TECH: Trim To the Bone?

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

Original posting 26 December 2008

Here comes Writer's Digest again! June 2005, pages 51 to 55, The Writing Clinic with G. Miki Hayden talks about a short story submission. The headline is "Cut Ruthlessly" and the subhead is "Trim off the excess -- even if it means making some characters disappear -- to further your narration." In the critique of the short story, there are number of helpful hints. Let me just pick out a few:

1. Find the Right Blend. The mixture of narrative description, dialogue, and action needs to be balanced. "Avoid using all dialogue, all description or all telling, but instead, employ a harmonious blend of each." Skip over a little "... writers sometimes have to surrender even the cleverest snippets to make the story cohere. No matter how witty or clever your sentence is, if it doesn't make the story stronger, it doesn't belong."
2. Pull It All Together. How do you put story threads, primary goals of the main characters, and wit together in a way that keeps the reader captivated? Focus on the main focus! "With the focus (the protagonist's aims) identified, the entire story can be handled with more clarity." Start the piece by showing the reader what the story is about.
3. Pace the Narrative. Go through your narrative and give only details necessary at each point. Make sure each part brings out only essential factors.
4. Cut Ruthlessly -- Even Characters. Don't add extra characters -- stick to the ones that are absolutely key. Occam's Razor -- especially worded as "don't explain beyond what's necessary" -- applies to fiction writing, too. Use it to shave off unnecessary constructs.

Use the right mixture of show, dialogue, and a dash of description. Keep the story focused on the aims of the protagonist. Provide details when they're needed. And don't over explain. Good advice, especially when rewriting.

So, write and rewrite!

TECH: Tell, Don't Show?

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

Original posting 28 December 2008

Tell, Don't Show?

Writer's Digest, May 2005, pages 21 to 23, in the fiction essentials column by Nancy Kress talks about times when exposition -- explaining and telling things -- is it just the right thing.

"' Show, don't tell': the Golden Rule of fiction. Except when it's wrong. Telling, technically called' exposition,' has its legitimate uses. And if you place the exposition correctly, it will strengthen rather than weaken your story. Following are three situations in which exposition should be used, along with tips for incorporating it seamlessly."

1. Exposition for an Entire Scene

Exposition -- telling -- means that you the narrator relate information to the reader. It's not dramatized through dialogue, action, description, or characters' thoughts. So when might you skip the dramatized scene and just summarize it?

• repeating a scene -- if we've already seen it before, a short expository version may be better.
• unimportant scenes -- if a scene is only needed for continuity, but is otherwise minor, a brief exposition may do the job.
• when a dramatized scene would interfere with the story's momentum -- especially when the pace is rising, characters still need to do necessary but quieter things, but you can do it off stage in a summary. (Her examples are fascinating: requisitioning a witness, mailing a package, traveling to Washington -- now why would a character be doing those three things?)

2. Exposition for Backstory

There's often background, family history, past events, and other material that's needed. But you don't want to slow down the story. Again, exposition, a brief summary, may do the job better than a full flashback. Save the flashbacks for scenes that are important to the plot or the theme.

Series especially often need a dash of exposition to help readers with backstory. "The reader needs to know what happened in earlier books, but that information needs to be given as concisely as possible so the author can get on with this story."

3. Exposition for Pure Information

The most difficult part is explaining how things work. Sometimes your story needs the reader to understand things so that the plot can use them, but you need to be careful about how you dump it on the reader. Certainly, you can try to dramatize it. Have characters discuss it, let the point of view character think about it, or build some kind of action around the information. But often this is clumsy. Characters discussing things that they should already know -- "As you know, Bob..." The point of view character thinking about things that they know by heart? And action scenes that have no plot value or character development, just so you can convey a tidbit of knowledge? "Sometimes a better choice is just to stop the plot and write a chunk of exposition."

The danger is that writer interruptions give the reader a chance to lay down the story. However, proper placement can help with this. So where do your expositions go?

The key principle is simple: "heighten the reader's interest with dramatization, then drop into exposition."

• Start with a bang. Open your story with an action scene. This can be a minor scene, a dinner party or dance. Introduce the characters, show them doing things, and plant some books or foreshadowing about conflict and tension to come. Then you can introduce exposition, and the reader will keep going.
• Sandwich chunks of exposition between interesting scenes. Dynamic, dramatic scenes should surround any exposition.
• Postpone exposition until necessary and relevant to the plot. Do the exposition as close as possible to the point where it's needed. Don't explain too early.
• Plant exposition before starting the run to the climax. When the pace picks up, characters and plot headed for a critical event should not pause for background or explanations.

Nancy ends with a rule of thumb about exposition: "if you can't make it short, make it good." When you're telling instead of showing, your prose needs to glitter -- it has to sparkle to compensate for lost immediacy. Make it interesting and well-written.

That's what Nancy had to say. Now let's see, can we come up with a exercise? How about taking a piece of writing that you're working on, and go through it looking for a scene that doesn't need to be dramatized. Now, write the exposition that you would use to replace it. One nice thing about working with digital writing, you can try replacing that scene, that flashback, or whatever with exposition -- and then compare the two versions since you saved them into different files.

Okay? Prefer show to tell, but when telling fits, make it good! A dash of tell can replace unneeded scenes, fill in the background, or even educate the reader. But start with a bang, wrap telling in showing, wait until you need it, and get it finished before the final sprint.

Tell me about it?
Write!