|
|
|
|
|
| SFReader Forums > SFReader > Ask The Expert > Info Dump? | Forum Quick Jump
|
 | 
muskrat
Humble Creator
      
Date Joined Jan 2008
Total Posts : 26
| Posted 1/29/2008 11:39 PM (GMT -5) |   | I agree with everyone who has posted here. Yet I'm amazed at how many reads and reviews of published stories are basically big info dumps with little or no dialogue. If you have an editor that complains about this, be happy, he or she is a good editor. Reading a few good screenplays can help you understand how dialogue and narrative can weave a story, what are acceptable gaps, what needs explaining and what doesn't really matter. I did that and it really helped. And after all, what would be nicer than having your story adapted into a screenplay?
I learned a trick from reading all that American lit in grad school, and that is when you do have to do an info dump, try to make it interesting. I think while many stories that are 100% narrative are not only boring, but often lack the dump of important descriptive information regarding character and scenery. You don't need to go on for paragraphs, but just to capture and describe a moment in time, an experience or picture, that is common to most people. In one sentence you can describe a deer in a wintery wood to the point the reader smells the mouldering leaves and bark and feels the wet snow. Also, some character description is nice, not physical necessarily, that can be gleaned throughout, and it can be nice to let people imagine and fill this in to some extent, but their thoughts, their personality, their character flaws and personality type. So much good writing includes this covertly even, humorously, metaphorically, or right out front.
But when you find yourself writing, he did this, then this, then this, then she did this, and they remember back when they were like that and did that and that happened, etc. and so forth, you need to consider showing and possibly reordering.
But it's hard to recommend showing over telling only because I've seen a definite preference for poorly written narrative in many entry level publications, though it may be due to a poor editorial staff or reviewers. But if you plan to rise above this and produce quality work, the advice from everyone in this post is valuable to you. I will always show when I can rather than tell, my characters speaking like they would in their given region and time, and if an editor finds this "unliterary" then they are just dorks. I osce had a piece rejected for being "too Southern". Well my characters, being from a certain socioeconomic class and region speak the way they speak, and to convert it to perfect English would render the characters wooden and unbelievable.
Another peave for good editors, jumping back and forth in time too much, changing tense unless done very very well and infrequently, and narrative flashbacks and dream sequences. These can be done creatively, and certainly in novels, the rules change and you can get away with alot more, but I learned the test of a good plot is whether, when it is told chronologically, it is a good story, something happens. So many people write long vague narratives that masquerade as plot. Even that is ok provided there is a good plot underneath it all.
This stuff I learned teaching writing, working as an editor, and working with my exhusband, a writer, and through conversations with writers, my own critiques, my exboyfriend the writer, and just through trial and error.
If you need inspiration in writing descriptive narrative, pick up some popular novels and examine how others do it and you will see that writers develop tricks, techniques, and have their own stylistic flare in how they convey this otherwise relatively mundane information. If you can't tell, I'm a little burnt out in reviewing work. I've done like six long ones of info dumps in two days in addition to my own writing and submitting.
I have an MA in English and I'm happy to look at people's writing if they will reciprocate and I have time. Just remember, descriptive narrative is a game, how clever can you be and how efficient. The rest should be dialogue as mentioned in the posts above.
The weary muskrat
Muskrat
"Brain? What is brain?" --Kara, giver of pain and delight, Spock's Brain episode 61
I'm not a trekkie but I love this episode | | Back to Top | | |
|
crystalwizard
Forum Moderator
Date Joined Nov 2006
Total Posts : 5196
| Posted 1/19/2008 3:59 AM (GMT -5) | | | | |
|
erazmus
Master
Date Joined Jul 2005
Total Posts : 4557
| Posted 1/5/2008 9:15 AM (GMT -5) | | | | |
|
Steven the Git
Acolyte
Date Joined Nov 2007
Total Posts : 225
| Posted 1/4/2008 9:27 AM (GMT -5) | | If something needs explaining then it has to be done. I'm terrible for reading blocks of description or other types, when I first read the Lord of the Rings I skipped huge chunks. But it is usually to my loss, you lose the scene and the scope of the setting of the characters.
I often try to be quick and vague when in short stories, try to conjure a feeling for an image rather than just describe it, and I may take that into full length works in the future. I also always try to give something character - call a castle impressive or magnificent, or perhaps ominous.
Also when revealing someone's past. This is often where large lumps of info come, but I try to constantly apply such details to the individual to enhance who they are now and also how they will interact with others.
I think you're right in essence - keep it interesting, never overwhelm the reader, keep it pertinent as well.
New and original ways to do it will always help too.
“Hello, I am William Burton, Head of Recruitment and Integration for the Agency for Peaceful Regulation and Definitive Cooperation of Extraordinary Existence.”
spinetinglers.co.uk Bakemono will not stop! | | Back to Top | | |
|
Nathaniel Morgan
Neophyte
Date Joined Sep 2007
Total Posts : 71
| Posted 1/3/2008 11:08 AM (GMT -5) | |
Lyn said...Narrative doesn't necessarily mean info-dump. But I get the impression than many editors consider anything explanatory within the story to be a no-no and accuse the writer of "telling not showing." Does anyone want to clarify what they mean by telling vs showing and/or info-dump? Thanks.
There are a couple of terms being confused here, that we should probably clarify so that we are all speaking the same language. I think by "narrative" you mean "description, exposition(AKA Back-Story), and explanation."
Technically all of your story is narrative, though more commonly I see everything but dialogue refered to as narrative. (If we wanted to be pedantic we could argue that everything in the story is descriptive but usually "description" refers to "scene description" or less often "character description" when it's used negatively.)
"Jack ran into the room and shot Bill." is narrative.
Telling vs. showing and info-dumping are also two seperate issues.
Telling: "I hate when she does that" Jack said angrily.
Showing: "I hate when she does that" Jack said and clenched his jaw.
Telling: Jack and Bill played soccer for a few minutes, until it became apparent that Bill stood no chance. Jack was simply too fast. Looking very dejected Bill gave up.
Showing: Jack shot past Bill with the soccer ball. He scored. Bill tried to outrun Jack and Jack cruised by in high gear, took the ball, and scored again. Bill's shoulders sagged and he sighed as he finally walked off the field.
Telling vs. showing is a problem that deals with the impact of how you impart what is happening or has happened to the reader. Essentially showing often has more impact on the reader, and gives more immediacy and excitement to the story, than telling. Info-dumping deals with impact on a larger scale. Personally I consider info-dumping to be any information the reader doesn't need to know, or necessary information given in a way that it stalls the flow of the narrative. What this basically boils down to is the reader losing interest.
I recognized info-dumping to be a major problem in my early writing and gave myself specific tasks to practice fixing it. Here's what I discovered about my own literary voice (of course everyone has to find what works for there own voice):
1. The reader usually doesn't need to know as much as I think. Fantasy and SF writers are by nature very bad about inserting large amounts of exposition and explanation. I think in part because we are people who enjoy the details and seeing how these small bits fit together to form the larger dynamic. In addition in creating these huge constructed worlds and trying to add a measure of verisimiltude to them, we spend so much time working on these details that it feels wrong to leave them out. It's important to distinguish between "what I need to know to write the story" and "what the reader needs to know to enjoy" the story. It's also important to give your reader some credit.
2. Many stories require some degree of exposition (I.E. what happened before the narrative). The key becomes how to impart that information without making the reader bleary eyed and stalling the flow of the story. I've found with my own voice that I can do this by first trimming the fat (cutting out everything the reader doesn't need to know or can infer), and then hiding the exposition by making it serve more than one purpose. What do I mean by "serve more than one purpose"? What if the exposition/back-story gives some insight into one of the characters? (and I don't mean recounting his family history to the nth generation. I mean what insights into his personality can I get from the way he remembers those events, or how is his voice expressed internally when remembering them, etc.) In this way that back-story also becomes an important character building tool and a way for the reader to learn more about the character. Another example would be using the exposition to foreshadow some future plot event. Then the exposition becomes a plot tool as well. All of this is to say "give the reader another reason to want to read the exposition."
Example-
Info Dump: (Insert 20 paragraphs about how Jack cheated on Jill, and Jack's mother and Jill don't get along. Tell who all the minor players were and on and on, when the real point is that Jack and Jill are still arguing about the past.)
Non info Dump: "Look, can we please just make it through this Christmas without any drama?" Jack asked.
"Drama? Oh yeah, Jack, that's right I'm the one who's alway creating drama." Jill said looking out the car window.
"I'm just saying, you don't have to act like going to my mother's is going to kill you."
"I'M JUST SAYING, I'M NOT THE ONE who cheated on his wife with Little Red Ridinghood! I am not the one who told his mother it was because his wife was frigid! I'm not the one Jack! I'm not the one who creates the drama!" Jill yelled with her little fists clenched and trembling.
They sat there riding in the car in silence for several minutes. Jack sighed. He turned on the radio. Jill twisted the knob back off. Jack thought that the silence was worse than her yelling. He felt it's weight in the air of the car that was suddenly stiflingly too small.
- A silly example? Yep, and certainly not a great one, I made it up on the fly. You'll also note I'm a big cheater! I gave the characters a reason to recount events that they both already know. I suppose this is the way I usually use dialogue to express exposition. Find a reason that it needs to be said. Hrmmmm...that's the fun part about the forums. In explaining something I discovered a little trick that i was using intuitively but had never quantified.  | | Back to Top | | |
|
R. L. Copple
Acolyte
Date Joined Mar 2007
Total Posts : 242
| Posted 1/2/2008 8:39 PM (GMT -5) | | And, you don't even have to say, "As you know..." to commit that either. If it is obvious that the listening character should know the info, then it has the same effect. On occasion that can work if the detail is small and the character is wanting to "remind" them of what they already know (how often do we do that in real life, "Honey, you know my boss hates..."). However, I think when it is obvious that the author is attempting to get out info, it can look like an artificial, not natural to the story and characters, to do it. And that's when it becomes "bad," which I'll admit to having done that before, without thinking about it.
And, that is what the info dump is, info that is inserted into the story that seems artificially inserted and/or not relevant to moving the story forward. Timing, as has been mentioned, and working it naturally into the story fixes the first, and making sure you only use the info needed to move the story forward will fix the second.
My understanding of the telling vs. showing is simply that showing paints a picture and helps the reader experience a scene and actions through sensory details. Telling usually involves more "to be" verbs and simply wants to get info across, or move the story along over details that aren't important for the movement of the story, or need to be glossed over because they would bog down the story to show that. Ex: if washing dishes is incidental to the story, we don't need to be shown that. Simply telling the reader that it is happening is enough. But maybe that fact needs to be given to make sense of something later.
Showing should happen especially at important plot points, when significant movement/events in the story are happening, wherever it is important to infuse emotion into the story to make it work. Sometimes that can be subjective from one reader/writer to another.
While, as an editor, I see my fair share of stories that would greatly benefit from more showing and less telling, it can be an easy response, especially if you happen to run across one spot where you see it happen. I think what could happen sometimes is an editor will read the first page, they see one instance of it, and say that's it, move onto the next one. It may be that's the only instance, but goes back to the beginning being one of those spots where you want to make sure you first draw the reader in with good "showing."
But I'm sure there are some out there too who when they don't like something but aren't sure why, it becomes a nice generic response to why it must be. So it becomes an easy out.
R. L. Copple
blog.rlcopple.com
www.raygunradio.com
www.haruah.com
Infinite Realities available at Amazon.com | | Back to Top | | |
|
cussedness
Adept
Date Joined Apr 2005
Total Posts : 857
| Posted 1/2/2008 7:07 AM (GMT -5) | | MattDempsey said...
Just don't do the classic 'as you know....'
"As you know Sir Knight, after the fall of the Burgundian Empire two hundred and thirty years ago the Guild Cities were thrown into turmoil. Two families rose to contest the vaccuum. . . ."
The 'as you know' is a killer phrase. Why are you telling him then?
The thing with info dumps is that often the writer knows a lot more about the setting than the reader ever needs to. Thats just so things can remain consistent. The problem occurs when the writer feels that his world is so cool that the reader probably wants to know everything about it as well.
I tend to bring out a lot of the back story in contentious dialog. Stealing from Matt, I would have taken that as you know and ....
"Whosits stepped into the vacuum when the Empire fell..."
"Yeah, and what did it get them? A bloody lot of trouble."
Janrae Frank
I have no skeletons in my closet, they are all hanging from the yardarm.
Once there were three brothers, Brandrahoon the vampire, Isranon called the Dawnhand, speaker to spirits, and Waejonan the Accursed, first of sa’necari. Isranon defied his brothers and was destroyed, his descendants forced into the darkness.
Blood Rites
www.fictionwise.com/ebooks/eBook29989.htm
website
www.janraefrank.com
Darkzone
www.janraefrank.com/Vanilla.1.0.1/ | | Back to Top | | |
|
erazmus
Master
Date Joined Jul 2005
Total Posts : 4557
| Posted 1/1/2008 4:53 PM (GMT -5) | | | | |
|
MattDempsey
Neophyte
Date Joined Dec 2007
Total Posts : 57
| Posted 1/1/2008 4:49 PM (GMT -5) | | Just don't do the classic 'as you know....'
"As you know Sir Knight, after the fall of the Burgundian Empire two hundred and thirty years ago the Guild Cities were thrown into turmoil. Two families rose to contest the vaccuum. . . ."
The 'as you know' is a killer phrase. Why are you telling him then?
The thing with info dumps is that often the writer knows a lot more about the setting than the reader ever needs to. Thats just so things can remain consistent. The problem occurs when the writer feels that his world is so cool that the reader probably wants to know everything about it as well. | | Back to Top | | |
|
erazmus
Master
Date Joined Jul 2005
Total Posts : 4557
| Posted 1/1/2008 2:09 PM (GMT -5) | | Ty hit it on he head.
Short stories just don't read well with mass information dumps. There is no space to blance them. Novels are another matter. Dan Brown, Tom Clancey, David Weber all have massive information dumps in their novels, all have been called on it (as an example of how their writing is less stellar than their success) and its a B-S charge. Some stories just have to impart a great deal of information to make sense.
The trick to it seems (to me) to be to impart that information just as is it urgently needed, by the reader to understand what is going on, by the character who is about to use that information to take action, and to do so not one line too early or too late. The information has to come from somewhere-- you can't just stick it in from you to the reader, someone has to be thinking it, or explaining it to someone, or something has to be happening (not going to happen, but happening right infront of the reader) and the explanation is part of the action.
Thus you can impart a lot of important things the reader has to understand-- say physics, ballistics and engineering facts about missle battles in space-- by watching a flight of missles in space from launch to detenation. It helps if the missles are launched by, and aimed at, characters the reader cares about. Less likely to make it would be a character explaining to some other, less informed character about space missles. That would be telling instead of showing. But explaining about politics to a stranger from another nation works, because people do that.
In fact, one person telling another a great deal of important information (important to the story) is pretty much the only way a main character (and the reader) are going to find out things very fast. A conversation is usually easier to read than, say, looking over a character's shoulder while he quietly reads a bunch of web-pages about the history of a secret society. Much better to have him read, then tell someone else (and the reader) about what he foud in a conversation. Though I suppose your POV character could blog his findings and your reader read his blog. That seems rather Stokeresque.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com
"Dutchman Rescue"in Continuum SF #6
www.continuumsciencefiction.com/orders.htm
"An Incident at Black Tongue Tavern" in _Bash Down the Door and Slice Open the Badguy_ from Fantasist Enterprises:
www.fantasistent.com/books/anthologies/BASH.php
"Stains" in Tales of the Talisman 3-1 www.zianet.com/hadrosaur/index.html
"Slushpiles" in Between the Kisses
www.samsdotpublishing.com/betweenkisses/TurnerSlushPileS.htm | | Back to Top | | |
| | |