When writing my dialogue, it was surprisingly easy for me to come up with lots of content for Goldman and Socrates’s conversation. I decided to base a majority of the debate on their opposing beliefs about obligation to the government, to the people and to the gods. I really wanted my dialogue to sound natural. I wanted the reader to easily be able to imagine this conversation happening in real life. My dialogue was very smooth and the conversation was flowing nicely. Even though this was good, I do think it distracted me from really putting in some controversial viewpoints for either Goldman or Socrates. I didn’t really have enough of my own spin on what I think they would say, I kind of just took from what the text said and didn’t stray far from it.
I spent a lot of time trying not to make the conversation repetitive and attempted for each of them to respond with a relevant counter claim. I tried to avoid just having each character essentially repeat what they said in the text. Once the conversation between Goldman and Socrates really started to flow, it was very hard for me to find a point to stop. I could have easily added 3 or 4 more pages. So I eventually just found a point at which Socrates conceded to some of Goldman’s points but didn’t fully give in and ended the dialogue there. In my revisions I am going to clean up the ending and add a little flair to the conversation to make my personal spin on it shine through better.
Pingback: sportsoser
Pingback: Tim Carter
Pingback: Katie Maser