The Significance of Insignificance

BlackMagic528 · Apr 7, 2010

I see quite a lot of complaints that go like this: "Author A said Character X had green eyes in the first chapter, but the green eyes never became important. They didn't mean anything and bore no significance. Why then did Author A say it at all?"

Or this: "Author B wrote a scene where Character Z bought wheat bread. But, Author B never told us why it was wheat bread. Why not rye? Author B never showed us te significance of the wheat bread and what it meant to the story and what it message it was supposed to convey. If the wheat bread didn't mean anything, why did he write it?"

Those are a little exaggerated (but not much, believe it or not). Still, you get my point. I see time and time again where people complain about the presence of insignificant details and such in something they're reading. I have a question about this: Does every single word have to be important? Moreover, does everything that happens throughout a story have to all be relevant to the plot?

Personally, I'm okay with random details being thrown into a story. I do this very often as a way of immersing my readers into the world of the story. I want them to be able to see, hear, and feel (if not smell and taste) what's going on in the story - particularly the seeing and hearing. I'm often told my stories and novels read more like otion pictures than literature. I believe that's largely because I find ways to help the reader "see" and "hear" the story as they read. Sometimes, this means mentioning some bit of information about either the immediate setting or the "world" in general that may or may not have anything to do with the plot, but will help to pull the reader more into the story. So, again, what's the problem with mentioning details that don't necessarily become integral to the plot later, especially if they help get the reader into the story? Well, that is, they should help get the reader into the story so long as the reader doesn't spend the rest of the story trying to find the significance behind the black suede couch (there is none

).

Another thing I do is try to have my writing reflect real life as much as what can practically be done. No fiction story is going to be completely realistic. There just won't be a plot at all if it's completely realistic. But, stories can reflect real life. And one thing is true about real life: Not everything that happens during a span of time is all connected. Life is random, for the most part, and sometimes things will go on that aren't necessarily connected to other things going on in someone's life. In my writing, the same thing is true. Events happen in my writing that have no significance whatsoever to the plot. They're just things that happen as life happens, and the characters work it out. Was it important to the plot that my character's girlfriend happened to drop by for a quick visit? Probably not. But those kinds of things do happen in real life, so why shouldn't tey happen in fiction? Again, I realize fiction by nature will be somewhat unrealistic, but how often in our real daily lives do we go through a span of days or weeks where every single event in our lives is interconnected? I'd be willing to say quite rarely, and most likely never. And again, this goes toward reader immersion. If the story is playing out almost just as real life would / could play out, doesn't that make the story all the more real in the reader's mind? Could it not make the reader feel more "in" the story as opposed to being "out" of the story?

So, anyway, what do you think about what I'm saying here? Do you agree that every detail in a story has to be significant? Or do you think that it's okay to have insignificant details as part of the story? Do you think it's okay to have events and such happen that don't have anything at all to do with the plot? Or are you of the believe that everything must connect to everything? Why do you have these opinions?

Cella · Apr 7, 2010

I notice everything but it doesn't bother me if minor details are used to fill in the story and make something seem real...

Like the wheat bread thing. I would not be satisfied to just know that so-and-so bought bread. I want to know what kind because it tells me more about the kind of person the character is. That's reason enough for me.

I do this in real life too. People think I stalk them strangely because I remember what they ordered from DQ last time we went and I wonder why they got something different this time. (by people, I mean friends and stuff--not strangers)

*keep further comments to self*

kaitie · Apr 7, 2010

Details tell us about the character. Now, if you gave a character really unusual eyes or something, like purple, and then never explained or it never became a factor, I'd be annoyed. I like in general having a vague idea of what a character looks like, however. Now, if you make a fuss about it and inflate the importance, and then nothing comes of it, that might be another story.

As for things like wheat bread, a) I like details, and b) I agree completely that it tells us more about the person. Someone who eats wheat bread might be more health conscious than someone who eats white bread. The same way someone who watches only reality television isn't going to be the same as someone who only watches the History Channel. Little details about people help us understand them as a person.

I think it's the inflated importance of certain things that make people feel this way.

PGK · Apr 7, 2010

I'm more than OK with random details being thrown in as long as they're not really random. For example: If my character buys wheat bread it's because it shows a small glimpse into his personality. This doesn't have to be a monumental plot twister, but it grounds the reader and shows an aspect (however insignificant) of the MC.

The green eyes comment is beyond me. If details like that must be relevant to the plot then all literature is doomed. My eyes are hazel, but that's hardly an important factor to the plot of my life. Sure, if I had blue eyes I might have been luckier with the ladies when I was young, but so what? Should we not mention any physical descriptions if they don't have a vital part in the story?

Same goes for name brands. I hear plenty of people complaining when the author mentions a brand instead of a generic description of the item. Unless the brand is being mentioned constantly as though it's a paid advertisement, I not only don't have a problem with it, but I also like it better.

When I was looking for a B-day present for my brother in law I was looking for an IPod not just any MP3 player. Similarly, my current MC has rented a Suzuki not a generic "motor vehicle of sub-par manufacturing value with the ability to drive off road but a rather dismal life expectancy with frequent repair and maintenance needs that all add up to a low initial cost but high prolonged expenditure which makes this the perfect rental to offer to unsuspecting tourists who are prone to foregoing the added cost of rental insurance."

Bond. James Bond . . . the name says it all for me.

BlackMagic528 · Apr 7, 2010

Let me add a bit more to this.

In addition to the original question, as a reader, how would you feel if a novel - a fairly lengthy one - mentioned the following details that turned out to be nothing more than setting / detail / random information:

1. The couch that the two main characters repeatedly sit on in a third character's aparment is black suede.

2. A character has an affinity for garish-colored clothing (like bright orange).

3. A character's cat is the "playboy" of the neighborhood.

4. The ideal serving temperature for human blood is 100 degrees F.

5. A character is the illegitimate child of a Roman soldier and an Egyptian servant girl (it might be relevant in later volumes, but not in the first one).

6. A character doesn't care for A- blood.

7. A character's girlfriend is left-handed.

8. The artistic etchings in the frosted glass wall of an office.

9. A character has multiple tatoos (and none of them have anything to do with the plot).

10. A character has a pronounced Long Island accent.

That's just a random sampling of stuff from the novel.

Polenth · Apr 7, 2010

It's not about the detail, but how the detail is introduced.

In first or close third, it's about what the character would notice. Most people don't notice eye colour when they first meet someone. It'd make sense if a character had a particular fascination with eyes, but most of the time, it's a detail they'd notice later. If a character is noticing certain details over others, I need to beleive they're someone who would.

When you're an all-knowing narrator, it doesn't seem odd to say Mary has green eyes. You don't need to notice something you already know after all. However, it will seem odd if every character is introduced by their eye colour. It's like you have some sort of eye colour obsession (and I have read stories that fall into this... it makes me wonder about the author and not the story).

In all points of view, you risk making the detail seem more important than it is. If the mention consists of "he sat on the blue chair", it's unlikely anyone will comment. If he looks at the chair, describes it, and then sits on it... that makes the chair important. It might be because he's a chair-maker, but if he's not, I'll wonder why so much time was spent on the chair.

Often when people are criticised, it isn't really because they said Mary had green eyes or the chair was blue. They just introduced those details in a way that didn't work.

kaitie · Apr 7, 2010

Let me add a bit more to this.

In addition to the original question, as a reader, how would you feel if a novel - a fairly lengthy one - mentioned the following details that turned out to be nothing more than setting / detail / random information:

1. The couch that the two main characters repeatedly sit on in a third character's apartment is black suede.

I'd probably assume that the person who owns it enjoys having sex on suede. That might say more about me than it probably should. Though I'm not sure why this would warrant repeated repetition. I'd probably consider that lazy editing and be shouting at the author that I got it the first time.

2. A character has an affinity for garish-colored clothing (like bright orange).

Just a personality thing. Without knowing anything else, I'd probably assume that he liked attention and was outgoing. I wouldn't make a decision solely based on this, though.

3. A character's cat is the "playboy" of the neighborhood.

The guy probably has a lot of kittens dumped on his doorstep? (And is kind of irresponsible if he doesn't have it fixed). Actually, I'd probably just assume the author intended this as humor. It's funnier than just saying he has a cat.

4. The ideal serving temperature for human blood is 100 degrees F.

Character is a vampire or a very sick freak wannabe.

5. A character is the illegitimate child of a Roman soldier and an Egyptian servant girl (it might be relevant in later volumes, but not in the first one).

I actually kind of have a hard time seeing how this wouldn't be important, particularly if the Roman soldier was in high standing. I wonder if it was consensual, and if it wasI'd wonder if the girl was either treated well and given more because of her father's status, or if she was raised as an outcast servant because of it. It's hard to tell out of context, and I suppose if it's just a random character it may not be important, but that's the kind of thing I imagine would have a lot of influence on a person's life.

6. A character doesn't care for A- blood.

I'd assume this was another attempt at humor. If it's not humorous, either the author was trying too hard, or she might be a spoiled bitch. Again, out of context hard to tell.

7. A character's girlfriend is left-handed.

So? This fits my category of green eyes. It's just a trait, and unless it was pointed out elsewhere that a murderer was likely left-handed, I wouldn't even think twice about it I imagine.

8. The artistic etchings in the frosted glass wall of an office.

Is it just a thing showing the setting? "Bob walked into the office. It was a high class sorta place, or one that tried to give that impression, from the fake Picasso on the wall to the artistic etchings in the frosted glass wall." If it's something like that, then I wouldn't think anything of it except that it was giving me a picture of what the place looked like. In fact, unless a huge amount of attention was paid to this, I would probably think that even if it was more detailed.

9. A character has multiple tattoos (and none of them have anything to do with the plot).

Again, not sure I'd care. If the author made a fuss I might. Like if she went into vivid detail about one particular tattoo that was emphasized to the point that it was clear the author was trying to hint at something and then it was nothing, that'd probably be annoying. I'd wonder more if the author was trying to give the stereotyped description by telling you a character had tattoos. Yeah, a person's tattoos could really tell you a lot about them, but some people do this as a way of showing a "bad boy."

10. A character has a pronounced Long Island accent.

He's from Long Island. :tongue

That's just a random sampling of stuff from the novel.

BlackMagic528 · Apr 7, 2010

kaitie said:
I'd probably assume that the person who owns it enjoys having sex on suede.

I'm sorry. I have to ask.

What?

Witch_turtle · Apr 7, 2010

So, anyway, what do you think about what I'm saying here? Do you agree that every detail in a story has to be significant? Or do you think that it's okay to have insignificant details as part of the story? Do you think it's okay to have events and such happen that don't have anything at all to do with the plot? Or are you of the believe that everything must connect to everything? Why do you have these opinions?

I agree that details such as what kind of bread a character buys gives an idea of his or her personality. Another way this level of detail can be used is to show certain abilities or relationships. Maybe it's mentioned that Character A is really good with computers, and Character B therefore considers Character A to be a nerd. That could possibly affect their relationship. In my WIP, it's briefly mentioned that my MC cooks for his sister. It's not a detail that's important to the plot, but it comes up twice more: Once when he tries to "bribe" her by offering a lavish dinner (even though he doesn't actually believe that he has the ability to cook well), and again much later when she tells him she loves his cooking. It's something mentioned only very briefly, woven into far more important conversations and events. It's not important to the PLOT, but it's important to their relationship and how they view themselves and each other, how they interact, how she supports him and has a high opinion of him even when he has a very low opinion of himself, etc. Does that make sense? This is how I think small details should work in terms of their significance in stories. I don't think the meaning of these small details should be shoved down reader's throats, though. It's just something that's there that sort of adds to the overall atmosphere of each character's life and their interactions with the world around them and with other characters.

As for events that have nothing to do with the plot, I feel like it's a lot less doable. Yes, in real life things happen that don't tie in or mean much in the short term (although I could get into a long rant about how everything does change everything, slowly, as our impressions of people change gradually with our interactions with them, but, I won't). IN storytelling: Maybe it would make the life of the character seem more "real," but if it's not interesting, nobody's going to care. Readers will get bored, and wonder "why is this happening? It's not advancing the plot." I think the only circumstance under which such random, pointless events can be utilized is in highly literary/character-driven/internal emotion focused stories. But even then, only if it has an affect on the internal thoughts, feelings, motivations, etc of the character. Events must have purpose.

I have these opinions because . . . I guess because I believe in telling stories that have meaning. Even small, seemingly mundane events can have meaning, though. My MC wandering around his house searching for something to do, spending half an hour feeding the fish and rearranging the refrigerator magnets doesn't advance the plot, but it has a big purpose and meaning -- he's avoiding a responsibility, something he's scared of, procrastinating, even though it's glaringly obvious that he has no excuse to still be at home. It mirrors the larger conflict of the story as well. So as an amendment to my comments about significant/insignificant EVENTS in a story: Things can seem insignificant, but still should serve some purpose or meaning. But again, that purpose or meaning doesn't have to be (and maybe shouldn't be, depending) spelled out and beaten into the brains of the reader.

shaldna · Apr 8, 2010

I think the difference here is how the insignificant is handled. For example:

a) He found Sarah at the fridge, basket in hand, staring balefully at the organic yoghurt. 'Are you okay?' he asked. Sarah sighed, 'I hate yoghurt.'

vs

b) He found Sarah standing at the fridge, basket in hand, staring balefully at the organic yoghurt. He thought this was strange because Sarah didn't like yoghurt, and he didn't like the look on her face. He knew there was something wrong.

Example one is just there, insignificant, part of a bigger scene. Sarah hates yoghurt. Big deal. The second one is portraying it as if this is somehow important.

shaldna · Apr 8, 2010

I'm not sure what you are asking, but here ya go

BlackMagic528 said:
Let me add a bit more to this.

In addition to the original question, as a reader, how would you feel if a novel - a fairly lengthy one - mentioned the following details that turned out to be nothing more than setting / detail / random information:

1. The couch that the two main characters repeatedly sit on in a third character's aparment is black suede.

the third character has no taste at all. I fully expect him to have a black light and a bead curtain too.

2. A character has an affinity for garish-colored clothing (like bright orange).

aging hippy

3. A character's cat is the "playboy" of the neighborhood.

character spends too long pondering over her cats sex life and obviously isn't getting enough of her own.

4. The ideal serving temperature for human blood is 100 degrees F.

tasty.

5. A character is the illegitimate child of a Roman soldier and an Egyptian servant girl (it might be relevant in later volumes, but not in the first one).

then keep it in. it gives a bit of her background and an idea of where she is coming from

6. A character doesn't care for A- blood.

said character is too damn picky.

7. A character's girlfriend is left-handed.

is this historical? if so I expect her to be considered in league with the devil.

8. The artistic etchings in the frosted glass wall of an office.

someone with too much money.

9. A character has multiple tatoos (and none of them have anything to do with the plot).

as a very tattooed person myself I fully expect them to get uncomfortable looks from old ladies in the street and people to not want to sit too close to them on the bus.

10. A character has a pronounced Long Island accent.

is this a trick question?

That's just a random sampling of stuff from the novel.

kaitie · Apr 8, 2010

BlackMagic528 said:
I'm sorry. I have to ask.

What?

Lol, left you a rep point. :tongue

knight_tour · Apr 8, 2010

I've always read that it is best to be specific in most writing. In the Stephen King book I'm reading right now, he constantly gives tiny insignificant details, and I like it that way.

Lady Ice · Apr 8, 2010

It depends how you set it up. If you set up, say, her vegetarianism to be a big thing and it's never mentioned again, that's annoying. If you mention it in passing, fine.

Everything is significant in some way. You've chosen X not Y.However it could be significant to a variety of things- that character, that relationship, that scene, humour, atmosphere...it doesn't have to be relevant to the plot but if it's pointless, why bother mentioning it?

Caitlin Black · Apr 8, 2010

On details: I think that details add a lot to a story. It has to have some meaning, though, but that's not hard. It doesn't have to add to plot, but it could add to character, or setting, etc. Details are what readers will ponder over in creative writing courses if you're ever used for the syllabus. It will drive home a merry conversation. Also, lack of details makes for just as important a conversation. Here I mean, you could say she drank some bourbon (lack of details compared to the alternative) or you could say she drank some Jack Daniels. People will infer a lot from details.

Again, though - if it's made to be important to the extreme and is then never utilised, I'll feel a little perplexed (especially on the second read through).

seun · Apr 8, 2010

I read a (terrible) book once which featured the MC describing the film Poltergeist as:

"The Steven Spielberg produced film released in 1982."

It bore no relation to character, plot or story. It was just over-writing which is another way of saying it was too much detail. Less can be so much more but the trick is not to underdo it just as you don't want to overdo it.

timewaster · Apr 8, 2010

BlackMagic528 said:
So, anyway, what do you think about what I'm saying here? Do you agree that every detail in a story has to be significant? Or do you think that it's okay to have insignificant details as part of the story? Do you think it's okay to have events and such happen that don't have anything at all to do with the plot? Or are you of the believe that everything must connect to everything? Why do you have these opinions?

I think I distinguish between details which stand out and details that blend in.
Usually stand out details are significant for plot and character and I think that if unimportant things are given weight that should be reserved for important things then that is irritating. Background details should usually be in the background along with significant things you want to bury for plot reasons - to misdirect the reader. It sounds as if you are maybe giving too much prominence to insignificant things either by mentioning them with too much of a flourish or by putting them in the wrong bit of the sentence.
It is a bit hard to illustrate but:
'She batted her green eyes and smiled provocatively. Unfortunately the smear of ' Vixen-Vamp red' on her prominent front teeth detracted a little from her allure.'
I don't see this as 'stand out' but just general descriptive stuff.
On the other hand.
'She smiled provocatively and batted dark lashes. Even with the lipstick smear on her teeth and her inept attempt at seduction I could not turn away. Her eyes were green.'

Here I think the reader expects there to be something special either about her or her green eyes. The 'green eye' line sticks out.

If you don't want a detail to stand out - fiddle with the line until it seems completely natural if you do want it to stand out, fiddle with the line until it does : )[/QUOTE]

If that is not the problem, apologies.

DeleyanLee · Apr 8, 2010

BlackMagic528 said:
I see quite a lot of complaints that go like this: "Author A said Character X had green eyes in the first chapter, but the green eyes never became important. They didn't mean anything and bore no significance. Why then did Author A say it at all?"

Or this: "Author B wrote a scene where Character Z bought wheat bread. But, Author B never told us why it was wheat bread. Why not rye? Author B never showed us te significance of the wheat bread and what it meant to the story and what it message it was supposed to convey. If the wheat bread didn't mean anything, why did he write it?"

I'd say it's time to either get new beta-readers or find people who stop analyzing what they're reading and just enjoys the story. Or both.

Every detail is important, as it helps paint the picture the author is trying to create--but importance=/=significance.

People like that drive me nuts.

Jamesaritchie · Apr 8, 2010

BlackMagic528 said:
Let me add a bit more to this.

In addition to the original question, as a reader, how would you feel if a novel - a fairly lengthy one - mentioned the following details that turned out to be nothing more than setting / detail / random information:

1. The couch that the two main characters repeatedly sit on in a third character's aparment is black suede.

2. A character has an affinity for garish-colored clothing (like bright orange).

3. A character's cat is the "playboy" of the neighborhood.

4. The ideal serving temperature for human blood is 100 degrees F.

5. A character is the illegitimate child of a Roman soldier and an Egyptian servant girl (it might be relevant in later volumes, but not in the first one).

6. A character doesn't care for A- blood.

7. A character's girlfriend is left-handed.

8. The artistic etchings in the frosted glass wall of an office.

9. A character has multiple tatoos (and none of them have anything to do with the plot).

10. A character has a pronounced Long Island accent.

That's just a random sampling of stuff from the novel.

Without such detail, the story has no setting. Without setting, the story floats in Nowhereville.

It's all in how and when the detail is introduced, but a story must have a certain amount of detail.

Namatu · Apr 8, 2010

Jamesaritchie said:
Without such detail, the story has no setting. Without setting, the story floats in Nowhereville.

It's all in how and when the detail is introduced, but a story must have a certain amount of detail.

I'll add to this and say some of these details relate to personality, and without personality your character isn't interesting. No setting and no personality leaves you with very little.

I provide details so the reader knows what the MC is seeing and thinking, can get a sense of time and place, etc. Aside from that, there are a lot of details I include because they'll be relevant later or that I pick specifically for symbolism when I'm intentionally going for that.

milly · Apr 8, 2010

specifics are best I think...they add so much to character development...it's like how we get to know people in real life so why not do that for our readers, let them get to know the people we've become enthralled with and enamored by...I think specificity creates characters readers remember not just ones they can relate to at the time they read it only to forget about them later

Who can forget the quirks of Holden Caulfield or the mannerisms and sheer visual image of Capt. Ahab?? It's hard to do because of how well Salinger and Melville showed us the "little things" about them

just my opinion of course

C.M.C. · Apr 8, 2010

We (as a collective) seem to be so intent on cutting out anything that isn't the plot that we forget we're writing. If every word of a book is intended to advance the plot, you're not going to have much of a book. It's the details and seemingly inconsequential stuff that moves the book from being a bullet point list of plot elements into an actual piece of art.

NeuroFizz · Apr 8, 2010

BlackMagic528 said:
... I'm often told my stories and novels read more like otion pictures than literature. I believe that's largely because I find ways to help the reader "see" and "hear" the story as they read.

On one hand, this issue is centered on the development of each writer's own personal writing style and voice, so go ahead and be detail oriented unless you receive feedback that suggests it's a bit much. On the other hand, if not "controlled" in some way, excessive detail can distance readers from the story.

We should never underestimate the intelligence of our readers (we shouldn't have to tie a ring through their noses and lead them through every single foot placement on the story's pathway).

We should never underestimate the imagination of our readers.

We should never underestimate the joy a reader feels when he/she gets to use his/her intelligence in reading our stories.

We should never underestimate the importance of allowing a reader to put a personal stamp on a story by allowing that reader a little freedom in imagining some details of the story and possibly aligning those details with their own personal experiences, which can enhance their emotional involvement and engagement.

One thing we should ask ourselves is, "Why is it important for the reader to know this?" If the writer's response is, "Because it is my picture of the person and I want the reader to have the exact same picture as I do." and there is no other reason, the writer may want to reconsider. Small details can almost always be introduced and used as a way of deepening characterization or action, so it's not difficult to justify putting details in. But we shouldn't be such control freaks that we insist that all readers have the exact vision of all the small details of our created characters and created worlds. It doesn't make reading much fun, in fact, it can come across as a lack of trust in the readers' intellegence and imagination ("I don't think they are going to see this right, so I'm going to make sure they get it.")

All that said, it all boils down to developing our own personal writing style. I see no problems with the examples cited in proper context (except one*) because they all can be used to show aspects of the characters' character. I'll agree with others, putting details in the story isn't an issue. It's how the body of details are used that can influence a reader's response to the story.

*I presume the served blood will include some form of anti-coagulant. High temperature may actually speed up the coagulation reactions. All good vampires who hold blood beyond immediate consumption should have his/her own special recipe for anticoagulants (family recipes).

I can agree with the agrument of it being art, therefore absolute freedom is a personal right, but to me, it's all about the readers, and if a large segment of the readers are turned off by my vision, then I'm defeating another goal (besides the artistry aspect)--entertaining the readers.

Greeble · Apr 8, 2010

BlackMagic528 said:
Does every single word have to be important?

Yes.

BlackMagic528 said:
Moreover, does everything that happens throughout a story have to all be relevant to the plot?

No, not necessarily. Mentioning little details can make a setting more vivid. For instance, at one point I describe someone hearing the meowing cries of black-winged gulls. Is mentioning the specific species that important? Plot-wise, I'd say no. But it does add more flavor to the scene, especially for the reader who knows this species of gull is prevalent in East Asia, hinting at where my story is set.

DeleyanLee · Apr 8, 2010

BlackMagic528 said:
Moreover, does everything that happens throughout a story have to all be relevant to the plot?

Plot is overrated by most writers, IMO. They will sacrifice everything else that makes up the story--characterization, richness of setting, subtly of theme--because of plot.

'Tis probably the sadness epidemic I've seen in my 30-odd years of writing.

The Significance of Insignificance

Master of the Darklands :-)

Cella

With great power comes

They put those words in my head!

Master of the Darklands :-)

Mushroom

With great power comes

Master of the Darklands :-)

hanging around for a spell

The cake is a lie. But still cake.

The cake is a lie. But still cake.

With great power comes

Fantasy Tourist

Makes useful distinctions

Wild one

Horror Man

present

Writing Anarchist

Lost in mental space.

seeing sparks

Archetype

The grad students did it

Writing Anarchist