Sometimes dialogue replaces the function of narrative in conveying action. This is less often used by authors, but in my opinion, is the playground of mature authors. The best way to explain this is through example. Here’s the “before”:
Cathy, bubbling for her share of fresh-cooked brownies, set her china plate atop the stove.
“Hey, don’t set that there,” said her grandmother. “That’s my wedding gift. And I’ll beat you raw if it shatters.”
If we let the dialogue tell us what’s happening, and keep it sounding natural and ‘in character’, the information is more engaging. This also leaves space to add more interesting narrative afterward. Here’s the “after” version:
Cathy pushed ahead of her brother for her share of fresh-cooked brownies.
“Hey, don’t set that on a hot stove,” said her grandmother. “That’s my good china. My wedding china. And I’ll beat you raw if it shatters.”
We learn from the charming grandmother that the girl is setting something inappropriate on the stove, and not just china, but grandma’s wedding china. The reveal is more impactful when the character is doing the telling because the layers of sentences better build toward her threat to beat the child. Getting yelled at (even as a reader) by the grandmother is more tension building than reading the same information through neutral narrative.
Of course, you should not use this technique constantly, or it will become cliché within your own work.
Good luck, Angels!!
Your Editor Devil