Author Mark C. Newton is a genius at writing blog posts that spark debate about Sci Fi. This week he asks what is meant when a critic says a writers dialogue is "clunky."
Here's my take on the question, which I left in a comment on Mark's blog here -
http://blog.markcnewton.com/2010/01/05/clunky/comment-page-1/#comment-2267
+++++
Writing great dialogue is an art form in and of itself. I am not sure I can define clunky, but I know it when I read it.
Great dialogue has to do with capturing an individual characters speech patterns and making the character seem like a real person. When the dialogue is stilted or not quite perfect for that character, the reader has more trouble suspending their disbelief and can be sort of yanked out of the pleasure of reading the story.
I think that suspension of disbelief is really what people mean when they talk about the "flow" of the dialog. You sort of forget you are reading and a little play is going on in your mind. You can imagine the characters and imagine them talking to each other.
Then all of a sudden you are like - wow - bad script writing, bad acting, bad dialogue. Clunky.
The flow is interupped by your mind's critical center seeing something that doesn't sound quite right about the way the characters are speaking to each other. Like a leaky Grohe faucets, the flow is interuppted. See, I did it just there.