Description vs Infodump - how do you tell when it's crossed the line?

That's the way I think of it. Maybe I put too much trust in the author, but as a reader, if I'm confused, I usually just take it for granted that I'm not supposed to know the answer/explanation/what-have-you yet and go along with it. That is, as long as it reads like it's done on purpose (and in the cases of published books, it typically does).

Also keep in mind that any kind of explanation should be through the lens of the viewpoint character. If you're bypassing the character just to tell the reader something (whether it's something the character knows or not), I'd say you're on shaky ground.

 

True enough, FreakyChicken , I can see places where that would actually add mystique and intrigue. I suppose I was referring more to times something happened, for example, like an enchanted sword blew someone to smithereens from it's amazing powers, but then it's never explained that swords can ever be enchanted anywhere in the book, leaving the reader feeling like they've missed something. Maybe not a great example, but my brain is having trouble thinking of a better one ATM. That being said, you've given me an idea though for a point to put something like that in, hinting at a mysterious power that isn't explained till later.

 

In my mind, the fact that an enchanted sword blew someone to smithereens is the explanation that swords can be enchanted, because, well, we just saw it happen

 

But remember that the reader is coming to the book with a lot of knowledge of other fiction. If somebody putters with a sword and something weird happens, the reader is absolutely going to wonder if it's enchanted. And if you've preloaded them with the idea that swords can be enchanted, you'll drain away some of that "Wow, I'm clever!" feeling when they discover that they were right.

I realize that's just an example and you're not a huge fan of the example. That's why I'd like more examples to discuss.

In another thread, I noted that very often the complicated thing that the writer is striving to explain maps pretty nicely to some concept we're already familiar with. At its core, it's a weapon. Or a school. Or a marriage. I added "That relationship between a walking tree-biped creature and the sentient fuschia-pink spider-like creature that normally hangs out on its shoulder may have more background details than you could put in a book...but at its core, it's a marriage." And this was my example of a scene that communicates that marriage without actually explaining: https://www.writingforums.org/threads/exposition-vs-infodump.147174/#post-1465087

(It's weird quoting myself, but, well, there it is.)

 

hmmm...good point. I'll have to mull this over, but I think you're on to something there.

 

Very interesting. I see that I still have much to learn. I'm recalling a scene I just read too in Elantris by Brandon Sanderson. When he described the Seon I believe. I figured out on my own that it was a floating, sentient orb of light, but then later that was confirmed, and later still it was discussed that the Seon attached themselves to their "masters", etc.

Edit: Well said @Homer Potvin

 

Yes, that's a tricky one. It's too easy for a reader to overlook a piece of information that doesn't seem important or make sense at the time. In fact, a loose fact can slide right past, leaving no impression other than a brief head-scratch. So it's a good idea to make it important ...but for the wrong reason. Call attention to it, in some way, so the reader will remember it. Then, when the real reason for it pops up again later—sometimes much later—the reaction is, "Aha! So THAT'S what was going on, eh?"

I learned this trick because some of my early beta readers missed a few connections that were important to my story.

At first I was slightly indignant ...but it's IN there, I said it right here, on page 23.... Then I realised I needed to do more than just say it. I had to make it stick, without making the reason for it too obvious. So I decided to apply the red herring principle. Make it seem to be something other than what it is. A couple of lines or an observation by a character usually does the trick.

Just a crude example here:

You want readers to notice something small that a character is wearing, because 20 chapters later, it will be the only clue to his identity. However, you don't want to make a big deal of it at the expense of every other item of his clothing, because that gives the game away. On the other hand, if you bury it in a mountain of description of everything he's wearing, the reader is unlikely to remember it.

So what do you do? You have the POV character (another person) notice this piece of clothing because it reminds him of what his father used to wear. He has an adverse reaction, because he didn't like his father at all, and you spend a couple of lines dealing with what his father had done to him to create this hatred. So the reader tucks this away, thinking the connection to the father is what will be important.

But no ...it's actually the item of clothing that's important. Because there has been an emotional connection made to it, in the eyes of the POV character, the reader will remember it when the only thing left to identify the corpse is this piece of clothing.

 

The snag is, if you repeat it too often, the reader WILL notice it and will be over-ready for it to become important. You can lose the element of surprise. As I said, it's a tricky old game.

 

I have edited a second time now and found a much better way to describe things without giving it all away. Something happens, but then it's not a huge info dump as to what exactly. Re-reading it now and it's even better. I see now I had fallen into the trap of creating a giant, beautiful world, with lots of very well-constructed rules and creations, then handed a tenth of it to the reader all in one shot. That's not anyway to unfold my story. Thanks again guys!

I actually did something like this on a minor scale. It wasn't a huge plot point, more of a small sub-plot I suppose, where character A sees a pendant, then later character B is asking about it and the significance becomes relevant. It played out over maybe 20 pages, but it did set the groundwork for the reader to trust that later things will be explained in some way if they hang on. I'm learning how to weave things together very well, not to be obvious, but to make sense when it does become relevant later. At the moment I'm working on setting the stage for a much more grand, main plot-ish scenario. I need to do this carefully...

 

This ^

It takes a while to recognize that the entire story in your head doesn't need to be established all at once. In fact, it can be a whole lot more interesting when the reader only gets curious glimpses and is enticed to keep reading. When you are reading books with a lot of world building that you particularly like, pay attention to how they start out. You want the world to be intriguing. Explaining every detail of it is rarely as intriguing as seeing little bits at a time unfold.

 

Yep, that's what I just got through doing is removing all the stuff I'd "given away", and instead made it more like a hint and not a dump. I also found that the description for the race I was introducing flowed much better, it gives enough information to get the gist, then your mind fills in the rest without the superfluous nonsense. My third chapter just went from 2k words to 1.4k, but that's what needed to be done. Now to continue on. I knew it was a good idea to make this thread. It will also help when I go through and re-edit my first two chapters.

 

Yes. Just make sure when Character A 'sees' the pendant, the reader will remember that moment. So that when Character B comes into the picture and asks about it, the reader won't be going ...what pendant? ...and having to backtrack to find out.

A mere mention of an important detail often isn't enough. You've got to stamp that moment on the reader's memory, in some way. WHY does Character A notice the pendant in the first place?

 

In the situation I had, I did make sure the pendant was clear to the reader, yes. However, it wasn't till later that it made sense why character A noticed it to begin with and what significance it had. I believe that fine, right?

 

Yes, although nobody can tell until we read it. But as long as the pendant was something the reader will remember, when later on it becomes important, that should work well.

I found myself that just mentioning something wasn't enough. Readers don't usually remember a 'mention' unless the thing that's mentioned is really unusual.

 

This could just be me, but I like forgetting a detail that doesn't seem important, having it feel like it came out of nowhere when it first becomes important, than re-reading and finding out that it had been there the whole time

EDIT: it turns out it's not just me, there's an actual trope for that

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RewatchBonus

 

The character saw it, then a couple pages later they grabbed it, then later on it became important. It's more than just a mention.

 

I do this as well - I find it's a very organic way to reveal my world and characters to readers, avoids a lot of awkwardness.

This is exactly the approach I take. I write basically an "over the shoulder" narrative for my protagonist, keeping incriminating details behind the curtain for as long as possible. I've had mostly positive feedback (though some people become frustrated with my secrecy) because mystique seems to keep my readers engaged.

This is the goal. For me, anyway.

This is suuuch a tricky balance, oi. This is what makes it art.

But also this challenge is what keeps it engaging and fun for me, the writer: what can I tell you about my protagonist that will keep you reading but also won't give too much away too soon?

 

Edit: how LITTLE can I tell you about my protagonist to keep you interested?

Edit again: what's the appropriate minimum exposition I need to get you hooked?

... I swear I can articulate thoughts. Sometimes.

 

This is all very enlightening. Following...

 

I have a slight problem with this approach (or at least what I think you're saying here) based on some recent beta-reading I've done. As a reader, I get annoyed at 'unnecessary' mystery. By that I mean when the writer withholds information for no reason other than to make the reader 'wonder' what is going on.

Some writers think that makes the story 'interesting,' or 'intriguing,' when, in fact, it's more annoying and frustrating. A truly interesting story leaves you wanting to read more—not trying to figure out what in heck you just read.

A simple example is when the writer fails to name a character. (My current pet peeve.) 'The boy' did this and that ...until we find out a few paragraphs on, that 'the boy' has a name ...Fred ...and that he's our protagonist. If all the other characters are wondering who 'the boy' is as well, that's fair enough. But if everybody else knows ...it's probably best to just spit it out for the reader as well.

Unless it's important for the reader to not discover the boy's identity (he's in disguise) then there isn't much purpose in playing too coy with the reader. What happens is the reader often starts skimming, wanting to put a name to the character they're reading about. In skimming, they might well miss something important.

I recently beta-read an excellent novel, where a chapter started with 'the seventh president of the USA' speaking at length with one of his cabinet members. (Who WAS named.) This went on for several pages, before the writer finally began calling the mystery Prez 'Andrew Jackson.' There was no need to create this initial mystery. The cabinet member, who was the only other person in the scene, certainly knew the president was Andrew Jackson. I don't imagine too many readers out there will automatically tick off the presidents by number. It didn't intrigue me at all. Instead, it took me out of the story and sent me to Google.

I would be careful when you withhold information, to make sure it has a purpose in the story, and that purpose isn't just to intrigue the reader.

 

I agree. Withholding information only for the sake of withholding information is pretty damn dumb. However, since my protagonist is a fugitive serial killer (in essence), he has to be careful about what he says, where he goes, who he's with, what he lets people notice about him — and therefore so do I.

 

Yeah, no problem. In fact, I've got a secretive character myself, and it was danged hard to write him. (He changes his name and identity to some extent, from the time we first meet him until we meet him again.) Sounds like you have your character in hand very well.

Writing is tricky isn't it???

 

@jannert Yes, yes it is.