Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/30570
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/30570
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

This is a very common technique among aspiring writers. It feels like playing tricks with the narrative line solves all kinds of writing and story problems for you. But this is largely an illusion. You rarely find these kinds of tricks in successful published works. Sometimes, certainly, but not often, because while they seem like an easy solution to a problem, they are actually very difficult to pull off effectively.

Here's the issue. You have some material that you think you need in your story to make the plot work, but you recognize that it is boring. What's the correct approach to dealing with this issue? Either make it interesting or cut it out.

Moving it to a different place in the narrative line is like trying to get you dog to take its pills by wrapping them in meatballs. It's still a pill and a clever dog is going to eat the meat and spit out the pill.

There is actually a very simple rule that you can follow to make this kind of exposition interesting: make it a story. Instead of "girl meets man who explains how the world works", do "girl has an adventure in which she discovers how the world works".

Yes, this means that you have to make up another story and make it work as a story while still getting across the information you need to convey. But that is what the pros do. All meat. No pill.

And the advantage of this is that when everything is done through story, you don't need to mess with the narrative sequence. You can tell the story in chronological order, which is what your reader will prefer 99% of the time.

Original score: 2