# Dialogue Doctor — Chapter 20

id: dialogue_doctor | owner: claude | target: `output/chapters/chapter_20.md`
Manifest scenes audited: 02 (lines 24–59), 03 (lines 62–93), 04 (lines 96–145). Scenes 01 and 05 are manifest not-required (no substantial dialogue).
Read cold against: reading guide §§1, 2, 5, 6, 8; voice cards (June, Ruth, Sam, Nia, Asha); `output/tics.md`; `chapter_20.claude_tic_audit.md`; Ch20 prompt anti-tics.

---

SCENE 02 (June's apartment, Ruth/Sam dish-and-box visit, lines 24–59):

- 1 Voice convergence: CLEAN — covered attributions and reread; Ruth speaks in scope-setting declaratives ("This is a two-minute visit unless you'd like it to be longer"), Sam in freight-and-carrying concretes ("What's the freight?"; lifts with knees; moves the chair six inches), June in object-protocol instruction ("The box is the errand. The dish is separate."). Strongest counter-candidate: the tag-team "We have a car." / "And a hand truck if you need it." — two speakers sharing one deadpan-offer rhythm for a beat; survives because the shared shape is the scene's point (coordinated no-advice help) and each stays in card lane — Ruth states a fact, Sam names carrying equipment.
- 2 Monotone Q/A: CLEAN — mapped turn weights: June's sixty-word catalog instruction against Ruth's "All right."; Ruth's three-sentence admission against June's self-interrupted deflection ("The class is--" She stopped.). No symmetric volleys. Counter-candidate: the closing offer/offer/"Noted" triplet — three short turns, but the weights differ (offer, extension, refusal-of-topic).
- 3 Missing interiority: CLEAN — June's mind runs through the exchange: the cardboard edge pressing "a line into her thumb"; the dish-flaw digression ("the cobalt had pooled and gone almost black, and it was the best part of the dish"); "June watched her read it and watched her decline to read it out loud"; "It came out before she'd decided to say it." The reader knows what the visit costs.
- 4 Questions-as-statements: CLEAN — the scene's questions are functional ("What's the freight?"; "10:30ish?"). Counter-candidate: Ruth's "unless you'd like it to be longer" — a position folded into a statement, but it is an open offer the scene honors, not manufactured portent.
- 5 Fake-McCarthy minimalism: CLEAN — every clipped turn is attributed or action-pinned, and the compression is earned by the frame the dialogue itself sets (double-parked, two minutes). Counter-candidate: "All right," Ruth said — bare, but it is assent to instructions, not performed starkness.
- 6 Jargon-trading: CLEAN — no untranslated world-terms; catalogs, Sonia, the studio all carry established referents; "the box is the errand, the dish is separate" is followable because both objects are on the page.
- 7 Attribution opacity: CLEAN — three speakers; every turn tagged or pinned by position (Sam at the door with the box, Ruth at the kitchen edge).
- FAKE-SHARP: CLEAN — cut-list run on every exchange. Strongest counter-candidates: "I kept them to myself and called it manners" (Ruth) — antithesis-shaped, but it is her single editorial-sharp construction this appearance (one-per-appearance cap checked; "You can leave that part out. We came for the dish" lands dry but is literal scope-release in plain words, a near-miss, not a second sharp), and the follow-up "Some of it was. Some of it was easier for me." is admission with friction, not a zinger. "I'd offer coffee but I'd be lying about the milk" (June) — self-aimed, card-licensed, speakable. "We have a car" is a loaded short line, but the unmarked-silence bullet does not fire: June registers and visibly deflects ("Noted. Both of you--thank you. For the box."), and the narration then registers the change concretely (she can see the whole floor by the door for the first time in a week).
- INTERIORITY-OVERCORRECTION: FAIL — rule 9's second direction: narration explains the tell twice. "She straightened the strap of her bag, which did not need straightening" (line 43, narration on Ruth) captions the displacement gesture with an evaluative ", which" — a family under a standing add-zero order (tics.md: Ch13 "Ch14 should add zero"; span 06–10 "avoid new `which` captions") — and the scene close repeats the identical move on June: "She washed the blue dish again. It did not need it." (line 59), where "again" already carries the fact. Two didn't-need-it captions in one scene convert card-true tells (Ruth squares what is square; June cleans what is clean) into narrator diagnosis of the gesture.

REVISION ORDERS (scene 02):
1. FAIL: interiority explaining twice / evaluative-caption family. Quotes: "She straightened the strap of her bag, which did not need straightening." (line 43) and "She washed the blue dish again. It did not need it." (line 59). Rewrite direction: end the first at "the strap of her bag." — Ruth's stillness at the kitchen edge and her card tell (edges squared) already read; if a beat is needed, give a concrete physical detail instead of the narrator's verdict that it was unnecessary. Cut "It did not need it." entirely; "washed the blue dish again" states the displacement, and June's card (cleans brushes she has not used) works only if the narrator does not annotate it. Keep the drying/shelf action untouched.

---

SCENE 03 (phone call, Asha at a freight door, lines 62–93):

- 1 Voice convergence: CLEAN — Asha runs fast imperative bursts cut by physical work ("Talk fast, I'm holding a door with my whole body."; "Say the studio clause again."; "Take the crating if you get it."); June runs prepared, notebook-flat recitation ("Terms: W-2, $49,500, six months funded..."). Rhythms and lexicons stay apart under covered attributions. Strongest counter-candidate: Asha's "the north window's honest light" — "honest" sits in June's evaluative lane; survives as working-painter shop-talk for north light, and June's later verbatim pickup ("Honest light," line 155, outside this scene) reads as quotation of Asha, not convergence.
- 2 Monotone Q/A: CLEAN — turn lengths swing from two words ("Okay. Second thing?") to the nine-line Dana/Kessler run; the call stalls and restarts around freight noise (gate, pallet jack, off-phone shout) — organic ordinary-work texture per the calibration allowance, not debate.
- 3 Missing interiority: CLEAN — June's relationship to the information is live: "the pen capped, because this part she knew without notes"; "June looked at the left page of the notebook, at GOOD in her own handwriting"; her answer to "can you get from here to March?" is the bare number, which is the interiority spoken. Counter-candidate considered: Asha's uninterrupted logistics block, during which June registers nothing until asked — passes because scene 01 pre-weighted every figure and the delayed reaction arrives on the page as the "FEB = coat" notation.
- 4 Questions-as-statements: CLEAN — "Why aren't you taking it?" is a real question Asha flags as real ("That's not me being polite"). Counter-candidate: "Who writes that?" self-answered ("Nia Torres, apparently") — rhetorical, but impressed shop-talk, no portent manufactured.
- 5 Fake-McCarthy minimalism: CLEAN — two voices located by ambient tags; the clipped register is freight-door-earned. Counter-candidate: "Yes," Asha said. "Send it." — clipped, then immediately expanded with reasons ("Forty-nine five and written access is real.").
- 6 Jargon-trading: CLEAN — every term is priced or translated in-line: net-45 → "you'll see money in March"; the studio clause → "in writing, in the offer letter"; the W-9 is a document with a deadline; the radiator joke prices the room ("Wear the coat inside until February"). A cold reader can weigh all of it.
- 7 Attribution opacity: CLEAN — two speakers; Asha's end pinned by machinery, June's by notebook actions; no drift across the long block.
- FAKE-SHARP: CLEAN — cut-list run. Strongest counter-candidates: "Corners like a surgeon." — quotable-shaped but genuinely speakable installer praise, inside Asha's no-mystique card; "Send my name because I'm qualified. If you're trying to feel less bad, don't." — the mandated referral-warning beat, blunt per card, answered with friction rather than a return volley ("It was both this morning. I'm fixing that."); "Not a favor. A clause." — fragment antithesis, previously cleared by the claude-tic audit as licensed plain distinction, and speakable as emphasis on a phone call about contract language.
- INTERIORITY-OVERCORRECTION: CLEAN — June reacts rather than re-explains; the close ("It was a joke where the answer went, which was at least her own handwriting.") is a fresh reaction to the filled-in page here. Noted: this line seeds the figure scene 04 then repeats — the FAIL is logged there, where the echo becomes the tic.

REVISION ORDERS (scene 03): none.

---

SCENE 04 (phone call, Nia — the refusal, lines 96–145):

- 1 Voice convergence: CLEAN — Nia is distinct from Asha and from June: managerial prompts and deadlines ("Torres."; "Have her email me today, subject line Tasker"; "I have payroll at eleven") where Asha was floor-level and physical; June's turns are longer, self-exposing, page-anchored. Strongest counter-candidate: "That's a worse offer." / "It is." — one beat where both speakers share the flat correction rhythm; survives as a single concession beat, not scene texture.
- 2 Monotone Q/A: CLEAN — asymmetric by design: short Nia prompts against substantive June answers, with the interview scaffold broken twice by genuine pushback ("The after-hours access is in writing."; "That doesn't have to happen."). Counter-candidate: three consecutive prompt-shaped Nia turns ("But." / "Okay. So tell me the counter, so I know what I lost to." / "Noted. You know what I'm going to ask next.") — watch, but each carries its own position and deadline pressure.
- 3 Missing interiority: CLEAN — June's hands stay on the evidence mid-exchange: finger on the crossed-out Vandercook line, touching the TASKER page, turning the receipt print-side up while saying "The no is mine." The reader knows what each sentence costs.
- 4 Questions-as-statements: CLEAN — Nia's questions are real asks. Counter-candidate: "You know what I'm going to ask next." — a statement doing a question's work with a beat of knowingness; survives on the old-peer frame and because June literally does know (the referral was arranged the day before, on the page).
- 5 Fake-McCarthy minimalism: CLEAN — strongest counter-candidate: "But." — a one-word untagged turn, exactly the clipped-cool shape this audit distrusts; it survives as Nia refusing the compliment cushion ("The job's good, Nia. You built it right... I don't want you thinking I missed that.") and demanding the point, card-true (brisk, deadline-driven) and speakable as punctuated. It stays clean only as a singleton; a second such turn would tip the scene.
- 6 Jargon-trading: CLEAN — this is the brochure-risk scene and it holds as talk: "The proof press in the back room. Trueing the bed, keeping it usable." translates Vandercook by apposition into what matters (maintenance, not painting); the counter-offer is read off the notebook as consequences, not a listing ("invoiced the 25th, paid in March"; "no real heat"; "February is a blank line in my notebook"). A cold reader can weigh both offers without outside knowledge.
- 7 Attribution opacity: CLEAN — two-hander, regular tags, office ambient (printer, keys clicking) pins Nia's end.
- FAKE-SHARP: CLEAN — cut-list run on the whole refusal. The mandated plainness holds: "I'm calling to say no," "I'd still be the person with keys," "It could happen anyway... I know what I do with that. I'm trying not to set it up." are speakable, concrete, and in the job's own vocabulary; the composure is diegetically earned (deleted draft email, the daylight test) rather than authorial. Strongest counter-candidates: "February is a blank line in my notebook." — quotable-shaped but literally true of the page in front of her ("FEB = ."); "I ran the math with you three weeks ago and I win the math" / "so I know what I lost to" — two polished Nia constructions in ~ten turns, inside the post-Ch15 flattening, and the first is deflated at once by June's plain concession ("You do."); "If the program ever needs freelance install, I itemize and I'm fast." — dry but professional-plain. No therapy-speak, no "follow your heart," no advice anywhere in the call — Nia argues terms, never feelings; her warmth stays material ("when it opens, come see it").
- INTERIORITY-OVERCORRECTION: FAIL — rule 9's explaining-twice direction. June delivers the beat in dialogue: "The no is mine. It isn't about the program." The closing interiority then restates it as a theme stamp: "The clean answer was gone. If February went badly, it would go badly in her own handwriting." (line 145) — and "her own handwriting" is the same closing figure scene 03 just used ("which was at least her own handwriting," line 93). Two adjacent scenes ending on the same ownership/handwriting chord is a composed close performing what the dialogue already landed; the second instance is the tic (cut-list spirit: a line that sounds quotable arriving where the character should simply be sitting with cost).

REVISION ORDERS (scene 04):
2. FAIL: interiority explaining twice / repeated closing figure. Quote: "The clean answer was gone. If February went badly, it would go badly in her own handwriting." (line 145, June interiority after Nia hangs up). Keep "The clean answer was gone." — that is new information (cost registered). Cut the handwriting sentence and replace with a concrete post-call object consequence in June's card lane — the receipt is already print-side up on the table (Marchetti header, faded total): let her look at it, move it, or go straight to "She did the rest before it could cool." Do not reuse the handwriting figure in any form; scene 03's close (line 93) owns it. The ownership content is already spoken in "The no is mine" and must not be narrated a second time.

---

SPECIAL CH20 CHECKS (per prompt, evidence above):
- Ruth/Sam care without advice: PASS — their only imperatives are logistical; Ruth names her own cost ("I kept them to myself and called it manners... Some of it was easier for me.") without steering; "You can leave that part out. We came for the dish." releases June from explaining rather than directing her choice; the offers are objects (errand, car, hand truck). Neither tells June what to choose, and June's "I'm not asking for an opinion" is honored to the end of the scene.
- Asha/Nia/June distinctness: PASS — registers quoted under mode 1 in scenes 03 and 04; the one shared word ("honest light") ruled shop-talk, not convergence.
- Nia-refusal plainness: PASS — see scene 04 FAKE-SHARP; the load-bearing lines of the refusal are plain and speakable, and the one quotable-shaped line survives on literalness.
- No dialogue diagnosis (zero tolerance), swept all three scenes plus surrounding narration: zero instances. Nearest misses considered and passed: "watched her decline to read it out loud" (line 41) — characterizes Ruth's action of not speaking, not her language; "That's not me being polite" (line 73) — a speaker glossing her own intent, ordinary speech. No "load-bearing" anywhere in the chapter (swept). Out-of-scope watch note for the voice check, not counted here: "The word possible doing more work than $2,643" (line 13, scene 01) is language-about-language in the "doing the work" family — notebook word, not speech, not banned, but adjacent; do not let it recur.
- Scene 04 job/studio terms followable: PASS — see scene 04 mode 6.

OVERALL: BLOCKING (2 findings).
Both findings are rule-9 narration-side failures inside dialogue scenes; the spoken lines themselves audit clean. Per audit policy, resolution routes to the opposing-model rewrite lane; self-repair by the drafting model is not an accepted resolution.
