How to write realistic character dialogue in the vibe of The Eleventh Doctor from Doctor Who

Question

So, I'm writing a character who's sort of like The Eleventh Doctor, specifically the very AUDHD, neurodivergent side of him and I'm not sure how to portray the dialogue, how to even begin studying to try and write the way he speaks the very sporadically, like trying to play hot potato with words and thoughts. Plus, the character is not only British, but also smart and knows things, loads of things, sorta Sherlock Holmes esque in a way, So I'm not sure how to portray well this like 'he doesn't seem to know what he's talking about, he seems to be rambling nonsense but to him it all makes perfect sense and ends up circling back to the main topic at hand.' sort of thing, or maybe it's not logically possible, I'm not sure.

Some quotes for the vibe I want to portray:

"Pantaphobia! That's what it's called: Pantaphobia, not a fear of pants, if that's what you're thinking, It's a fear of everything, including pants, I suppose, In that case, Sorry. Go on."

"A needle that looks like hay, A hay-like needle of death, A hay-like needle of death in a haystack of uh.. statues."

"I've thought about that.. And, we'll all plunge to our deaths. See, I've thought about it."

"I would love to stay here, this whole thing. I'm thrilled, Oh this is Christmas!"

"That's probably quite a lot, looks like a lot. Is it a lot? I can never tell.."

"Oh, I will. I'll shout when that happens, yes.. something like.. I WAS NOT EXPECTING THIS!"

"Hello-- oops. Sorry, don't worry I wasn't listening, in a world of my own down there." "What?" "Do I have to stay now?"

"Ah, yes. Blimey. Sorry. Christmas Eve on a rooftop, saw a chimney, My whole brain just went what the hell."

"What are we going to do? Eat crisps and talk about girls? I've never actually done that but I bet it's easy, girls? Yeah?"

"Of course I'm okay, I'm the king of okay.. uuh.. That's a rubbish title, Forget that title."

"Don't worry, I put everything back the way I found it. Except this. There's always is bit left over, isn't there?"

"Yes. No! But if it helps, yes."

"Things? Hello! What kind of things? Interesting things? I love things, ask anyone."

"Social call. Thought it was about time I tried one out. How are you? This is the bit where I say I'm fine too, isn't it? I'm fine too. Good, love to Sofie, Byee."

"Just go. Stop noticing. Just go. Stop noticing, just go. Stop noticing, just go. Stop it. Am I noticing? No. No, I am not. And what I am not doing is scanning for electrical fluctuations. Oh, shut up, you. I'm just dropping in on a friend. The last thing I need right now is a patina of teleport energy. I'm going. Do you hear me? Going. Not staying, going. I am through saving them. I am going away now."

"It goes up tiddly up, it goes down tiddly down for only forty nine ninety nine, which I personally think is a bit steep, but then again it's your parents' cash and they'll only waste it on boring stuff like lamps and vegetables. Yawn! Nobody panic, but I appear to be losing control. Oops. Guys, guys, ladies and gentlemen. While I deal with this awkward moment, you go and find your parents slash guardians. Try in lamps."

Oh, right! Should mention that it's set in the 2010-12ish era, normal slice-of-life type world so, yes, unlike the doctor, no crazy sc-fi info dumping.

Any and all advice would be very very welcome. This is my first time writing on this forum, or any forum really, so If I did it wrong, I apologize. Thank you in advance!

Answer 1

Comedy

A lot of this is just comedic writing. It is not realistic, but it is the funny thing to say.

Comedic structure follows recognizable patterns. There is a setup, which feeds the expectation of what the next sentence should be. But then a surprise – the next sentence is not what was expected. Where it goes instead are the rules of comedy.

"I'll shout when that happens.. something like.. I WAS NOT EXPECTING THIS!"

In reductive terms, the punchline doesn't need to be intellectually funny, just deliver a surprise twist. It's the setup that primes the joke, hence there are structures that follow specific rules.

Jared Volle's Joke-Structure Guide lists the following that are working here:

• Broken assumptions the reader assumes some facts that would be 'normal' according to information in the setup. The twist is some crucial element that destroys that image with something ridiculous.
• Exaggerations the payoff sentence is completely out of scale to the setup.
• Contradictions the pay off is literally the opposite of the setup.
• Misplaced Sincerity the setup seems to be positive – an observation or sincere realization, but the payoff shows he's completely off the mark.
• Specificity the payoff includes something 'oddly specific'. It is not tribe-signaling a demographic, or a call back to pop-culture. It's just a weird non sequitur.
• Callbacks the payoff is a reference to an earlier hanging thread, or a variation on a running gag.

Others structures are listed at the link. Some are more obvious as stand-up jokes, some may apply to your character (Self Deprecation).

Character-revealing subtext

A web search led to more rules and other comedic-structure lists, including known tricks dating back centuries that can be very character-specific – for example 'malaprops', as Mrs Malaprop is the name of the character who said them. Malaprops are still used because it's a clever way to deliver a joke and character-build at the same time.

The subtext in your Who examples are not just comedy setup-and-payoff, they are character-revealing statements about how his mind works. The effect is a brain moving very fast, or several minds which are not quite synchronized.

"Yes. No! But if it helps, yes."

When he uses contradiction he says something with extreme confidence, then after hearing it said aloud, he denies it just as strongly because it feels instinctively wrong. The comedy is he goes on to debate both sides or rationalize why he said the wrong part first, coming across as indecisive and unreliable. He's subverting his own role as a leader who is suppose to be 2-steps ahead and smarter than everyone else.

He is easily distracted and fumbles social cues, yet he's also self-centered and over-confident – 2 ends of the same faulty communication skill. He often says the wrong bit out loud: a confident wrong note. Then realizing it didn't come out as intended, he offers misguided comfort (not an apology). He is unclear on his own role, and moving so quickly that he isn't waiting on cues from others to establish a normal.

Domestic is strange, mundane is fascinating: lamps and vegetables and talking to girls. He knows these things are 'common' but to him they are incomprehensible. He rationalizes they must be sinister, or banal, or probably easy if he ever bothered. The sentence structure is basic comedic writing, but the subtext shows his flaws, his real desires, and his ego-defense mechanisms which reject those things.

Dialog representing AUDHD (neurodivergent)

The structure of Who's dialog is Comedy + Character. It is not a realistic representation of neurodivergence, just as Who's 'brilliant' solutions are not science.

We accept that he is a quirky chaotic genius through suspension of disbelief. It works because it is entertaining, and because we understand the premise of the show requires it.

The writer's conceit during that particular era was to 'humanize' Who with vulnerability and flaws. The character was balanced by competent and socially adept companions who are filling-in the missing emotions he isn't able to show directly. Their reactions and occasional pushback make him appear deeper than he is on the surface. Viewers invent an inner-torment that creates a bond.

The character becomes less entertaining without the ensemble to set the normal and keep him grounded. Compare to other incarnations where companions were essentially tag-along protagonists so Who has someone naive to explain the lore to, and forgettable Starlord from the MCU who is 'just' the comedy quips un-differentiated from his ensemble cast – an anti-team of jerks.

This particular character was the youngest actor to play Who, and actor Matt Smith had a lot of input into how he would be portrayed. It reads as neurodivergent on that actor (also nerd-ish and asexual which probably help) – but there are many 'Steven Moffat' edits on youtube that highlight how repetitive and formulaic the writing could be. The same story-beats read differently on other actors. It's still good writing, but a lot of the glamour rubs off when you see how the sausage was made.

The takeaway is that stories portray Characters, not real people. You are not modeling an actual spectrum, and you don't need a textbook on neuroscience. You also don't need to be a genius to write dialog for a genius character. The Story comes first, and the reader will suspend disbelief as long as you keep it entertaining.