My early stories only used the past tense verb attrition, 'said'. But lately, I've been experimenting with the present tense, 'says'. I've heard there is an arguement of which is correct. The dialoge tag 'said' tells the story as if it has already occured, and that seems to me more like tellng the story instead of showing the story.

Someone (Auntietk, that ever present writing coach-banger on my head-elusive guide through a forest of verb tenses) keeps telling me.. show don't tell. Yea, okay, easier said than done. So, I've been trying to use only 'says' present tense to give the story the feeling that it is unfolding as it happens. I kind of like it, seems more action happening to me. 

So, what's the take. Is 'says' the great evil of literature, a distraction to the story? Must we step to the cadence of 'said' or can we skip down alternative paths to the tune of 'he says, she says, without incurring the wrath of the great tense gods that sit upon Mount Merriam and pass judgement on us poor mortals.

"Says", in this context, is what is called the "Vivid Present" ( a usage carryover from Latin which used it a lot), it is intended to make the past event "come alive" by telling it as if it were happening now. 

Grammatically, both "said" and "says" are equally correct, it just depends on personal preference and what exactly you want to express.

It is a matter of personal preference, and "said" or "says", are both equally valid, but just remember, that your use of dialogue tags has to match the tense in the rest of the story: if the story is in past tense, then you should only use "said"...and if the story is in present tense, then you should only use "says" though if you're writing about a past event in present tense, then you should slip into past perfect (when describing what someone HAD SAID) in the context of a character remembering something that had happened and is perfectly complete, or in terms of the story-teller dipping into the past in order to make some point with a lot of bearing on the present.  This is where a lot of writers tend to mess up, because in common speech (which often throws syntax and grammar our of window) it's acceptable (in informal situations) to mix tenses; in writing, this is a no-no, simply because it's cruelty to readers: mixed tenses are like blood clots in the arteries of the stories, they break the flow and often confuse readers, because story tenses, once established, actually become a part of the story.  Present tense writing is more intimate and immediate because the reader is given the feeling that the story is unfolding, real time, whereas past tense establishes that the story has already unfolded and there is some distance, both temporal and emotional, between you and what's written.  There's also a debate as to whether or not good writing should even include dialogue tags, since they're redundant in many ways.  I happen to think that they're necessary, but you don't always have to use the traditional ones.  Rather than say "he says" or "she said" you can also try describing the tone of voice--that "show-don't-tell" guideline.  Instead of writing: "It's over," she said.  You could go off in some other direction like: "It's over."  Her voice was like an ice pick, stabbing the silence.  Dialogue tags work well, though, especially when they're placed in unexpected (but logical places) or if they're consciously repeated in order to deliver a specific poetic cadence. 

 I like that little bit of history, Jeff, that's cool to know where stuff like that comes from. Chip, ok wow, you've just tossed me a whole new writing challenge. Since I'm not really writing books, just 'pamphlet type episodes', I guess it doesn't matter much if I experiment between episodes a bit. Anyway, I like the idea of trying to write an entire episode without dialogue tags, that sounds like a cool challenge. I'm not sure I can, but I've never liked using them and struggle as to when I can get away with getting rid of dialogue tags.

 And I do get using dialogue tags to create a cadence. I did that in the Jack of Diamonds episode to create the whimsical atmosphere.

 Good stuff here. 

I had no idea I was putting challenges out, but hey...if they're fun, run with 'em...the whole thing with writing is to actually have fun.  I mean, if you enjoy your story and have fun with it, then that's a sign that readers might do the same, and ultimately, that's what you want, especially if readers are paying money to do it.  The thing with dialogue tags is that they're sometimes unavoidable, but there are different dialogue tags, including morsels of description and also their absence.  If you're writing stuff in which characters are talking a lot to each other in long passages, sometimes it works perfectly to just set up the pattern with dialogue tags in the start and then dispense with them all together.  Harlan Ellison did quite a lot of that in his shorter works. 

An interesting idea to be sure, but it doesn't work for me. However, you might consider the following: Instead of 'she said', 'he said', or 'he says', 'she says', use 'says she', 'says he'.  In the first person, 'says I' works too.

I walked up to the copper and looked him in the eye. "Lots of rum doings," says I. "Indeed there is," says he, looking suspiciously at me.

This has the effect of sounding both archaic - 19th century - and colloquial - almost cockney.

Just my take on this.

The whole thing with dialogue tags (and not using them) also depends on the story you're telling.  Generally, description in place of some dialogue tags deepens the story and pulls your reader in.  When you use dialogue tags too much, they break the emotional impact of the story, when you don't use them enough, you become confusing, but when you occasionally (even strategically) employ description, you're adding depth to the character and giving your reader a way to feel a bit of sympathy or antipathy for the person speaking; as a writer, the more you allow your readers engage with more than just the plot, the more likely you are to have devoted readers who are going to pay cash, or at least time for your other stuff.  But all of this ultimately boils down to what you're writing and what it requires, and so the only thing you really need to do is just follow the requirements of your own intentions.

 Okay, I tried a whole story without tags. I felt 'uncomfortable' with the story, and that the story is choppy. I think Chip has the idea by using a few attributive tags mixed with descriptive tags, the stories seem to flow better. As for whether to use says or said. I think maybe Chip is right about just staying consistant with one tense or the other. Now I guess the question next is, deciding on the tense of a story.

 There's this weird thing where I'm from, and you can almost tell where a person grew up by how they tell a story.  People from west of the mountains will say, "I was at the store the other day, and ..."  and people from east of the mountains tend to say, "So I'm at the store, right?  And ..."  Personally, I find the present tense more interesting, exciting, engaging.  "I was at the store the other day" could be the most boring story in the world, but putting you right there, as if it were happening NOW, "So I'm at the store, right?" asks you to participate and pay attention.  (I'm from west of the mountains, btw.)

If you don't use ANY dialog tags, I'm going to have to go back and figure out who said what at the beginning of the conversation, because sometimes I can't tell who is speaking if it goes too long with no tags.  In a longer conversation (say five or six changes), even if you use a tag every second or third speaker change, it helps. 

I'm with Chip about substituting tags for descriptions.  It really IS more intimate, and assists with character development as a side benefit. 

Consistency gets my vote, as well.  Just pick one and stick with it.  That doesn't mean through an entire book, or your entire writing life, but just within each story or chapter. 

You're doing great!  :)