Exposition vs. dialogue

[Djmac1031]

Authors may overestimate the importance of backstories. In real life, you don't usually need to know someone's life story to have an idea where they've been and where they're going.

I tend to develop backstories in my head to understand my characters, but the readers shouldn't need all that detail to understand a well-done character. You should be able to understand them largely through their voice, mannerisms, actions, and reactions.

I try to fold backstory into dialog when and if it's needed, rather like TadOverdone did in the example above.

I basically jumped into the deep end of the pool here so I'm really just learning as I go.

The problem with that particular story is that it's told in the first person from the male characters point of view.

Which made it difficult to get into the females mind unless i had her actually explain herself to him via dialog.

For better or worse, that's how I did it.and now that it's done I won't need to do it again.

But I appreciate advice like this, certainly things to consider moving forward.

 

[TadOverdon]

Authors may overestimate the importance of backstories. In real life, you don't usually need to know someone's life story to have an idea where they've been and where they're going.

True dat. We learn people where we meet them.

 

[NotWise]

Which made it difficult to get into the females mind unless i had her actually explain herself to him via dialog.

OMG! He actually got into her mind? Why not just get into her panties?

Just kidding. Dialog is probably the best way to get that done, but a chunk of dialog that has no purpose other than giving the character's back story isn't much different from a chunk of exposition doing the same thing. I won't say that you can't make it work, but you need to get it done without putting your readers to sleep.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Authors may overestimate the importance of backstories. In real life, you don't usually need to know someone's life story to have an idea where they've been and where they're going.

I tend to develop backstories in my head to understand my characters, but the readers shouldn't need all that detail to understand a well-done character. You should be able to understand them largely through their voice, mannerisms, actions, and reactions.

Yep. I also find sketching out the backstory helps me avoid continuity errors ("you remember 9/11 but you were still in school in 2019?") but as with characterisation, that doesn't all need to make it onto the published page.

 

[Djmac1031]

OMG! He actually got into her mind? Why not just get into her panties?

Just kidding. Dialog is probably the best way to get that done, but a chunk of dialog that has no purpose other than giving the character's back story isn't much different from a chunk of exposition doing the same thing. I won't say that you can't make it work, but you need to get it done without putting your readers to sleep.

Trust me, that was my biggest fear, especially since that chapter didn't really contain any sex, just sexual themes.

The characters were at a crossroads and it really was the only way to move it forward. At least for me anyway, maybe a better writer would have found a better way.

It got some positive feedback and the ratings on it are about equal to other chapters so I guess I didn't bore readers that badly lol

 

[TadOverdon]

Exposition.


Researchers at McGill University had used electrodes to stimulate the pleasure centers of rats' brains, rewarding them for learning and repeating desired tasks. It had worked so well that, eventually, some doctors had tried to modify human behavior the same way—specifically, human sexual behavior. The ethical objections to that had been strenuous and, as far as anyone knew, successful at ending the experiments.

Yet, the reward of orgasmic pleasure had proved to be far better at changing behavior than was punishment and deprivation. Give people a taste of something that made them feel good enough and they would do anything to get more of it. And if they had control of the pleasure source, they'd give up everything to indulge.

The very definition of addiction. In the case of the McGill rats, some had died of exhaustion, chasing their electric bliss.

Far as I can tell this isn't actually true, BTW,; at the very least, it's an oversimplification of the findings of various BSR studies. It's sort of the "urban legend" of behavior mod.

 

[Grendelpuppy]

As a writer, you want to get X amount of backstory and other information about your character through to the reader. How best to do this? One option is to give some introductory paragraphs before any action takes place (or very little action takes place). The other is to contrive a situation where the protag talks about themselves and their life experiences, in which case we get their emotions attached to it as well.

Which is better?

Note- this is different from show vs tell, because both are essentially different kids of "tell". Only in case, the reader gets it from the author and in the other, from the character.

I absolutely believe that the backstory should be woven into the story. A data dump at the beginning of the story is particularly unappealing to me. It appears that the story is merely an outline for a story rather than the story itself. Even worse is beginning a story with a massive life history. These remind me of the running gag in the movie AIRPLANE where the people who have to sit next to the protagonist keep committing suicide.

If the background can not be revealed as part of the current events in the story, it is probably irrelevant.

 

[TadOverdon]

Another 68 words of exposition.

Lauren got to bed in the early AM after a long drive in utter darkness from the airfield, across the rugged cliffsides of Kai'ulau, to the Novak family compound. It was harrowing despite the sure confidence of their drivers; less than half the roads were paved and if anything she wished they'd slow down. She slept badly, waking from several weird sex dreams sweating, breathless and wetly aroused.

Or, 109 words instead that establish additional important stuff.

There was no way for Lauren and Janet to talk on the long drive across the rugged cliffsides of Kai'ulau back to the Novaks' headquarters. They were crowded into one of the Land Rovers with Stefan, a young man Jan introduced as Jakob, and two other men. The journey was harrowing. Less than half the road was paved, and beyond the throw of the vehicle's headlights was pitch darkness.

Jan suggested that they get together the next afternoon. Lauren easily agreed, despite her anxiety to find out what was going on here. She was exhausted but slept badly, waking from several weird sex dreams sweating, breathless and wetly aroused.

 

[BuckyDuckman]

. . . In real life, you don't usually need to know someone's life story to have an idea where they've been and where they're going.

I tend to develop backstories in my head to understand my characters, but the readers shouldn't need all that detail to understand a well-done character. You should be able to understand them largely through their voice, mannerisms, actions, and reactions.

Came here to make this exact point!

I often find myself taking side journeys into a character's past - but it seldom winds up in the story because it was a trip made for me, not the reader.

How much exposition/backstory do you give to your friends? Do you go into every detail about how you came to be who you are or do you just explain the important stuff when asked? Most people I know have no idea about my full backstory and never will.

 

[MelissaBaby]

Authors may overestimate the importance of backstories. In real life, you don't usually need to know someone's life story to have an idea where they've been and where they're going.

I tend to develop backstories in my head to understand my characters, but the readers shouldn't need all that detail to understand a well-done character. You should be able to understand them largely through their voice, mannerisms, actions, and reactions.

I try to fold backstory into dialog when and if it's needed, rather like TadOverdone did in the example above.

I suppose it depends on what you consider backstory. If you are just talking about giving background info on a character for example, I agree that it is best done through dialogue and actions in the primary storyline. But when events in the past are integral to the plot, I don't think of that as backstory, but as part of the plot. There is no reason plots have to follow a linear timeline. Weaving in flashbacks, reminiscences, etc, is tricky, but can be done effectively. There's no trick to it; you just tell what needs to be told, no more no less.

 

[SimonDoom]

I suppose it depends on what you consider backstory. If you are just talking about giving background info on a character for example, I agree that it is best done through dialogue and actions in the primary storyline. But when events in the past are integral to the plot, I don't think of that as backstory, but as part of the plot. There is no reason plots have to follow a linear timeline. Weaving in flashbacks, reminiscences, etc, is tricky, but can be done effectively. There's no trick to it; you just tell what needs to be told, no more no less.

An excellent example in both book form and movie form is The Godfather. In the middle of the book, and well into the movie The Godfather 2, the narrative shifts from the present (1940s-1950s) to the past, showing the early life of Vito Corleone and his rise to becoming a powerful mob boss. It's not a flashback, or dialogue. The story just shifts to the past. There's no reason a story cannot do the same so long as the narrator makes it clear what is happening. In that case, the past narrative offered an interesting comparison with the present narrative, and it helped explain who Corleone was and how he got where he did.

 

[MelissaBaby]

An excellent example in both book form and movie form is The Godfather. In the middle of the book, and well into the movie The Godfather 2, the narrative shifts from the present (1940s-1950s) to the past, showing the early life of Vito Corleone and his rise to becoming a powerful mob boss. It's not a flashback, or dialogue. The story just shifts to the past. There's no reason a story cannot do the same so long as the narrator makes it clear what is happening. In that case, the past narrative offered an interesting comparison with the present narrative, and it helped explain who Corleone was and how he got where he did.

When I wrote My Fall and Rise, I faced a dilemma. If I wrote the story in a linear narrative, I could not imagine anyone reading past the first chapters, when things turn pretty dark. So I started the first chapter in the middle of the story, then continued with alternating before and after chapters. Most chapters began with some bit of introductory exposition that kept track of which timeline they belonged in.

I received a few comments from readers who were confused while reading the early chapters, but then, everyone seemed to catch on.

Based on the response from readers, I think it's safe to say that it worked out well.

 

[MillieDynamite]

An excellent example in both book form and movie form is The Godfather. In the middle of the book, and well into the movie The Godfather 2, the narrative shifts from the present (1940s-1950s) to the past, showing the early life of Vito Corleone and his rise to becoming a powerful mob boss. It's not a flashback, or dialogue. The story just shifts to the past. There's no reason a story cannot do the same so long as the narrator makes it clear what is happening. In that case, the past narrative offered an interesting comparison with the present narrative, and it helped explain who Corleone was and how he got where he did.

In the book The Carpetbaggers, by Harold Robbins tells the story of Jonas Cord, a Howard Hughes like Character. The book begins when Nevada Smith rides into the Cord ranch. A young cowhand (running from something) looking for work. What follows he becomes the surrogate father to Jonas and rears him. Taking care of Jonas even as an adult, until the Jonas hurts a young woman. Who, Nevada takes to hide her from Jonas.

At that point, the story switches to a young half breed named a Max Sand. The story jumps back about 30 years or so. It follows Max Sand as his parents are murdered by bigots, his struggle to find the killers, and even when he goes to prison to kill one of the men. In the last stage of this back story, changing his name, Max goes after the last bandit. In the end, he doesn't kill him. He shoots him several times, and leaves him alone. Max Sand is Nevada Smith, and the story pics up where it had left off before the flashback or original story.

In the movie The Carpetbaggers, Nevada Smith was played by Alan Ladd and no flashback story occurred. But a few years later, a prequel movie was made (Oddly enough called Nevada Smith) Staring the King of Cool, Steve McQueen. While Alan Ladd is somewhat smaller than McQueen the later isn't all that tall and is at least feasible to believe they are the same person years apart. I read the book and then watched the two movies back to back with my father. I prefer the western, but both follow the book rather closely.

 

[TadOverdon]

Perfect SATs had compensated for Lauren's mediocre high school GPA to get her into DeSoto State, where she'd flailed hopelessly away at freshman remedial algebra. A volunteer tutors program had paired her with Janet Tucker, a severe, earnest sophomore who appeared to exist in the world without family, friends, or any sense of humor.

After two review sessions, Jan had looked at Lauren through her thick eyeglasses and announced, "Zonk, you're wasting your time and mine unless you're going to buckle down, study harder and party less. Like, a lot less."

The name meant nothing to Lauren. Her mother overheard the exchange and was delighted to explain it at dinner that evening. Turned out that the tutor did have a sense of humor, and Lauren didn't much care for it.

"You think I'm a dumb stoner."

"Zonker is not dumb," Jan insisted, retreating to her most professorial voice. "He's the best character in the strip. He's...a free spirit. Like you."

They'd looked at one another for a long time after that. Lauren didn’t remember which of them had blushed and looked away first.

That was how they'd begun.

 

[Bramblethorn]

When I wrote My Fall and Rise, I faced a dilemma. If I wrote the story in a linear narrative, I could not imagine anyone reading past the first chapters, when things turn pretty dark. So I started the first chapter in the middle of the story, then continued with alternating before and after chapters. Most chapters began with some bit of introductory exposition that kept track of which timeline they belonged in.

That's often a good reason for tweaking the narrative order. Setting reader expectations, whether it's "this will get better" or "this ends badly", can be so important.

My latest story is a romance where the narrator's beloved wife dies after developing early-onset dementia. That's not a conventional choice for romance (I believe a few months back I was arguing that "romance" requires a happy ending!) and if I'd told it chronologically, it would have been a major downer. The flashback structure let me change the story from "but she died" to "she died, but..." and that makes a world of difference.

Another reason why your structure works well for My Fall and Rise: it gives you a hook. At the start of the story we learn that things went badly wrong and somebody died, but we have to read to the end to find out just how things fell apart. That promise of "if you keep reading you'll see somebody really fuck things up" is a powerful draw. Who among us is immune to the lure of a train wreck?

Told sequentially, not only do you have a fairly depressing first half without much sign that it's going to get better, but you also have a lot of the action in the first half with the second probably feeling anticlimactic in comparison. Instead, you get to build almost to the very end.

 

[NotWise]

My latest story is a romance where the narrator's beloved wife dies after developing early-onset dementia. That's not a conventional choice for romance (I believe a few months back I was arguing that "romance" requires a happy ending!) and if I'd told it chronologically, it would have been a major downer. The flashback structure let me change the story from "but she died" to "she died, but..." and that makes a world of difference.

That sounds like you might be writing a tragedy rather than a Romance. Tragedies can be very romantic, but they don't fit the description of a Romance.

I've written a couple, and it can be hard to find them a good home. "The Third Ring" was a SciFi story, so that was easy. "Love is Enough" (one of my most romantic stories) went into Novels and Novellas because the ending . . .

 

[MelissaBaby]

That's often a good reason for tweaking the narrative order. Setting reader expectations, whether it's "this will get better" or "this ends badly", can be so important.

My latest story is a romance where the narrator's beloved wife dies after developing early-onset dementia. That's not a conventional choice for romance (I believe a few months back I was arguing that "romance" requires a happy ending!) and if I'd told it chronologically, it would have been a major downer. The flashback structure let me change the story from "but she died" to "she died, but..." and that makes a world of difference.

Another reason why your structure works well for My Fall and Rise: it gives you a hook. At the start of the story we learn that things went badly wrong and somebody died, but we have to read to the end to find out just how things fell apart. That promise of "if you keep reading you'll see somebody really fuck things up" is a powerful draw. Who among us is immune to the lure of a train wreck?

Told sequentially, not only do you have a fairly depressing first half without much sign that it's going to get better, but you also have a lot of the action in the first half with the second probably feeling anticlimactic in comparison. Instead, you get to build almost to the very end.

Wow, I sound really clever.

In reality, I had no idea what I was doing. But I knew the obvious climax couldn't come in the middle of the story, so I found a way to wiggle around till I got to it.Let that be a lesson to new writers, I suppose. You don't know what works until you try it.

 

[Bramblethorn]

That sounds like you might be writing a tragedy rather than a Romance. Tragedies can be very romantic, but they don't fit the description of a Romance.

I've written a couple, and it can be hard to find them a good home. "The Third Ring" was a SciFi story, so that was easy. "Love is Enough" (one of my most romantic stories) went into Novels and Novellas because the ending . . .

Yes and no. If somebody asked me to categorise their story with no more info than "the wife dies from dementia", I also would balk at Romance. But death is not quite the end of that one, and sometimes you have to go by the spirit of the thing rather than the letter of the law.

I had doubts but I felt it fit better in Romance than anywhere else, and so far it looks like the readers agree; it's scoring better than I'd hoped for. The only complaint I've had (with accompanying 1-bomb) is from one reader who apparently thinks a relationship between two women cannot be romance, and pissing off that guy is a positive in my book.

Wow, I sound really clever.

In reality, I had no idea what I was doing. But I knew the obvious climax couldn't come in the middle of the story, so I found a way to wiggle around till I got to it.Let that be a lesson to new writers, I suppose. You don't know what works until you try it.

A lot of this kind of stuff I do by instinct and tinkering until it feels right. But looking back on it, it's sometimes possible to work out why instinct likes one choice better than another.

 

[MelissaBaby]

A lot of this kind of stuff I do by instinct and tinkering until it feels right. But looking back on it, it's sometimes possible to work out why instinct likes one choice better than another.

I have heard it said that the best way to become a good writer is to be a good reader. I often feel that my "instincts" are mostly things I learned subconsciously from reading.

 

[NotWise]

I had doubts but I felt it fit better in Romance than anywhere else, and so far it looks like the readers agree; it's scoring better than I'd hoped for. The only complaint I've had (with accompanying 1-bomb) is from one reader who apparently thinks a relationship between two women cannot be romance, and pissing off that guy is a positive in my book.

Lots of different relationships can be romantic, but I think only a heterosexual relationship can be a Romance -- unless RRA or some other organization has changed the definition.

I wrote "Love is Enough" thinking it was obviously a Romance, but then found out that the Romance readers aren't necessarily open to ghost stories. I was still weighing that option when xelliebabex beta read the story and pointed out that the ending wasn't HEA. While Hannah and Gabby promised TJ that they'd wait for him forever, TJ would have to die before they could be together again.

Ah, well. I always wonder what would have happened if I put it in Romance. I think now that I'll always have the same question about "Quarter to Midnight," which went into NC/R.

I don't fully understand why Lit segregates same-sex relationships into different categories, and looking at the tag clouds makes me think that maybe the distinctions are breaking down.

 

[TadOverdon]

Lots of different relationships can be romantic, but I think only a heterosexual relationship can be a Romance -- unless RRA or some other organization has changed the definition.

I don't know about the RRA, but the Romance Writers of America recognized gay Romance six or seven years ago:

https://www.aideeladnier.com/romance-writers-of-america-recognize/

 

[NotWise]

I don't know about the RRA, but the Romance Writers of America recognized gay Romance six or seven years ago:

https://www.aideeladnier.com/romance-writers-of-america-recognize/

News to me. Here, gay romance normally goes into GM.

 

[KeithD]

News to me. Here, gay romance normally goes into GM.

Yep, gay romance is a recognized genre (with HEA), but here it needs to be posted to the Gay Male category for the best reception. (I've had a few instances of a commenter saying they thought it should have been posted to Romance, though.)

 

[TadOverdon]

News to me. Here, gay romance normally goes into GM.

Well, the criteria for sorting here don't have that much to do with mainstream publishing, do they?

 

[SimonDoom]

I have heard it said that the best way to become a good writer is to be a good reader. I often feel that my "instincts" are mostly things I learned subconsciously from reading.

I believe this 100%.

By being a diligent and careful reader you learn the "rules" of writing far better than you do studying grammar guides.

By being a diligent and careful reader you learn, by absorption, what works and what doesn't.

When you read other writers, you learn what you like and what you don't. You learn what you want to imitate, and what you want to avoid.

But the best part of reading other writers is when you think, this is great, but I want to try this idea in my own way. That's what happened to me, after decades of reading in general and after about a decade or so of reading erotic stories at Literotica. The urge to do my own thing got too big to ignore. I couldn't hold back. 42 stories later, I'm still doing this nonsense and enjoying it. And being an avid reader is a huge part of what motivated me, and what still motivates me.