She also agreed with Josh that I should add in more stage direction to make it less halted and formal. Joey agreed with Lynnsey and Josh about the stage directions. He said he really liked the places where I added humor because it made the characters seem more real. He suggested that I use accents to give the characters distinct voices in addition to the slang. He also agreed with Josh and thought I could try to shorten it, and suggested that I just try to concentrate on eliminating irrelevant information my characters might have added.
2. I think the most helpful advice I received was the suggestion to add more stage directions. I focused on making sure all the speakers said their piece at least twice, the result of which is a bunch of posturing experts vying for the chance to talk. I need to make my dialogue more like a play and focus now on keeping it and the characters' voices authentic and relevant to the setting I've chosen, which is the PTA meeting.
3. Probably the least helpful advice I received was the suggestion to shorten this dialogue. Everyone gave me great suggestions and seemed to agree that even though it was stuffy and more formal than a real conversation, my dialogue seemed to flow like a PTA meeting might and the characters seemed a bit more formal and stiff--just like they might if they were on a panel in front of a live audience. If I take everyone's suggestion and add in stage directions and more slang and dissenting statements, I have really no choice but to make this paper longer. I don't want to shorten it and sacrifice clarity and flow to satisfy concerns about the page length. So I don't think I could, even if i should. Sorry, guys...I know it's long, but I can't see any other way.
4. So when revising this dialogue I will attempt to lend the characters/sources more authenticity by working in some slang and some accents. I will try to make them less formal in this way. Now, to make it more clear that they are agreeing and disagreeing with each other as Lynnsey suggested, I will need to add simpler stateements of "No", "Yes", "That's not what I think", or "Exactly!"...that kind of thing. I will probably attempt to do this in such a way that kills two birds with one stone--I may try to make these "agree or disagree" statements with accents and slang included just to save the space. Finally I plan to take everyone's suggestion and add in more stage direction. Josh did this the best of us, so I will borrow some of his techniques and make this piece more like a real play.
Any more suggestions? please let me know. I have no doubts Megan will have some good ones in her comments as well. See y'all in class later! (Ha! See there! I can do slang! ;) just joking!)
No comments:
Post a Comment