Filler Vs Depth/Substance

[Zoolander]

I have scenes in my fantasy novel that i feel like adds depth/substance to this fantasy world the story takes place in or either adds depth/substance to my character life. But i'm afraid since the scenes has no connection to the main plot or subplot, it would be looked at as filler.

For example:
The main plot in my fantasy story follows a new detective solving his first case a local school boy murdered.
The subplot follows him struggling to find love.

Now, i wanted to add depth to my character life by having my character do things inside this fantasy world like: Compete in a sports game that he loves. Take his parents to a new restaurant that opened up in his childhood neighborhood. Attend his best-friend wedding etc

None of these things effect the story plots but to me they add some kind of substance to the character life in this fantasy world

I do plan to add conflict to those scenes so they can be interesting......

Maybe its just me but i appreciate when reading or even watching characters do things in they life that allows me to naturally get to know them that doesnt require some plot point to advance a storyline.

Like if a character has kids, i would want to see them spending time with them and see the relatinship/bond they have with their children.

Normally people probably would find that stuff boring lmao but i feel if you add some conflict in those scenes then they could work.

Let me know what you guys think about this and your opinion.

 

[Common Grackle]

I'm a bit of two minds on this. On the one hand, I think characters having interests and relationships outside of the main plot go some way towards humanizing them, and I think small details in worldbuilding can be helpful in making it feel real. On the other hand, digressions of this sort can be frustrating, depending on their presentation, so it pays to be careful and not to include anything which will feel too much like an aside.

I think if you can connect these scenes to characterization, themes, or plot in some meaningful way, there shouldn't be much of a problem--but if they really are there just to showcase the world, then (depending on how it's handled) they might distract from your story. Does your character competing in a sport tell us anything about him, his social status/circle, the structure of the world around him, etc.? Or is it just a really long scene detailing something that's not relevant? Another thing to consider is how much time is spent on these things. Mentioning that he plays the sport or showing him playing it briefly is one thing; going into several chapters of explanation of all its rules and complexities is another, especially if there's no other real point to it than explaining it for the sake of explaining it.

Basically, I'd see if there's some way you can connect these things to other, more structurally-significant parts of the story. The only example I can think of right now is Quidditch in the Harry Potter series. Rowling uses this as a) a means to give Harry something he enjoys and some sense of freedom (which he's seriously lacked, to this point), and which is taken away at various points to cause conflict; and b) a source of conflict/stage of conflict in and of itself--for instance in developing his rivalry with Malfoy, or presenting a scenario in which more serious outside threats play out. That is, it's used to build a sense of what the normal, happy school life is like, so that it can be played with later on as things get more dangerous.

The same sort of thing applies to the other scenarios. Do we know and care about the best friend? Does attending the wedding provide any insights about what the main character wants (or does not want?), how he relates to the people and broader society around him, etc.? Is the theme of weddings (or any of the themes implied by weddings) important in any way going forward? Seeing as how he's struggling to find love, you could probably make it relevant somehow...

 

[tinkerdan]

I think it's fine when characters do normal things for normal reasons and that might actually add to the pacing somewhat.
However the plan to add conflict comes under suspicion here because it does sound like you plan to add conflict because there is something wrong with the scene not having conflict.
Sure if the conflict makes sense then maybe that would work and should be there; but I'd think about that before jumping in.

Sometimes your reader needs that break and a small reality check to show that the character isn't consumed 24/7 in mortal conflict with no time to even sleep.

 

[Brian G Turner]

None of these things effect the story plots but to me they add some kind of substance to the character life in this fantasy world

I do plan to add conflict to those scenes so they can be interesting......

Indeed, if you can tie them all up to the same sense of conflict, that could work. Ultimately, eating out and running a race are not story - conflict is.

 

[The Big Peat]

*cough* Maybe this is one for the Writers' forum?

In any case, as a reader, I love reading digressions into everyday life. Yes, sometimes they can break the flow of the story or be boring... but the likelihood is that if me and the author disagree about what's boring/distracting about those scenes, we've probably already disagreed before I got anywhere near them.

That said - generally its best to bring them into either the plot/subplot in some way.

 

[The Judge]

I have to say the scenes you describe read to me as filler, pure and simple. Filler that takes a paragraph or two is fine, but anything more and personally I'd be getting antsy wondering what the point of it is. Just shoving conflict into a filler scene isn't going to help, either, unless that conflict itself in some way relates to the plot/sub-plot, and actually for me would just muddy the waters and give the whole book a lack of cohesion and substance. I'm something of a purist, though, so to me each scene should build on what has gone before and be necessary for what comes after -- like building a tall thin tower as opposed to a sprawling mansion all on one level. So if a scene is removed it should leave a gap which causes the structure to wobble at the very least. If a scene can be removed in its entirety without in any way affecting what happens or showing us things we need to know to understand what happens, then I'd question why it's there.

So, to me you need to integrate those scenes into the plot somehow.

And as TBP says, this is really a writing matter, so I'll move it over to GWD.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

It's really an unanswerable question for two reasons:

1) So much depends on how the scene is written. (Which none of us can tell without actually reading the manuscript.)

2) One reader's filler may be another reader's substance.


Another, and different question, is what you really and truly want the story to be about. Is it the mystery that interests you, as the writer, the most, or the search for love? Either way might make a brilliant story, but probably not if you can't make up your mind which story is the one you really want to tell.

 

[Parson]

As a reader I would have to say that I expect each scene whether it has the detective chasing down a clue, or having lunch at a supper club to add a piece to the main story As T.E. said, whatever it is about and both can be included but only one should be the thrust of the story. IMHO!!!! As I said Reader not Writer.

 

[Biskit]

So if a scene is removed it should leave a gap which causes the structure to wobble at the very least.

To which I would add - test it by experiment. Smile nicely at your long-suffering, ever-faithful beta-reader, and ask them to read a chapter or two with and without the scene(s) in question. Does the story still work?

You can try the exercise yourself, but in my experience the beta-reader is better. As the writer it is easy to get overly attached and reluctant to cut scenes that really need to go.

On a practical note, I would suggest reading the 'without' version first. Then the 'with' to see if you gain anything.

 

[Gonk the Insane]

As others have said, this is a tricky one. My feeling is that too many scenes/chapters that might be construed as filler could slow the pace down, and affect the overall story, perhaps muddying the arc of it altogether.

None of these things effect the story plots but to me they add some kind of substance to the character life in this fantasy world

But they could do both, right? This is a detective story in a Fantasy setting, so I think from what you've described you could do both. Taking the example of the sports game:
Could suspects be present at the game, either playing or watching? The detective could then be trying to enjoy the game, for example, but finds himself musing on the case. His reactions to their presence could deepen his character without diverting too far from the main story arc.

With the restaurant visit, perhaps he sees another suspect there, perhaps the suspect is with someone other than his/her partner and sparks suspicion in the detective. How would he react, trying to enjoy a meal with family while part of his mind is occupied with work thoughts?

Just ideas, but I think if you can tie in these events with the plot the story will be stronger for it. You can use them to build tension, deepen the mystery, and show us more about the main character(s) all in one go. Several birds for one stone, so to speak.

 

[barrett1987]

Gonk, I agree. Fleshing scenes are great if linked to the plot.

 

[SciFrac]

If they truly add nothing, make them super short. I prefer every scene these add something to the main story. Definitely show characters in daily life, but maybe during dinner he gets a phone call with a mysterious clue. Or the game causes an injury, and he runs into somebody at the doctor's office. I'd try to incorporate each one somehow.

 

[vonHelldorf]

It's a good idea to reveal more about the character, but don't go off on long tangents. Show the reader the tip of the iceberg! Little is more.

 

[TWErvin2]

If they scenes might tie into a sequel in a series, such scenes would be less toward 'filler'.

Characterization and expanding reader understanding has merit, and it really depends on your style. As was mentioned above, if the scenes could tie in some way to the main plot...crossing paths with someone or jars a memory or new idea to solve the crime, that would be beneficial too.

 

[Ihe]

Try having the search for love mirror in some way the main conflict or plot, either to potentiate or to bring contrast, even if it doesn't advance the plot per se. That way you maintain coherence. This way, even if you don't advance plot, you can at least explore a plot point/theme from a different perspective/through symbolism, making it a bit more meta/artsy ad bringing a different flavour/interpretation to the table, maybe even a little fresh insight into the MC or the conflict.

Example: the main story is about the MC searching for redemption after murdering an innocent man, and for this he turns himself in and goes to jail. A coherent "filler subplot"/digression could be him, while "in the hole" for bad behaviour, finding a wounded rat and nursing it back to health, then trying to set it free from within the strict confinement they are in. This symbolises his own struggle to free himself from the shackles of guilt (if done right), but it doesn't necessarily advance the story--it could just be one chapter even, never to be mentioned again in the rest of the story, and of no consequence to the resolution. It just repeats the premise using symbolic elements. I don't know if I used the correct example, but you get the gist of it.

I feel the Breaking Bad bottle episode of the fly falls into this category. It looks at their situation from a symbolic standpoint, without really advancing the main plot at all (IMO), just exploring the psyche of the 2 MCs. I thought it was beautifully done, but that episode in particular is a love it-hate it deal, which is the reaction you'll get with any "filler" scene.

 

[The Big Peat]

Something that I don't think anyone has said yet...

A lot of readers will read any unconnected scene like its connected anyway. A lot of us assume that if its in the book, its tied to the plot.

So by having unconnected scenes, you run a risk of having the reader think you're promising something you're not. Which is nearly always a mistake.

I've changed my mind slightly. I love scenes showing details from the character's life. But everything has to connect and resolve in some way. Completely unconnected scenes sound like something you'd need to be a genius to pull off.

 

[tinkerdan]

The more I think about this the more I am willing to admit that this is very close to the same principle of Chekhov's gun; though I might point out that this is often speaking in terms of a play or sometimes a short story where there is a more pressing need for being concise. Novels have a little bit more latitude though I favor the notion of keeping it brief because too much focus on any particular item can leave the reader wondering what that is all about.

Perhaps a point in case might be in my first novel I kept mentioning the oddity of the paint on certain walls and that elicited the response from beta readers, What's with the rust colored walls? Which I didn't respond to because it indicated that they hadn't reached that point where that become critically important.

However when I split the book into two books I found it necessary to move at least a portion of the explanation for the oddity ahead enough that it was in the first book; though the real use of, and the whole explanation for, was in the second book. This almost appears like a cheat and may put some readers off, however it does give a closure to that thread for the time being. That it plays an important part in the next book, is a sort of bonus at that point that makes more sense to those having read the first book.

There are other scenes that play important parts in future books; but these are only touched on lightly and though one beta reader expressed the thought that there were elements that slowed the story down, I left them in without explanation or closure because when it does become important, if not previously touched upon, it raises this other flag for people who worry about why something seemed to just come out of nowhere.

Either way you have to understand that the Chekhov's gun device calls for immediate closure to within three acts or chapters and I don't think mine qualify though they ultimately try to respect the existence of the 'rule' which may be more of a guideline.

If you have scenes that will go nowhere in the future of the plot then I'd keep them brief. The longer they run the greater the possibility you'll see them mentioned in a reader's rant-review if they take the time to do one at all.

Bottom line is you should be aware of these guidelines to help understand what you are setting yourself up for with your readers.