Dumb and dumber explanations

[SciFrac]

Half way through my book, and I have lots of fun, mysterious subplots happening. But now I need to start dropping backstory and connecting the dots. Trouble is, I don't like the explanations I'm giving. Exposition is always tricky, and I know not to write a simple boring conversation, but even when it's right, I still cringe at the info presented. Guess I'm good at creating mystery, but don't like pulling back the curtain. Any ideas?

 

[Vaz]

Do you really need to explain away all the mystery?

I'm a massive fan of authors who plant seeds in their works and then never fully explain them. Sometimes an unexplained mystery can be more satisfying as it can intrigue readers and allows them to use their imaginations.

Just a thought.

 

[SciFrac]

Thanks, Vaz. I do too, but at some point the reader starts to feel like you're just withholding information and it gets frustrating without any context, IMO.

 

[J D Foster]

too much mystery without reveal or tie up feels like a cheat to me. Kind of like a TV show I adored once. I watched it thinking this is all so exciting and how does it all interconnect? In the end it appeared that the writers lack an over all story arc and just sort of gave up/petered out. It felt like a lot of build up and tension without any release. (sounds like the sub title to the diary of my teenage years... buts best not say too much about that).

I'd go for it and reveal the things that need finishing out and explaining.

 

[Cathbad]

I'd go for it and reveal the things that need finishing out and explaining.

That's what sequels are for.

 

[Phyrebrat]

If you can swing so that the reader feels empowered enough with information to join their own dots, then you're onto a winner as far as I'm concerned. Even if they get it 'wrong'. I try to make mine as ambiguous as possible for that reason.

pH

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Perhaps you're forcing the explanation because you feel you have to. Ask your characters and blame anything clunky on them later.

 

[zmunkz]

Kind of like a TV show I adored once. I watched it thinking this is all so exciting and how does it all interconnect? In the end it appeared that the writers lack an over all story arc and just sort of gave up/petered out.

That is how I would summarize the series "Lost."

Perhaps you're forcing the explanation because you feel you have to.

Agreed, you don't want to force it. If you can give a specific example, maybe we can help with ways not to force it... otherwise hard to advise.

 

[J D Foster]

That's what sequels are for.

Chuckles

That is how I would summarize the series "Lost."

It's as if you read my mind

 

[CWScott]

I would try to wrap everything up and reveal it all by the end of the book. My readers hated me leaving open ended things. A few of the items I hadn't planned on explaining at all because it didn't really matter to the story. Had to go back and add some info to book 2. Now, if you write faster than me (I'm glacially slow), it probably won't matter too much.
I think its ok to leave a overarching mystery for sequels.
In the end however, you won't please everyone. And my experience has been that a majority of my readers didn't complain one way or another.

 

[Brian W. Foster]

My biggest tip regarding exposition is to, to the greatest extend possible, make sure that there is a story reason for the information to be conveyed. Instead of the author just telling the reader something, it's better, generally speaking, when the author creates as need for a character to learn the information.

 

[SciFrac]

Thanks everybody. I think I figured out what to do. There's some revealed and some kept a mystery, and I think I have compelling reasons for doing both. I'll let my beta's decide!