Guest Blogger: Matilda McCloud
Avoiding On-the-Nose Writing
A common complaint about amateur screenwriters is that their dialogue is too “on the nose.” Characters talk openly about their feelings, thoughts, and backstory rather than revealing them through action or unspoken subtext. Fiction writers, of course, should avoid writing on-the-nose dialogue. But to broaden this concept, I think we also need to be careful that our characters and plots aren’t too on the nose.
Off-the-Nose Characters
Let’s say, for example, a biker dude, with a skull-with-wings tattooed on his biceps, swaggers down the street. A dog gets in his way. Maybe you’d expect him to kick or yell at the dog. That would be on the nose. But what if the biker says “bless you” to the dog when it sneezes? That would be what I call “off the nose.” If the biker removes his leather vest to reveal an “I Brake for Unicorns” t-shirt, you might lose your reader. That’s too far off the nose.
It’s difficult to write off the nose. When I need to describe a minor character, I shuffle the character deck of cards in my mind, and from all the books and movies I’ve seen, I’ll pull out the donut-eating cop card or the flaky New Age woman card. These kinds of characters elicit recognition from the reader, but no surprise or delight. I need to discard those ideas and come up with something more original.
I disagree, though, with writing instruction books that encourage writers to create characters using charts and graphs. You pick one characteristic from column A and another from column B. As a reader, I recognize these artificially constructed characters, like the cop who recites Keats from memory and collects netsuke carvings. These characters don’t seem real to me. To create off-the-nose characters, it helps to have firsthand knowledge of the people you’re writing about.
I wouldn’t recommend writing thinly disguised versions of yourself, your family, or friends. I did that when writing my first novel and learned the hard way: I’m not fascinating enough for a whole novel! But you can borrow off-the-nose characteristics from people you know. My husband has a cop friend, for example, who is a health food nut and would never eat a donut.
Observe and take notes in your daily life. Get away from your computer and don’t write only from inside your head. I’ve been to Central Park in New York City dozens of times, so I wrote the Central Park scene in my novel from memory. A recent visit to the park reminded me that I couldn’t conjure up the kind of off-the-nose details one can find there on a typical Saturday. Here’s one: members of a Bavarian folk band in full costume—red stockings, brimmed hats, tubas and trombones slung over their shoulders—clapping in appreciation as they watched street kids dancing to rap music. I went back and rewrote that scene.
Off-the-Nose Plots
I once freelanced reading unsolicited manuscripts for Dial Books for Young Readers. Of the 3,000 manuscripts I read, only one was published. Most of the manuscripts were written by bandwagon writers, i.e., Madonna wrote a picture book, so why can’t I? How hard could it be to write a 32-page book with only a few lines per page?
We got a lot of stories like The Little [Fill-in-the-Blank] That Could; The [Fill-in-the-Blank] Under My Bed; Aloysius the Alliterative Animal; and so on. These are examples of on-the-nose plots—stories from people who are writing what they think is a typical picture book manuscript, but who don’t know a thing about contemporary children’s books.
I am guilty of once being a bandwagon writer. A few years after I graduated from college, I tried to write a Harlequin-type romance. I figured these romances are all the same, so how hard could it be? Yet I found it nearly impossible to write an original one. My romance about the American tourist who meets and falls for a hunky Welsh guy was rejected. I realized I would need to immerse myself in the genre by reading dozens of similar romances before I could hope to come up with an off-the-nose plot.
Take advantage of interlibrary loan and immerse yourself in your chosen genre or category of fiction or nonfiction to find that off-the-nose twist that will make your manuscript stand out.
Final Thought
way. His juxtaposition of images was startling and eye-opening.
For inspiration, reread the Parable of the Mustard Seed. It would have been on the nose
if Jesus had said the kingdom of heaven is like a mighty oak that grows from a small seed. Instead he used the tiny seed of a tall, but hardly mighty, shrub, the mustard plant, to make his point.
I worked for ten years at Penguin Putnam in NYC. I now work at G&H Soho, a small book printer. I have recently completed a novel, SONG OF A CROCUS MOON, and am working on a new novel. By the way, my real name is Mary Jo Rhodes, not Matilda McCloud!
[ Next Post → ] [ ← Previous Post ]
39 Responses 
If you're new to publishing, please start here: How To Get Published.
You may also want to watch this 14-minute video: Advice for New Authors.
My passion is partnering with authors to bring worthwhile books to publication. I started this blog as a way to create a community of writers, both published and seeking publication. I write about a wide variety of topics of interest to writers, and I consider the reader comments even more important than my own posts!
Click HERE for my full bio.
>Mary Jo, you nailed it! Right on the nose!
Sorry. Couldn't resist.
That was a great post; thank you for writing it. It is a keeper!
>The FX cable show "Rescue Me" with Dennis Leary has wonderful "off the nose" but believable characters: the alcoholic priest, the macho fireman afraid of women, et al.
>Good stuff here. Thanks for the post.
>I really enjoyed this post, and thought the example of Jesus and the mustard seed was particularly relevant. Thanks for visiting!
>Great post! Thanks.
>I have been recently observing that most "real life" conversations are "off the nose." For example . . .
I was reading a marriage counseling book (I'm a lay counselor) and the author was explaining something that fascinates me: long-term couples rarely conduct their relationship "by the book." They don't say the right things; they don't practice traditional conflict-management strategies; they don't even talk in logical sequences. Their conversation topics are all over the ball park — even in one five-minute segment. Simply put, they don't follow the guidelines for a healthy marriage in their actual verbal exchanges, nor do they pay the slightest attention to what we would call good communication.
But they're close. They're intimate.
His point? We have misunderstood how intimacy is built and what it looks like.
I started watching. This counselor has nailed it. Long-term married couples are hilarious. They are a world unto themselves. Then I noticed that we (married 25 years) were doing our own version of this, too!
The lesson: there are at least two conversations happening between two people — one spoken, one unspoken. Guess which one is the most important?
>When creating a minor character, there are some very good reasons for us to use an “on the nose” character, rather than developing unusual traits. Minor characters are often representative characters. A major character walks into a room full of people and they all want to speak to him, but rather than relay his conversations with fifty people, we pick three average Joes and relay his conversations with those three. The reader can then assume that his conversation with the others is very similar. If we were to use three “off the nose” characters, the reader would be left with the impression that the whole room is like those characters. Minor characters need to blend into the background. Part of the reason actors don’t like “on the nose” dialog is because it doesn’t give their character a chance to shine. As writers, we have to be concerned with the big picture and the big picture is that if we allow the minor characters to preempt the main characters then we’ll ruin the story. We need a few red shirts to show the reader just how in trouble the main character is. We need some characters who are exactly what the reader expects. But, yeah, when it comes to major characters, we need some deep layers there.
>Thanks for a great post! The folk band/street kids scene choked me up a little. Love it.
>Thanks for the reminder that the best observations come from real life and not from inside my head!
>What a wonderful post. Off the nose. Great stuff. I must remember that watching and listening is one of my most important tools as a writer. The ears have it! I shall copy and paste this post now for the future lest I forget.
>Great post and very true…and a reminder that I needed! It's so easy to get caught up in expected imagery…the unexpected ones are so much better.
Great food for thought!
>Too true.
Thanks for that. I'm off to read and ponder the Mustard Seed Story.
>This is good stuff. I wrote a post this week about the need to have plenty of "unplugged" time — time engaging in real life — to keep us inspired and full of what will later spill out in some form onto our writing pages. I feel affirmed here in what you said on the same subject, and enjoyed your take on "on the nose" vs off-nose.
>Timothy's comment is misleading. All primary and secondary characters should be interesting in some way. Why go out of your way to create something boring?
Those "background" characters Timothy mentioned are not really characters. In a movie or a play they'd probably be "walk on" roles or at the most, bit parts.
Let's not miss the point of the post. If you're going to create a character, major or minor, make them each special in their own way.
>Thanks so much for your comments! Very much appreciated!
I agree, Timothy, that some "walk on" characters should fade into the background and not stand out too much. In one draft of my novel, I had a bored waitress reading modern philosophy. I was trying too hard. But I also didn't want to make her a gum-chewing waitress stereotype. In the end, she turns ketchup bottles upside down and rolls silverware in napkins in the empty diner–something typical, but not stereotyped.
>Whoops–just saw Rachelle's comment! But I guess we agree on that.
>Thank you for the lesson on keeping it real. Loved it.
>Good morning Rachelle and Mary Jo,
Mary Jo said: "I wouldn't recommend writing thinly disguised versions of yourself, your family, or friends. I did that when writing my first novel and learned the hard way: I'm not fascinating enough for a whole novel!"
That comment amused me because it reminded me of feedback I received from a professonal critique. My dialog was typical of my own family's speech. "That's too plain and ordinary," I was told. "Instead, think of what your characters would say if they had all the time they needed to think of their response. Make their words sparkle." Sparkle is definitely not in my everyday vocabulary.
Thanks for showing me that dialog is not the only place where I need to watch this problem.
Be blessed,
Lynnda
>Thanks, Matilda, I really enjoyed this post. It was very enlightening and a good example of how to write productive characters.
>As I sift through the volumes of writing advice permeating the blogsphere, this is one of the most vivid, concise and helpful things I've seen lately.
Mary Jo, I just added your blog to my reader. I didn't find you on Twitter. Do you tweet, too?
>Personally, I'd want to follow the biker in the unicorn t-shirt for awhile just to see what made him tick!
Great post.
>Great reminder! Stereotyped characters come so easily to mind, it's the lazy way to keep the story moving. Thanks for the wake-up call to shake-up those characters.
>Thanks, Mary Jo! I just brought up this concept to someone the other day. You've done such a good job of explaining it that I will have to refer her to this post. It's especially important when our characters talk about spiritual matters. Far better to have them say nothing at all and reveal their beliefs through their actions than to say something too direct. Spiritual conversation in dialogue is very, very difficult to pull off.
>You know, one of my fave minor characters was a waitress with an attitude. She was short and stocky with an in-your-face personality. She teaches the MC how to waitress and work the tips per "guy table or girl table." And is always sneaking food in the kitchen while on a diet.
I think I like her so much because she's different, but I couldn't write a whole novel about her. She's comic relief.
>Great post. Makes sense. I like the example of the biker-dude and the "bless you" made me smile, but painted the picture well.
Thanks for this post.
>Anne–Thanks. I'm not on Twitter yet.
Lynette–I guess we'd need a little more backstory about the biker guy with the unicorn t-shirt, but it could work!
Sharla–interesting about the waitress character. This was the only job I was ever fired from (cocktail waitress), so I think I block waitressing from my mind, except I always leave big tips!
>Great post, Mary Jo! I have challenged myself to write my characters in an "off the nose" way, but I truly appreciate your pointing out the "too far off the nose" tendency — a sure way to lose the reader, as you say! I also loved your colorful Central Park example. Thanks for the excellent, concrete advice!
>Excellent guest post – thanks so much!
>Thanks for this post Ladies. You have given a lot to consider and mull over in my upcoming project.
Jesus is the Master storyteller.
>Brilliant, my friend! You are one funny lady. Please, please keep on writing about anything that suits your fancy. Your words are wonderful!
>Rachelle,
I’ll concede that the three people from a room of fifty aren’t really characters, but red shirts are often real characters with significant dialog even though they may be very much “on the nose.” But my point was that we don’t want scene stealers grabbing the spot light and directing it away from the story. Even among the colorful characters that Dickens used in Oliver Twist, we find Charlie Bates who is a much more “on the nose” character than The Artful Dodger. He is important because he provides contrast to his more colorful companion. For that matter, Oliver himself is extremely “on the nose.” If we were looking for the stereotypical example of an orphan born into poverty during that time period, he would be it. And he isn’t a minor character. Neither is he boring. I believe there is a place and a purpose for both stereotypical and atypical characters. As writers, we need to be prepared to use either as needed.
>Brilliant! You've made me a better writer in just one post today. You've also explained why my book club's last pick was so hard to get even a third of the way through. It was/is a young adult book written by a prominent journalist, a sex-free reworking of the Cinderella fairy tale set in no particular time or place, just unfolding until the girl finds true love with a strong woman. Every sentence, every character was "on the nose." Who can finish a book full of "just about what you'd expect"?
>I enjoy an eclectic group of characters (or ideas) in a work, myself. I love conflicts of personality or thought as I feel they bring humor and light to a tale. Not to mention that many readers resonate with it, fictional or not, and 'boring' is, in the grand scheme of things, relative…
Writers, fear not. Being true to one's voice and vision is key, all of which Mary Jo effortlessly exemplifies in her writing. Way to go!
>Cool post! Thank you for sharing. I think I need to rethink some of my characters.
>Great guest post!
Add "off the nose" to the list I keep in my head.
And I appreciate how you pointed out Jesus as being the best for off the nose. He is the ultimate story teller.
>Here via Bibliophile Stalker, and hey, what a great post! "Off the nose." I love it! Definitely something I will be keeping in mind as I work on my stories and novels.
>That biker wouldn't kick the dog. That's OFF the nose.
>Great post. Now to put it into practice.
Diane
I’m truly enjoying the design and layout of your website. It’s a very easy on the eyes which makes it much more pleasant for me to come here and visit more often. Did you hire out a developer to create your theme? Superb work!