Exposition at the expense of the plot?

First of all, congratulations on getting this far with an agent. That's great news.

Now, I interpret the comment to mean you have too much talking and not enough action. That might mean that you talk about events (tell) rather than showing how the events unfold. Or it might mean you stop your action too abruptly or frequently so you can make a point. Or it might mean something else, or something in between. You know your story, so maybe if you re-read it with the agent's comment in mind, the answer will become apparent.

Best of luck!

Congratulations, also. This is a big step in the right direction if the agent is willing to take another look at it. Take that seriously, because it doesn't happen often.

I agree with CaroGirl and, to me, it sounds like you've interrupted your forward movement too often or for too long. Readers can get bored or easily distracted, making them have to flip back to see what the MC was doing before all that "richly imagined world" description intervened.

I'm wondering if it could also mean that you've filled your book with more description than plot, altogether. Not only does it interrupt the action, but perhaps takes over the action and you have a thin - or not fully realized - plot. But only you will really know from taking a look at your own writing. It certainly wouldn't hurt to ask the agent for a brief clarification (they're busy) - telling them that you appreciate the feedback and would love to have them read it again when you've revised.

It's really hard to help interpret that agent's feedback without knowing what your writing is like. Is there any way you could post some of it so we can read it for ourselves, and offer you some help?

I second the congratulations--that's actually a nice compliment from an agent! It's a very good sign that she's encouraging you to send a revision. It means she thinks it has serious potential but just needs some tightening up. Nice work!

Mythica said:

I'm guessing that maybe she's referring to too much telling about my world than showing? Maybe exposition refers to info dump?

Click to expand...

A hard question to answer without seeing some of the writing, but my first suspicion (resulting from examination of numerous fantasy fiction manuscripts over the years) is that you may have put a finger on the problem here. There always seems to be a temptation among fantasy writers to indulge a wee bit too much in the fun of "world-building". You'll need to take a dispassionate look at the manuscript in order to make a sensible judgment on this matter.

caw

Mythica, you've got an agent's interest - that is good, as in very good. May I suggest that you ask the agent exactly what she means? That would serve to show you really care about her opinion.

Congratulations of your progress thus far. I would begin revising the novel right away, based on what you mentioned above. When you feel you've accomplished what the agent asked for, resend it with a copy of the letter she sent you. Be sure to thank her for her advice.

I've pulled out a small snippet of your writing. I'm looking at ONLY the problem of interpolated exposition.

It's here. These are thoughts and explanations that would not be in the mind of someone fighting for his life.


I felt her aura flare and her power intensify with her rage, and my lips curled back into a nasty leer. She lunged for me, her pain momentarily forgotten, and her fist ripped back and thrust at my face fiercely. I ducked and I shoved my palms into her chest to push her away. Immediately I shrieked and reeled back, cupping my right hand. A cross-shaped burn seared my palm and I looked up to see the glowing pendant around the hunter’s neck. I had accidentally pressed my hand into the cross; igniting the reaction the symbol has against the flesh of my kind. I hissed ferociously at the girl.

Her leg kicked up and connected with my side, and I gave in to the force of the blow, falling to the ground. My opponent gave me no time to recover, and her foot struck the back of my neck with a great force. If I was human, or even a weaker vampire, it would have for certain snapped my neck in two. Her hand clutched the fabric of my shirt and pulled me to my feet before I could react. Her fist collided with my head and her knee shot up into my gut. My vision blurred, but I could still feel where she was. She let go of my shirt and attempted to strike me again, but I caught her fist, forgetting her other one.


There is another sort of exposition. May I recast the passage to show it?

Basically, there's no need to list every movement in this fight. The fighter, the POV character, only 'sees' and 'notices' things of quite immediate importance. That is ... he sees a blow coming towards him. He sees the woman's aura. He feels pain and fear.

But he doesn't necesssarily take time to notice that he himself is snarling or that somebody's let go of a shirt before they hit him.

When you add all the movements and thoughts and action and description that would be in the mind of an observer, outside the fight, rather than just the few things the fighter would concern himself with -- that's exposition.



Her aura flared. Her power intensified with her rage. She lunged for me, fists pounding.

I ducked and shoved her away. Pain. Pain beyond bearing ripped through me. I shrieked and fell back. She wore a cross. I looked down. A cross-shaped burn seared my palm

She attacked again. Hissing, disoriented, terrified, I dodged a roundhouse kick, riding the force of the blow, falling to the ground. Her foot struck the back of my head. A killing blow, if I'd been human.

She grabbed my shirt and pulled me to my feet. Her knee slammed into my gut. The world went black. I couldn't see, only sense where she was. It was enough. I caught the blow aimed for my face.

I'd forgotten her other fist.

Hmm. If it was me who said specifically "exposition at the expense of plot" I would have meant that the characters explaining their plans/abilities/items before they happened/were used was killing the suspense.

Like everyone else, I want to say congratulations on getting an agent to show this much interest - well done.

I thought long and hard before adding my opinion, but better to be ignored than not to offer my thoughts. So:

1. I agree that you should ask the agent what they mean. Every poster has a different interpretation of what is meant. You could end up changing what is good about the story and leaving the wrong bit in.

2. Be aware of what 'sort' of book you are writing. Literary fiction is more suited to greater exposition. More commercial fiction needs to be faster paced and readers won't have the patience for too muh description. It is a fact that chapters are getting progressively shorter over time.

What I mean by this is that if you wanted it to be a literary work, removing exposition isn't necessarily a good thing. Think of 'The Historian.' It certainly isn't long on action.

3. This is the part that I struggled to add. My chief focus when I read is POV. If it works, it really grabs me - but if not, I find it frustrating. First person POV is the most powerful at getting the reader inside the head of the main character. They 'become' that character. You keep the reader there by keeping withim character.

I noticed, for example, "She lunged for me, her pain momentarily forgotten..." My honest question is, how does your POV character know this? What this does is place the reader as the narrator and takes them out of your character's head. You've lost that special link.

I'll finish by saying, once again, how impressive the agent's response is.

Sounds like you told more than you showed. Or at the very least, early on in your story. Is there any way you can scatter this exposition in smaller fragments throughout the story as opposed to (from what I gather) too much too soon?

First, it's great the agent is asking to see a revision. So get back to work, and quick!

Second, I think it means you have too much explaining, building the world, telling, etc. but the plot isn't really moving in those scenes. It's common for writers to stop the plot (nothing happens) to describe the world the characters are in, or to explain back stories, etc. There's no or very little plot movement. Nothing happens for a stretch of time, or the plot doesn't go anywhere. People doing things, talking about things, hanging around, with no conflicts or resolutions or twists of events.


I don't think it's a show vs. tell issue at all. It's about plot movement.

Telling rather than showing meaning that she started telling the reader things as opposed to showing us or showing anything happening. As you said, some writers have a problem with grinding their worlds to a halt while they spend a page or more describing a coffee table.

3. This is the part that I struggled to add. My chief focus when I read is POV. If it works, it really grabs me - but if not, I find it frustrating. First person POV is the most powerful at getting the reader inside the head of the main character. They 'become' that character. You keep the reader there by keeping withim character.

I noticed, for example, "She lunged for me, her pain momentarily forgotten..." My honest question is, how does your POV character know this? What this does is place the reader as the narrator and takes them out of your character's head. You've lost that special link.

Click to expand...

I noticed this too. When you are using a certain POV (in this case, first-person), you have to remain consistent. Your person can't know the other person's thoughts.

But I don't think this is what the agent means. To be honest, I don't really know what she means and I'll be following this thread with interest.

One thing that might help is to overlap the exposition with the action, if it's possible.

I would look at chapter two. It's almost all exposition, including the dialogue.

After reading the first two chapters, I agree with JoB about his assessment of how exposition is handled within your action scenes.

I also agree that chapter two is extremely heavy on the exposition, which is a strange shift from chapter one, which has so much action.

I think you hit the nail on the head when you identified that it's better to let your character's development and backstory come out as she deals with her conflict. That is almost always preferable to writing in passages of pure exposition, no matter how long they are.

Nice work! I'd thank that agent and let her know you plan to revise with her advice in mind and resubmit it to her. Then, when you are ready to resubmit it, be sure you include a mention in your cover letter that she advised you to make some changes and invited you to resub. I'm sure that will make her remember this one!

Mythica said:

OT - patrick bateman, love the name american psycho = awesomeness.

Click to expand...

Then you'll love the avatar that goes with it now. It's my favorite book and movie.

Rewriting

Here's a tip:

Read though your pages and think, now how can I change that bit of exposition into dialog? Then see if you need some segways or transitions and add them.

Mythica said:

I wish I had learned HOW to write a novel before I actually wrote one. lol

Click to expand...

Writing one and being prepared to make changes IS how you learn.

You're obviously receptive to advice and/or criticism, which is another major part of learning.

Good for you and mega luck.

Building a rich and believable world is the easy part.

Treating the reader as if he already knows everything about that world--that's the challenge.