How To Make Your Characters Almost Cry

Y’ever read something and have understanding that has eluded you interminably suddenly stop, curl up, and snuggle neatly into a fold in your brain because a new way way opened to it?

100 Dialogue Tags You Can Use Instead of “Said”

For the writers struggling to rid themselves of the classic ‘said’. Some are repeated in different categories since they fit multiple ones (but those are counted once so it adds up to 100 new words). 

1. Neutral Tags 

Straightforward and unobtrusive dialogue tags: 

Added, Replied, Stated, Remarked, Responded, Observed, Acknowledged, Commented, Noted, Voiced, Expressed, Shared, Answered, Mentioned, Declared.

2. Questioning Tags 

Curious, interrogative dialogue tags:

Asked, Queried, Wondered, Probed, Inquired, Requested, Pondered, Demanded, Challenged, Interjected, Investigated, Countered, Snapped, Pleaded, Insisted.

3. Emotive Tags 

Emotional dialogue tags:

Exclaimed, Shouted, Sobbed, Whispered, Cried, Hissed, Gasped, Laughed, Screamed, Stammered, Wailed, Murmured, Snarled, Choked, Barked.

4. Descriptive Tags 

Insightful, tonal dialogue tags: 

Muttered, Mumbled, Yelled, Uttered, Roared, Bellowed, Drawled, Spoke, Shrieked, Boomed, Snapped, Groaned, Rasped, Purred, Croaked.

5. Action-Oriented Tags 

Movement-based dialogue tags: 

Announced, Admitted, Interrupted, Joked, Suggested, Offered, Explained, Repeated, Advised, Warned, Agreed, Confirmed, Ordered, Reassured, Stated.

6. Conflict Tags 

Argumentative, defiant dialogue tags:

Argued, Snapped, Retorted, Rebuked, Disputed, Objected, Contested, Barked, Protested, Countered, Growled, Scoffed, Sneered, Challenged, Huffed.

7. Agreement Tags 

Understanding, compliant dialogue tags: 

Agreed, Assented, Nodded, Confirmed, Replied, Conceded, Acknowledged, Accepted, Affirmed, Yielded, Supported, Echoed, Consented, Promised, Concurred.

8. Disagreement Tags 

Resistant, defiant dialogue tags: 

Denied, Disagreed, Refused, Argued, Contradicted, Insisted, Protested, Objected, Rejected, Declined, Countered, Challenged, Snubbed, Dismissed, Rebuked.

9. Confused Tags 

Hesitant, uncertain dialogue tags:

Stammered, Hesitated, Fumbled, Babbled, Mumbled, Faltered, Stumbled, Wondered, Pondered, Stuttered, Blurted, Doubted, Confessed, Vacillated.

10. Surprise Tags

Shock-inducing dialogue tags:

Gasped, Stunned, Exclaimed, Blurted, Wondered, Staggered, Marvelled, Breathed, Recoiled, Jumped, Yelped, Shrieked, Stammered.

Note: everyone is entitled to their own opinion. No I am NOT telling people to abandon said and use these. Yes I understand that said is often good enough, but sometimes you WANT to draw attention to how the character is speaking. If you think adding an action/movement to your dialogue is 'good enough' hate to break it to you but that ruins immersion much more than a casual 'mumbled'. And for the last time: this is just a resource list, CALM DOWN. Hope that covers all the annoyingly redundant replies :)

Looking For More Writing Tips And Tricks? 

Check out the rest of Quillology with Haya; a blog dedicated to writing and publishing tips for authors!

Instagram Tiktok

How to create an atmosphere: Supermarket

Sight

advertisements for products

big signs showing discounts

aisles full of colorful products

fresh produce

employees in matching uniforms

all different kinds of costumers

with shopping carts

with children running around

with a stroller or toddlers sitting in the shopping cart

with a service dog by their side

Hearing

the sound of shopping carts being pushed and bumping into shelves

parents calling for their children

people talking on the phone

a man asking his wife if they still have enough toilet paper at home

someone asking the employee where they can find something

music interrupted by announcements about promotions the store is doing

the surring and beeping sound of the cash register belt

the sound of the electronic doors opening and shutting again

Touch

the stickiness of the floors

the differents textures of each item they think about buying

the coldness and often stickiness of the handle of the shopping cart

the sudden wetness from some products that are either fresh produce or where the package is leaking

Smell

the smell of spilled drinks that someone dropped and left for the employees to clean up

the smell of cleaning products from them having to sweep it up

the smell of hand sanitizer

the smell of different products the costumer holds up to their face and smells to decide if they like it

the horrendous smell of deposit machines where you return your not quite empty beer bottles to and the leftover liquid spills everywhere

Taste

different samples offered at the supermarket

If you like my blog and want to support me, you can buy me a coffee or become a member! And check out my Instagram! 🥰

I’m still tweaking it, but something the Visible app has hammered home these past few weeks is just how much energy my body expends existing.

Currently lying perfectly still and I’m in the ‘exertion zone’ because I’m in so much nerve pain it's making my heart rate elevate.

Being in pain is burning up my pace points. I’ve used two since I woke up this morning simply by being conscious.

Anyone who dismisses the effects of chronic pain on the body or tells you to exercise to push through it is formally invited to throw themselves into the sun.

Dont know if you were joking about needing catboy references a couple of weeks back but here ya go

Theres one for sheep too if you need that

the sacred texts.... thank you for bestowing it upon me

NO ONE knows how to use thou/thee/thy/thine and i need to see that change if ur going to keep making “talking like a medieval peasant” jokes. /lh

They play the same roles as I/me/my/mine. In modern english, we use “you” for both the subject and the direct object/object of preposition/etc, so it’s difficult to compare “thou” to “you”.

So the trick is this: if you are trying to turn something Olde, first turn every “you” into first-person and then replace it like so:

“I” →  “thou”

“Me” →  “thee”

“My” →  “thy”

“Mine” →  “thine”

Let’s suppose we had the sentences “You have a cow. He gave it to you. It is your cow. The cow is yours”.

We could first imagine it in the first person-

“I have a cow. He gave it to me. It is my cow. The cow is mine”.

And then replace it-

“Thou hast a cow. He gave it to thee. It is thy cow. The cow is thine.”

Why the Protagonist Must Be a Problem-solver

In some ways, this post's topic sounds obvious, in others . . . not so much. On the surface, the tip seems simple, and yet, it is easily and often overlooked.

Your protagonist must be a problem-solver.

Yup. 

A problem-solver.

I don't care if she's the laziest, most passive, most dimwitted person on the planet, within the context of the plot, she must be a problem-solver (even if a reluctant one).

Otherwise, she'll feel like a weak character.

Otherwise, the plot will feel weak.

Of course, I'm sure you can find rare exceptions to this.

But 99% of the time, your protagonist needs to be a problem-solver.

So let's talk about why.

Why it's Important for The Character

Imagine a protagonist who doesn't problem-solve. She encounters the antagonist, reacts emotionally, but doesn't do anything to try to win the conflict, or at least gain the upper hand of the conflict. She won't be interesting for very long. It's hard to care about what happens to her, when she's putting no effort in to resolve it, when she doesn't care enough to try to fix it herself. It may start to feel like she's stuck in a loop--just circling the same internal responses over and over again, never really progressing, never really moving on.

Sometimes writers mistakenly think this makes her more sympathetic, but in reality, as counterintuitive as it may sound, the opposite is true. Audiences lose interest or become annoyed.

We've all met people who talk, and whine, and fume about their problems but don't do anything to better their situation. We may feel sorry for them at first, but eventually, we want them to take action to improve their predicament. Often we may even find ourselves giving advice (or in some cases, doing the problem-solving work for them).

We feel the same way about characters.

Your protagonist doesn't need to be the next Sherlock Holmes or Violet Baudelaire to be a "problem-solver."

At the most basic level, what this means is that when she encounters an antagonistic force (a problem), she's coming up with--or perhaps shifting--goals and plans (however big or small, or grand or modest), and taking action to try to make those a reality.

If she's not doing that, she's probably too passive in the plot and not exercising enough agency. The story is happening to her, but she's not doing anything to make the story happen. She's not influencing the direction of the story.

When the protagonist is the one coming up with goals and plans, and implementing them, the audience becomes more invested in her. They want to stick around to see if she's successful. She also now holds some accountability over what happens--the consequences--and that actually makes her more interesting and more sympathetic. What happens, good or bad, is on her. She holds responsibility. 

If your protagonist isn't problem-solving, it may be a sign that her wants aren't strong enough. Solid stories will showcase the protagonist's deepest desires (however big or small, or grand or modest), what she would sacrifice almost anything to obtain, avoid, or maintain. If the right desire is in jeopardy, the protagonist should naturally be driven to problem-solve. Characters with strong wants are more compelling. And in reality, we all have powerful wants we house deep within our hearts. 

Great stories will test and challenge the deep desires of the protagonist's heart. And if that's not happening, you likely haven't figured out your protagonist's deepest desires or you need to alter the character so that she desires what she desires more deeply. Don't settle on something she kinda wants. Find what she'd be tempted to sacrifice her life for--literally or figuratively (meaning her current lifestyle). What does she want to obtain, avoid, or maintain bad enough, that she'd consider doing things she wouldn't ordinarily do? That's the kind of want you should showcase--whether it be obtaining recognition as employee of the month, avoiding responsibility by taking on a new identity, or maintaining control by offing all rebels.

It's usually helpful to focus on an abstract want--obtain recognition, avoid responsibility, maintain control--that can then manifest into various concrete goals. Most people aren't going to give their "lives" to become "employee of the month," but many have gone to such lengths to obtain recognition; becoming employee of the month is just one way to obtain that. So even if the goal seems modest on the surface, tie it to a deep abstract want. (A bit of a tangent, but it's useful, so I left it in here 😉)

When the protagonist is problem-solving, it conveys to the audience what she cares about. If the rebels are increasing in power, and she doesn't do anything about it, then obviously she doesn't really care about being in control very much. That's not a deep desire of her heart. So we need the protagonist to problem-solve to help convey character.

And finally, if she's not struggling to overcome (problem-solving), she's probably not growing through a character arc. She's stagnant. She's not changing her worldview as she strives for success, nor is she wielding her beliefs, growing in resolve. This can make any attempt at an internal plotline feel repetitive or nonexistent, because the character isn't progressing on an internal journey. She's just stuck in the same spot.

Why It's Important for the Plot

Solid stories will showcase the protagonist's deepest desires, and even if those desires are abstract (obtain recognition, avoid responsibility, maintain control), if the character wants them bad enough, they will manifest into concrete goals (employee of the month, new identity, off the rebels) that have specific plans (show up on time to work, move to a new city, locate the rebels' base).

So the protagonist has a goal. The antagonist opposes the goal.

And since there should be an antagonist for nearly every scene, this means there are problems in nearly every scene.

If the protagonist isn't trying to solve those problems, by adjusting his goals and plans, then it's likely the plot isn't properly progressing. Like I mentioned with the internal journey above, the external journey probably feels repetitive, or in some ways nonexistent. It's just circling the same situation over and over, in the toilet bowl.

If you find yourself arguing against this, then it's likely because another character is the one doing most of the problem-solving, in which case, it's also highly likely that character is the true protagonist, and your "protagonist" is really more of a viewpoint character spectating the external plotline.

The plot needs conflict in order to progress properly. If the antagonist shows up, and the protagonist allows himself to just get beaten, it's not strong conflict. Sure, stuff is happening, but if the antagonist is hammering him to the ground without his resistance, it's not much of a conflict. It's passive victimization. And while that might work in a scene or two, it's not going to hold for a whole story, or even a whole act.

A passive victim isn't a problem-solving protagonist. Obviously.

So, suffice it to say, your protagonist needs to be a problem-solver.

Circling vs. Zigzagging Conflicts

Nearly every writer understands that a story needs conflict. The protagonist sets off to fulfill a goal, runs into an antagonistic force, and their struggle creates conflict. This should happen in the story as a whole, this should happen in acts, and it should happen in almost every scene--the difference is that the smaller the structural unit, the smaller the antagonist and conflict (simplistically speaking).

Today I want to talk about a sneaky problem I sometimes see when editing manuscripts, one that relates to conflicts.

Sometimes the writer simply “circles” the conflict.

What I mean is that after a given conflict, nothing has actually changed in the story. We just completed a “circle.”

For example, say the protagonist is a favorite target of the schoolyard bully. They get into a verbal fight, but when it's over, nothing's different. The conflict didn't have any consequences.

It may not sound that bad.

And if it only happens once in a while, and there are enough other conflicts going on, it may not be.

But if this happens repeatedly or this is the main conflict, the plot isn't progressing. It just did a circle and the characters ended up in the same situation they were before the encounter. Essentially, no matter how exciting the scene may seem to be, you could still cut it and the story would be the same.

Let's look at an even less obvious example.

The protagonist needs to get Object X from Character B.

The protagonist finds a way to successfully steal it.

But then immediately afterward, Character B steals it back.

The scene ends, and the protagonist is back at square one.

It doesn't sound that bad, does it?

And if it only happens once in a while, and there are enough other conflicts going on, it may not be.

But if this sort of thing happens repeatedly--over and over and over--the plot isn't progressing. You're just going back and forth and back and forth and back and forth. And if we just arc that path a bit, guess what? It creates a circle.

Another example:

The protagonist has a problem.

But she's not taking action to solve the problem. 

Yes, she reacts emotionally to the problem.

She may even sometimes come up with a plan for how to try to solve the problem.

But she doesn't execute it. Or, some other problem comes up that keeps her from executing it.

And rather than come up with and execute a new plan to address that problem.

She just reacts emotionally to the problem.

Imagine this going on for multiple scenes.

The plot isn't progressing. She's just ruminating.

It still feels like the text is just circling the conflict.

Please know I'm not saying a story can never do these things. On rare occasions, circling conflicts can be useful, like when the point is to show the audience how some things don't change. My first example may arguably work near the beginning of the story, to show what the protagonist's day-to-day life is like. My second example can sometimes work as a frustrating irony. And my last example, well . . . don't do my last example. Okay, okay, maybe it could work to show off how the protagonist is incapable of or has the flaw of never moving forward (and chances are it'd probably be better to illustrate that through summary, rather than scene).

And some degree of circling can work, when the story needs to end with the characters and world in the same place they started, like in a serial, but note that usually through the installment, there isn't much circling.

And often, even if the external circumstances complete a circle, the journey changed the character internally in some significant way.

BUT if you are repeatedly writing examples like those above, where the situation at the end of a scene or act is essentially the same as it was at the beginning of the scene or act, then you aren't moving the story forward.

Sure, conflict may show up on the page, but the text is just circling it.

Instead, it's much more effective to create a zigzag. 

If we wanted to keep this super simple, we might say the scene (or act) needs to move from a positive situation to a negative situation, or a negative situation to a positive situation. Or, a positive situation to a better situation, or a negative situation to a worse situation. Essentially:

+ --> -

- --> +

+ --> ++

- --> --

This is a good starting point, but I admit, it sometimes feels oversimplified to me.

In any case, the situation the character is in, has changed.

The story didn't do a circle. It did a zigzag (or zigzigger or zagzagger). 

The protagonist had a goal, encountered an antagonist, had a conflict, and the conflict came to a definitive outcome (if only on the small scale for that scene). It hit a climax or turning point.

And that outcome carries consequences.

The protagonist gets in an argument with the bully and gets suspended for his language. If he's suspended, his parents will ground him, and he won't get to go on an upcoming date with his crush. It's a setback.

Character B steals Object X back and in the process, mortally wounds the protagonist. Now the protagonist needs to get help before they die.

The protagonist takes action to solve the new problem, and not only succeeds, but manages to solve her original problem at the same time.

But often just adding consequences isn't enough. We need to make sure the consequences aren't or can't be undone, at least not easily or coincidentally. We don't have the protagonist's dad have a serendipitous change of heart and simply allow the protagonist to go on the date.

Don't undo what you just did (generally speaking). 

If the protagonist ended with a bigger or new problem, make him put in the effort to try to solve it. (See the "No, and . . ." vs. "Yes, but . . . " rule under "Disaster.")

And don't forget my "acid test" for plot progression. At the end of the scene (or act), ask, did the protagonist's current goal and/or plan shift? If the answer is no, chances are you did a circle. (Or you at least left things stagnating). If the answer is yes, something changed.

As I mentioned above, sometimes the change is internal. 

Maybe Character B did simply steal Object X back, but maybe that leads to the protagonist realizing he doesn't want Object X as much as he wants revenge on Character B. He hatches a plan to exact that.

While that may not be as strong as the protagonist getting mortally wounded, it's better than nothing changing, and the experience does change the direction of the story.

Personally, I'd still be cautious of writing such a situation, though. In most types of stories, we want consequences to be both internal and external.

But that topic could be another post.

So in closing: zigzagging conflicts is better than circling them.

Adieu.

i'm AWARE this is a stupid hill to die on, but like. trope vs theme vs cliché vs motif vs archetype MATTERS. it matters to Me and i will die on this hill no matter how much others decide it's pointless. words mean things

hey boy don't kill yourself. green's dictionary of slang is available online and allows you to explore 500 years of english vulgarity. you can search by part of speech, source, time period, etymology, and usage. there's a whole category for gay slang. they even have specific citations listed so you can see the exact context for yourself. boy did you know that in 1927 "to kneel at the altar" was slang for "to sodomize"