Can there be too much communication in a story?

I think over communication is possible; but how are your characters? What are their personalities like? If theyre ones to be apologetic it might make sense or if they tend to avoid conflict, but if not then have the character do something else. B/C how often do people actually apologize to each other, some might others will deny and say they were right or might just not care and let it roll over. Another thing it might make things a bit more interesting if someone who is usually friendly kind and apologetic if they suddenly keep it to themselves and don’t apologize ^.^

or if they apologize have the other character not accept it. this could be great to cause more tension between the relationship

I feel as if communication isn't a bad thing at all when it comes to writing. There's a lot of benefits (especially if its just how your characters are (like @SchmuckDuck said above) or if you've introduced your characters and built them up in a way that the audience knows that they are the type of person to want to speak things out.

The real struggle is how the conversations work and trying to figure out if the other person is like them (as in communicates and avoids misunderstandings or conflict) because one character can be a "lets talk this out and apologise" and the other could be completely opposite. It would make the dialogue so much more interesting to see the clash in views at times instead of seeing a potential conflict get immediately solved. What would be the reason for the issue to even pop up then you know? It all just takes time and effort to make sure the conversation feels real :]

This still sound like miscommunication. Like if the topic of discussion is how the room should be lit, and both characters get off topic and discuss their right to want the room lit a certain way, they're not really communicating are they? It's like if a parent and child got into a fight, and they both realize it's okay for both of them to be upset about whatever it is. But they didn't address the what caused the fight in the first place. Now, them respecting and understanding each other emotions can lead to a better dialogue, but that doesn't mean they're actually communicating. Unless you frame the fight over the lighting situation as indicative of a deeper issue, it still kinda sounds like neither want to address the issue at hand.

It kinda sounds like these friends may have too similar personality traits. Most people don't resolve or handle conflict the same way. Some people half-heartedly apologize in an effort to move on and not dwell, other stew in the issue for days or weeks, some are thoughtful in their response, other not, and some people will never accept an apology or attempt to reconcile. Very similar to what @SchmuckDuck said.

Well if your story is more grounded and down to earth then yea cooking duel can be ridiculous.

I think it's more about picking and choosing when good communication should be used and where a breakdown in communication would make sense depending on a character's personality. An insecure person might be prone to negative assumptions while a confident person may assume nothing could go wrong for them. Those two ideologies naturally oppose and conflict with one another. No matter how openminded either person is, miscommunication can still occur.

Ooh I definitely relate to this one

I've always had an inclination as a writer to have my characters quickly jump into deep heart-to-heart therapy-sounding conversations that solve all their issues. It feels too easy and cheap a fix, and thinking of all the conversations and conflicts I've observed, few people in reality are so open, straightforward, selfless, or emotionally mature/self-aware/perceptive enough to have that kind of dialogue- even (and especially, tbh) with those they love and trust. Most of my characters shouldn't be either, if I look realistically at their histories, relationships, and personalities- and I think it's more interesting that way.

I tend to want to make my characters say the "right thing" in their conversations and make them very emotionally sensitive and perceptive of the other character's feelings, fears, and motivations for the sake of moving things along and simply because it feels correct to me as the all-knowing observer who loves harmony and hates conflict, but it just doesn't make sense for everybody to be that way.

I know I'm not like that. If I know what I should say to resolve a conflict in the first place, odds are I still don't say it for whatever petty reason (too tired, given up on them understanding, feeling angry, annoyed, or resentful, etc). So, when done well, a lack of communication- or "wrong" communication- feels more human to me. Ideal communication is satisfying to read in the right amount, but boring, unrealistic, and unrelatable when overused.

In short, there's a happy medium and I think as a writer you just have to get a feel for what that looks like with practice and thought. Knowing your characters' behavior and what purpose you want to fulfill with their interactions helps.

Hm! I think it really depends (coming from a communication heavy story as well haha)

I think you need to have a good mix of communication and action, which is why I recommend settings scenes somewhere where the characters can do things that can reflect their emotional state.

E.g- a character may apologize to another character by say, handing them their umbrella in the rain and telling them to "get home safe"- it shows they care for the other person just by "shielding" them from the rain (a bit cliche but I hope it illustrates the point)

I know I personally have had to cut back on dialogue when used too much, and usually I'll try show it through character action and reaction. And usually things can be kept engaging by having the scenes be motivated by pre-established wants and needs as well as the character acting in the scenes.

And also with arguments and such- I feel like it's good to have time for characters to reflect on the situation before realising they're wrong, especially for scenes like that where they are growing as a person. As long as them apologizing makes sense with their pre-established character and motivations, I'd say it's all good.

I think it's pretty hard to balance a ton of communication with action, but things like setting and character acting can help. If I find myself bored with a scene I'll usually try find something interesting to add in so that I enjoy drawing the scene when I get to it 🤷‍♀️'

Edit: I also think miscommunication can work well if it's a conflict that can't be solved by a simple conversation. It needs to actually be a conflict that reflects on the character's perspectives as people- like why did they misunderstand each other?

( I personally hate the "oh I misheard what they said!" thing LIKE NO. GIVE ME GOOD CHARACTER DRAMA PLEASE)

image.jpeg604x508 104 KB

Yes (courtesy of Brian Michael Bendis’ old comics)

Okay, I've been working on a story kind of like this recently, and I understand these concerns. ^^; It's hard to figure out how to keep things interesting in a grounded story (as in, most of the conflicts are interpersonal) when all the characters are relatively kind and nice. A lot of potential conflicts just wouldn't happen, and another large portion would be resolved quickly because the characters don't want to see each other hurt.

So how do you get to that portion of conflicts that would take time and effort to resolve despite the characters' kindness? The answer is actually very simple: character flaws, and lots of them. ^^

To give an example, here's a brief rundown of my characters' troublemaking flaws. To reiterate, they're all very nice people. However:

A: Immature, socially anxious, conflict-avoidant; tends to blame himself for things.
B: Poor impulse control; prone to jealousy and sensitive about proving his worth-- despite this, he often tries (semi-successfully...) to hide and repress negative emotions.
C: Stubborn and willful; can hold a grudge for years. ^^; When faced with someone who's not quite so nice, he's more likely to choose violence than tolerance.
D: Brutally honest, sometimes to the point of dismissing people's feelings. Likes to tease. Finds it difficult to share her personal problems with others.
E: The all-time champion of emotional repression, causing rifts between herself and others that they often can't detect until it's too late. Struggles with imposter syndrome.
F: Between his upbringing, trauma, and neurodivergence, has very little in the way of social skills, and has made a habit of hiding things in order to seem normal. Very shy at an age (53) where it is no longer socially acceptable to be shy. ^^; Also tends to blame himself for things.

...So yeah, there's a lot to work with there. :9 At one point or another, one person's flaw will have to have a particularly unfortunate interaction with another person's flaw (e.g. D's insensitivity paired with B's hyper-sensitivity, or A's social anxiety paired with F's social ineptitude)

And to make things even more fun, another strategy I like to use (one I think most slice-of-life writers use) is to structure the story with events and activities. Keep the characters working on things, going places, and solving problems together, and you'll have more opportunities to create and explore conflict.

One last hint: don't be afraid to give your characters some backbone. ^^ As ideal as it might seem for friends having problems to both immediately capitulate and try to find another way forward, it's not really realistic. Most people tend to think that their ideas about things are correct-- that's why they have them and feel comfortable expressing them. :T And most of the time they have to be convinced to drop them for someone else's.
Or y'know, they might have wildly different ideas about how to fix their problem, and end up creating a second layer of conflict to resolve. ^^; Let it happen; let things get a little crazy. Let them struggle with each other and communicate unsuccessfully before reaching a true understanding.

For me as a reader, comic and novel, not communicating has to make sense. I get tired fast reading or watching series where the leads are constantly angry or upset in some way or misunderstand everything because they don't communicate when it's so obvious they should.

I find myself yelling, "SAY SOMETHING! OMG you're not engaged in top secret warfare! You're on friendly terms and _______ just happened! SAY SOMETHING!"

If it's a logical situation of one or both feeling reasonably worried about speaking up, I can accept that. In real life, our fears and stubbornness or ego can make us stay silent when we should open up to those around us who matter.

Find that balance. "Does it make sense or am I just trying to create drama by making my characters dense?" (I didn't mean to rhyme, but it's there now and I'm not changing it )

Stupidity is a pet peeve of mine, so I don't like reading characters who are stupid and I do my best not to make my characters stupid lol. Common sense shouldn't be a super power, although it seems to be these days. Since it's fiction, I like characters who show a respectable amount of logic and reason not found these days. (I think we need a thread dedicated to spontaneous rhyming!)

Or you can still have them reason everything but when it comes to acting they can't stop themselves from doing it emotionally and then regret it