Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/30585
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/30585
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

To the specific issue about something technical being boring: It was probably boring because you were bored. Unless you really wanted to inform the reader about the important differences between "latent fees" and "semi-optional fees" and "non-fee application expediting fees" or whatever, the point of research (IMO) is not to translate a graduate level accounting course into a fun narrative.

The point of MY research, at least, is to be sure I do not bake a cockroach into my pretty chocolate cake. So no readers (especially those better informed than me) will not drop their interest because I had my character do something completely impossible at the bank, like for example secure a hundred-thousand dollar signature loan with a fake ID.

Or for a more realistic example, in one of my stories a character was a gun expert (I am not) and I spent far too many hours reading on the fine points of making bullets and re-rifling barrels and calling parts of guns by the correct names (most of which I no longer remember). But I did not have him recite a dictionary of it, it was just used at times in conversation or in describing his actions.

It may seem a waste to spend a lot of time learning something and then not use 99% of it, but I think of it as a form of insurance, and just enough reality spice to make it seem like I know what I am talking about.

You don't have to explain what X, Y and Z mean, your character (and a bank employee foil) can discuss such things without explanation, relatively quickly. One trick is to introduce a minor conflict or disagreement:

> Character: _"I can't pay that for X, I can pay half that."_
> 
> Bank Girl Foil: "Your Z will increase, a full point."
> 
> Character: _"I can live with that if the Y stays the same."_
> 
> Bank Girl Foil types, checks screen: "Okay, sir, done."

### Interactive Writing

I think that is a mistake. In your example, who the MC goes to the bank with must not really matter at all. Which makes your story weak, and not thought out. If a side-kick is needed there must be a reason, a need for the side-kick, and that need is best satisfied by one character.

If it isn't and characters are interchangeable, your characters are not sufficiently different from each other. If you are writing for comedy, there should be a funniest character to take to the bank, the one that provides you with the best opportunities for jokes or comical situations.

I think you just handicap yourself by relying on the whims of non-writers in crafting a good story. In a GOOD story, every scene is relevant to the whole and each character has a reason to be in it. Your suggestion sounds like it would result in a series of standalone improv routines. While individually those may be funny, there is no depth to them, they don't make a movie, or show, or string together into a funny **_story_**.

So no, interactive feedback (from people that only consume writing and have no idea of story craft or structure) is not a good idea IMO, I think it will result in nothing of value.

Original score: 2