Too Much Information
How much is too much information for your readers to handle? I've been thinking about this question a lot lately. Many readers have said my creative writing books are jam packed with so much information - they love it. Of course, looking back, I remember making the decision to write 2 creative writing books that could be used as references, books with a lot of information that would be kept on a writer's bookshelf for years to come.
But for my next book, which is more about the creative process than about the mechanics of writing, I think less is more. This is something I will be exploring in the coming months.
It leads me to question how this issue of 'too much information' comes into play for fiction works. Is there such a thing as 'too much information' in fiction? The reader needs to know what is going on, to get into the charcter's head, but how do you know if you have crossed that imaginary line and are boring your reader with too much exposition?
I think it means going back to the basics - does the information:
Advance the plot?
Reveal Character?
Set the scene?
Pull the reader into a mood?
Explain motivation?
Entertain?
'Entertain' is a sticky one, that's where we usually get into trouble. It can be fun to learn a fact or two about a new town, for example, but if it is just some information to entertain the reader then make it brief. Or maybe we want to add some humor to a scene so we set up information that is not integral to the plot just to get a joke across - again keep it brief.
Sometimes we have to let go of a good idea because it just doesn't fit. You don't want to ruin the tone of a book for the sake of a joke or two. But you want to make sure your readers know what is going on in each scene. It's a balancing act that is usually addressed in the re-writing stage. So get the story down and then check for 'too much information' when you re-write.
Any other examples of 'too much information' in fiction?
But for my next book, which is more about the creative process than about the mechanics of writing, I think less is more. This is something I will be exploring in the coming months.
It leads me to question how this issue of 'too much information' comes into play for fiction works. Is there such a thing as 'too much information' in fiction? The reader needs to know what is going on, to get into the charcter's head, but how do you know if you have crossed that imaginary line and are boring your reader with too much exposition?
I think it means going back to the basics - does the information:
Advance the plot?
Reveal Character?
Set the scene?
Pull the reader into a mood?
Explain motivation?
Entertain?
'Entertain' is a sticky one, that's where we usually get into trouble. It can be fun to learn a fact or two about a new town, for example, but if it is just some information to entertain the reader then make it brief. Or maybe we want to add some humor to a scene so we set up information that is not integral to the plot just to get a joke across - again keep it brief.
Sometimes we have to let go of a good idea because it just doesn't fit. You don't want to ruin the tone of a book for the sake of a joke or two. But you want to make sure your readers know what is going on in each scene. It's a balancing act that is usually addressed in the re-writing stage. So get the story down and then check for 'too much information' when you re-write.
Any other examples of 'too much information' in fiction?
posted by Victoria at 11:20 AM
4 Comments:
An example of too much info? How about Neal Stephenson's Cryptonomicon. LOL! I loved the book, but the guy spent about 4 pages describing how the encrypted code system worked in WW2. Fascinating stuff, but I had to really
"decide" to read these pages. Did it forward the story? Not really. Did it reveal a character? Not really. Set the scene? Possibly. Pull the reader into a mood? Now that I would say yes to, to some degree, if you were willing to hang in there long enough to get the ingenious of it. Stephenson just writes that way. Most of his books are loaded.
I think a prime example is Moby Dick! What is it? A whole chapter lecture on whales? Flippin' 'eck!
Another one is Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code. I just had to let it wash over me!
And Lord of the Rings. I love the story but found some of the book put me to sleep. I think the films distilled the story beautifully and really made the story flow for me. I know a lot of information was needed but surely there must have been a better way. I think the problem was that Tolkien was more interested in the background and the world and the larger overall story he created rather than the characters (especially the few women). This is why I find it difficult to read some fantasy/science fiction because so much background information is needed. You get books on the fantasy world.. websites.. a whole load of history.. a new language to learn.. a run down of the biology etc. Some people like that. They learn Elvish or Klingon. It depends how deep you want to go into the world. I think some people think they live in Middle Earth or boldly go where no-one has gone before... Sometimes I just want to read a book!
I suppose I feel if the information can't be put in drop by drop and not take away from the flow of the story maybe it's too much. But that's just me.
Is it my imagination or does the information limit shrink just a little more each year?
Somewhere in between sucking up to editors, we need to make the pendulum swing back the other way so we can have blessed relief from Morse Code and sound bites.
I, for one, seek out particular authors because I enjoy surrounding myself with all that glorious language. Charles Dickens is one example, Jack Kerouac is another.
Sometimes we have to be as picky about our editors and readers as they are about us. There's a great old saying: When all you've got to work with is a hammer, soon every problem looks like a nail. Perhaps the same could be said for an editorial machete.
Jazz-Law bear: Bless you! I thought I was alone out here.
The reason I'm reading a book instead of reading over a screenplay or a play is that I want to see inside the character's head. I want to learn something. (Did you know that many readers like it if they feel they have learned something while reading fiction? Kind of makes up for it being "made up" and a "waste of time they could use to do something concrete," which is what Granny used to say about storybooks.) (grin) I like to read the stuff that y'all say you skip.
I think the diff here is that NOW the market caters to people who don't really like to read. Now don't get all up in arms yet. I mean . . . there are those of us who are bookworms. We have always read the backs of cereal boxes if there's nothing else on the table to read. We think the height of luxury is to sit in a hammock/ on a scenic outpost/ on the beach *reading*, perhaps with a notebook at hand to copy down notable quotes (*with attribution!*) or make notes about something that the reading sparked us to want to research. We are wordnerds and bookworms. We love those Old Book-Books (with no genre labels attached) that just told us a bunch of things along with the story.
Then there are those who read for story. They are the people who say, "Don't tell me what happens! Don't do spoilers!" You see, I'll read something even if I have read it before if I loved it, and I'll read it if you tell me all about it (so I can be sure no pigs are killed), and I'll read if if I read a lot of spoilers. I'm not reading so much for surprise or plot as I am for vicarious experience, touring the mind of a character (or an author), experiencing the setting and events of the story. Even if the character is "passive," or the author goes into a fascinating little aside or puts in footnotes, I keep reading. What is important to me is: am I being entertained? Am I reading on because it's a trainwreck that I can't stop looking at? That's OK! If the prose is cadenced and I love the way the author has with words, if the narrative drive pulls me along . . . I like the book, generally. I don't have a checklist like the RWA contests do--"does the hero appear by page 6? Is there a word relating to each of the five senses on every page?" (etc.) I just "know" when a book is for me.
Sometimes it's the voice that keeps me reading. I know that is the case with Zora Neale Hurston; she wrote a book about her upbringing and one about folk magic, and it's all voice in both cases. In fact, I thought _Watching God_ had a very minimal plot in terms of believability. I read it for her voice and her characters, the way I read series novels that start to peter out plotwise around book four or five.
I know. I'm a weirdo. I think that many books are being workshopped to death, that many compromises are being made in the name of "wide appeal and saleability." This leads to sound-alike books. This takes away individual expression to some extent. This means that books that could have become your favorite never made it to the shelves--the crit group imposed its structure on it, and then the editor/agent crew had its way with the text, and they told you, "Cut out all those descriptions and make the pace breakneck."
And it's a darn shame. Not everybody was built to ride in a sports car on the Autobahn all the time. Sometimes a Sunday ride on ol' Charlie the mule is the most scenic and relaxing and best.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home