I see this around the blogosphere a lot. When do you need backstory? Only use as many descriptive words as are necessary. I need to include more characterization. Only include exposition when it is necessary to the plot. I need to learn to show not tell. Don't include anything in your book that isn't 100% necessary, cut out everything else. And many more iterations of the same basic idea.
Well, I'm here to tell you that the idea of what is and is not necessary in your story is a False Dilemma.
Elements of story (like backstory, prologue, characterization), building blocks of writing (like exposition, descriptive words, dialogue) or even specific elements of your story (a certain character, a particular scene, a paragraph of description) are not either necessary or unnecessary. Because let's face it, this is fiction. And there's no such thing as "necessary" in fiction. Everything is unnecessary include your entire story its self. Every word, every sentence, ever character, every plot point is essentially unnecessary.
But that's ok because the point of reading fiction is not what is "necessary" but what is pleasurable. Fiction is entertainment or possibly even art. You don't ask yourself "is this necessary" when writing. You ask yourself "does this make for an enjoyable reading experience".
Now you're down to the question of what is enjoyable, which is much better. As we all know, this is going to be subjective and trying to please everybody will only please nobody. My personal opinion is that the author needs to write the story that they would enjoy themselves.
So if you like backstory, then include it. If you like a certain plot point, include it. If a certain descriptive phrase is pleasurable to your ear, include it. If you think a certain plot point make the story more enjoyable, include it. And so on. Don't be intimidated by the idea of what is "necessary". Focus on what is fun and pleasurable and beautiful.
You're now free to move about the written page!
ReplyDeleteSometimes if I feel I'm getting too many details or backtracking and I really want to know how the lady was murdered...etc...I skip pages. But generally I agree with you.
ReplyDeletei think the challenge comes in that what is interesting or enjoyable for the author is not always interesting or enjoyable for the reader. For almost all my CPers, they write much more about the characters than I actually want to read. Hence--discovering what is "necessary" is the way to par down the information.
ReplyDeleteI certainly see your point, but using the term necessary helps me to cut though all that backstory and what not with an eye to what the reader needs to understand the story.
Alex, I am all about the freedom.
ReplyDeleteJaye, certainly the author should try to make everything they include in the story interesting. But then again, part of the challenge of being an author is making things interesting when they might otherwise not be. I read a book once that had a long section where the MC engages in carpentry. It has nothing to do with the plot, but the author wrote it in such a compelling way that it was my favorite part of the book.
Heidi, you have to keep in mind though that for every person who thinks that a certain thing is boring or unnecessary, there is probably a different person who would find it compelling and enjoyable. You really CAN'T write your story to please a handful of CPs. If you try, you'll most likely just fail to write a truly compelling story.
I have to agree with Heidi. I think that certain elements are necessary in a story, especially in an opening. What those elements are will vary based on the story itself and the characters.
ReplyDeleteBottom line, the reader has to care enough to keep turning the pages. If you don't have an opening with action, then you better focus on deepening your characters so the reader is invested to see what happens.
Some kind of dilemma, tension or conflict are all more engaging than the weather or long passages of description which the author might love, but the reader is setting the book down because quite frankly it's boring. When readers have to decide how they're going to spend their money, an author has to take more than their personal desires into account if they want to sell. Otherwise they may never get published or sell enough to get a second contract.
Isis, there are certainly elements that should be in all stories: characters, plot, setting and theme. The basis of all story.
ReplyDeleteHow you incorporate any of these into a story has nothing to do with "necessity". To link necessity and the creative process is disturbing to me. And you cannot justify it with an appeal to "readers" because readers are so varied and have such different tastes and opinions that it makes no sense. What is "necessary" to one reader will be repulsive to another.
Rachelle Gardner has a post today related to this topic:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.rachellegardner.com/2011/08/10339/
Excellent advice. There are so many different types of stories, styles of writing, preferences of readers, that no one out there can define what is too much or too little or what should be in or not.
ReplyDeleteMargo, that's an interesting post, but I'm not really sure how it's relevant to my point.
ReplyDeleteClaire, my entire post in one sentence! :)
I think when people are first beginning to write novels it is important for them to write whatever they think they need to write. Get it all out. BUT there is an art to revising and leaving in only what is necessary. It may just be a matter of semantics here, but there are parts of a story that aid in the telling of it and parts that detract. Not all authors can identify this for themselves, which is why a good critique partner is worth their weight in gold.
ReplyDeleteWell, L.G., I'll just have to disagree. Stories should never be reduced down to what is "necessary" and no more. That is the antithesis of art.
ReplyDeleteWell HI Sarah! It's good to meet you, thanks for stopping by my blog. I look forward to explore your blog :)
ReplyDeleteHi Sarah! It's nice to meet you. Thanks for stopping by Heather's Odyssey and for following.
ReplyDeleteI think back story is a lot like adverbs, more powerful when it is lightly used and sprinkled in. :)
"Margo, that's an interesting post, but I'm not really sure how it's relevant to my point."
ReplyDeleteThe discussion of modern reader expectation and the back and forth between agents (the industry) and writers over the guidelines--what one thinks is necessary and another does not. Lots of varied opinions in the comments.
Wow, this is quite a discussion. I agree with what you conveyed in your post, Sarah. Write the book you want to read. Given the editing process, no one will have to read your novel as many times as you will, so it better be the type of story and narrative style that you enjoy! I can say, in all honesty, that The Somebody Who (my first novel) is the best book I've ever read 40 times!
ReplyDelete"That is the antithesis of art."
ReplyDeleteThough minimalist painters and writers would disagree. As I recall it was a major movement in the 80's and still has hardcore devotees.
It's also a matter of why a writer is writing and who they are writing for. I've made some characterizations of art for art's sake that would make seriously offend some people (and got passed around the writing blogs for awhile--lol), but the point would be that it's appropriate for some goals and not for others.
Margo, my entire point is that since fiction, story its self, and every aspect and detail thereof is inherently unnecessary, appealing to necessity when crafting a story is a bit illogical. Appealing to "reader expectation" is equally illogical as there is no such thing. Every reader is different and every reader expects and wants different things. You CAN'T appeal to them all. It's impossible. And constructing a set of guidelines is according to "reader expectation" is only going to end up pleasing some readers and disappointing others, like me. I have long been dissatisfied with the modern trends in storytelling as a reader.
ReplyDeleteI personally would not call anything that the minimalists do art. Which is also the point. I agree that every author has to decide why they're writing and who they are writing for and what they want to write. That's why it bothers me so much when so many writers seem so slavishly devoted to pleasing agents. (Not saying you are, obviously.)
Katie, 40 times! Wow! I don't know if I could ever like my books that much. ;)
Heather, whereas I LOVE backstory. The more backstory the better. But I would never claim it was necessary. I just find it enjoyable.
ReplyDeleteOkay, you've reeled me in.
ReplyDeleteThis is exactly the kind of thing I'm -always- saying. Yes! Write -your- story, not the story that some agent or editor is telling you they think you should write. The key, the only real key, is to write it well. People will read, and enjoy, all mannner of "unnecessary" material if it is well written.
Hi, thanks for visiting my blog and welcome to the campaign!
ReplyDeleteI think backstory is important to make the characters feel more real. But it's more interesting if it comes later, after I already care about the characters.
Hi Sarah, I can already see that hanging out here will be loads of fun. Thanks for sharing this, and I look forward t more.
ReplyDeleteAndrew, yes, that's our job as authors to make our stories and all the little details therein interesting to our readers.
ReplyDeleteMatt, I like my backstory as a constant thread woven throughout the narrative. You should keep learning little things that make you keep wondering all along the way.
Myne, at the very least, it will be the kind of place that's fascinating like a car wreck. ;)
My point being that I think your argument (about necessity, about reader expectation, etc) only holds up with some kinds of writing but fails for others. Readers of, for instance, romance *absolutely* have a HEA expectation. Readers of fantasy absolutely have an expection that the fantastical element be integral to the story rather than strictly metaphorical, which is the hallmark of magical realism. Readers of lit fic will absolutely have an expectation about the level of lyrical language. Readers of minimalism fiction will expect a minimalist technique. I don't think you'll find readers whose expectations have been dashed are any more welcoming than agents or editors.
ReplyDeleteThe ultimate answer is not to write differently or pretend reader expectation doesn't exist *at all* but to find the overlap between what you're writing and the appropriate audience whose expectations fit what you're providing.
I'm not pretending that reader expectation doesn't exist. I'm saying that "reader expectation" as an over-generalization (applying to all readers in general) doesn't exist. But still, that's beside my point because my post doesn't really have anything to do with reader expectation but the very nature of fiction its self. And I am saying that fiction and necessity are mutually exclusive. Entertainment and necessity are mutually exclusive. There is NOTHING about fiction and story and entertainment that is NECESSARY. (And here we're going by the dictionary definition: of inevitable nature or absolutely needed.) That's my point. So talking about what is necessary for your story is an oxymoron.
ReplyDeleteThe entire point is: don't worry about what's necessary, worry about what's enjoyable.
Great advice. I agree that focusing on necessity will only constrict a writer and make for a more hollow story overall. Putting a focus on what is enjoyable allows for a hell of a lot more creativity.
ReplyDeleteWhile I love the internet for the wealth of writing advice that is available, I have found myself feeling a little overwhelmed by all of the "rules" of writing. Although I understand the need for, say, an opening that involves a good hook, or avoiding passages that drag or involve an overabundance of description, all those rules can start to feel a bit limiting and suffocating.
ReplyDeleteI'm actually the sort of reader that loves description: I want to know what the world I'm reading about looks like and smells like, and I want to know what the protagonist is wearing. I like lengthy introductions, too, ones that allow me to ease gently into the story. Super catchy openings are great, but they're not a requirement for me.
Sadly, most people seem to disagree with me here, which seems to be the case with the link above to Rachelle Gardner's site. It makes me really sad that people are so hyped up and have such short attention spans that I can't add an extra bit of description.
Anyway, I get what some of the other commenters have said: publishing fiction is an industry, and there are certain conventions that have to be obeyed in order to do well. If I'm writing romance, I need to expect that the romance-reading audience will have certain expectations of what "romance" means, and I need to try my best to follow those guidelines. But to echo Claire above, there will be a different niche for each writer.
Jamie, exactly.
ReplyDeleteJamila, don't listen to all the constricting writing advice. I'm not really convinced that all the authors and agents talking about what readers expect know any more about it than I do. I think that if you write the story you're passionate about in the way that would connect with you as a reader, eventually you will find success.
I like that you're basically saying there is no wrong way to write, so long as the elements of your story feel right to you and fit with your book. Well said!
ReplyDeleteAs a soldier in the writing campaign, I salute you.
ReplyDeleteI outline my stories heavily and meticulously, so I have an idea what may or may not be necessary to the story. I may or may not be correct in that assessment, granted. I may be a self-delusional maniac, probable. But my general rules are that something has to be necessary to the story, the reader's comprehension of the scene, the references made in dialog, and the descriptions of those speaking.
I will defer some backstory to make the beginnings punchy, but my general rule these days is not to leave the reader guessing. Saying NO backstory and NO exposition is, of course, a snobbish authorial stance.
Best wishes on your writing.
This is a fascinating discussion. I'm glad that I stopped by again just to look over the comments.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what you would think of my minimalistic writing? ;-)
Maybe all this does turn on the idea of whether fiction is necessary. And I'm not ready to say that it isn't necessary. Because it is how we play, and play is necessary for learning and growth and everything that makes life enjoyable. All animals play.
But that also seems to be a separate argument from what is necessary within a work of fiction. I don't know. I'm still thinking about it...
E.R., yeah, that's basically what I'm trying to say with most of my posts in different ways. :)
ReplyDeleteAE, I outline my stories as well so I know where I want them to go. But I don't necessarily stick to the outline. I write what feels right at the time.
Heidi, I would say that if you write in a minimalist style because that's what you think you NEED to do to get published, then I am sad. If you write it because it is what you truly enjoy as a reader and writer, then I would want nothing better.
I agree with you 100%. If you write something in an entertaining way, the readers will enjoy it, regardless of the supposed rules. Just think of how many "rules" Rowling broke. Did that bother her readers?
ReplyDeleteBy the way, greetings to a fellow campaigner. I think I'm definitely going to be keeping track of your blog.