Not Making Exposition So...Expositiony?

[Jester85]

I'm writing a sequence currently that involves a few things that need to be established, but I'm not satisfied with how Point A to Point B the dialogue feels.

It's like the characters meet and make some flimsy excuse to spout exposition.

And I figure if I feel this way, a reader would probably feel it even more.

Any advice on making exposition flow more organic?

 

[Null_Zone]

Short encylopedia like entries at the start of the chapter have always worked for me or, say it is a historical event, brief chapters from that time.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

Or pay attention to what the characters are doing. Discuss it over washing the dishes, running to catch a bus etc and weave the exposition in with the action.

 

[Jester85]

^ That's how I'm trying to do it. I don't know, it just feels artificial to me, like two people step in a room, somebody says "so how about this earthquake we're having?" and person 2 says "well, as you know, ever since the Tirruvenogen Corporation's drilling destabilized the core, drawing it into collision with the gas giant, yada yada yada"

^ Just a facetious example.

 

[TheDustyZebra]

Perhaps we could see a bit of it in Critiques, to get an idea of what you're doing?

 

[AnyaKimlin]

Using that I would possibly do something like:

Plaster powdered and rained down from the wall. Sheltering under in the stairwell Freddie waited until he had stopped shaking. "Bloody hell what was that?"

"Earthquake." Tom brushed plaster from his hair.

"Bugger! Tirrguvenogen Corps gone too far." Freddie out from his space and surveyed the damage.

"Totally, they need to stop drilling before they destablise the core further."

 

[JonH]

Can't you just casually drop it into the conversation?

"Mabel. Mabel! What in hell is this thing in the garden?"

"Don't you use that language with me, Albert Rockinshaw. It's a Soyuz 26, as I'm sure you know, half price from Sainsbury's."

Albert shook his head sadly. "I sometimes think you'd buy broccoli if it was half price."

"You won't be saying that after the Tirruvenogen Corporation have destabilised the planet's core with all that mining, and we have to go to stay at Mother's on Vesta. Now come inside before your fish supper gets cold."

 

[Jester85]

^ I kinda like what you did there. lol

 

[Juliana]

I'm glad you started this thread, Jester, as this is something I'm struggling with at the moment.

Anya, nice example. And Jon, what can I say... That's fabulous.
And now I'm off to eat my fish before it gets cold.

 

[Hex]

I like Anya's and Jon's suggestions. I think, probably, it helps to give your characters a natural reason to discuss the question or to show what's going on through something happening.

(e.g. Bob changed the channel again, picking desultorily through the cold noodles which seemed to be all Maddie had left for his supper. On the BBC, some journalist was rambling on about the Tirruvenogen Corporation lawsuit. He watched for a moment, admiring her breasts silhouetted against the big graphic of the earth plunging into a flaming gas giant, then channel surfed until he found a comedy show...)

 

[Brian G Turner]

Why put it in dialogue? If you have POV characters, and they know about this, simply sum it up succinctly in their internal monologue.

 

[tinkerdan]

All these suggestions are great. I think that while following them remember what brought you do this point. If it sounds too contrived to you then something is not right. Sometimes it's a matter of finding the balance of many of the elements people have suggested.

I have used a lot of the internal dialogue for POV character before and that's one that has worked best for me. Sometimes I've had two characters using the 'as you know, Bob' conversation and that's a bit tricky. It works better if someone is telling a character something they don't know and need to know.

If the characters are going through a scene that doesn't necessarily have anything immediately connected to the exposition then you might need to create the scene with it's own specific purpose that makes sense and then filter in pieces of the exposition where it can be logically inserted without jarring the reader too much. That usually means inserting it in small chunks while returning continually to the scene.

If you need long exposition one way I've seen that done is to use a framing story narrative. Where the character or characters are heading from A to B with nothing exciting needing to happen between; and then there is a flashback or some such insertion of another scene with the exposition and you bring the reader back into the frame when they arrive at their destination. This usually requires that the exposition be interesting enough that it keeps the reader involved. Both the transition into and out of the story should be logical and seem seamless.

Sometimes exposition is necessary and as long as you recognize when it doesn't seem to flow well you are half the way there.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Sometimes you can put the exposition in dialogue. If one character is telling another something that it is vitally important for them to know. Or if characters are arguing about what to do next (because that's when people naturally remind each other of things that are already known to everyone involved). Or any other time when the characters really would be having that conversation, and you didn't just invent it so that you could sneak in some exposition.

But quite a lot of the time, trying to hide exposition in dialogue can make it look even more like exposition. In those instances, it drags out longer and it rings false.

So if the conversation or argument or explanation or whatever it is would develop as a natural part of the events of the plot, without any obvious pushing from you, then dialogue would be the best way to go.

Otherwise, there is nothing wrong with a little exposition slipped in between the dialogue and the action. If you are in close third person POV, then that would probably be through the POV character's internal monologue. If you are in omniscient, or if there is a narrator, then you can just write it as unashamed exposition.

If it is well-written it will fly by. If you are rushing it in to get it over with, it will probably be boring and it will seem much longer than it actually is.

 

[The Storyteller]

Looks like you have quite a few good answers, but I thought I'd throw my two cents in!


I agree, that if it sounds bad/forced to you, it will sound even more so that way to a reader.


Some of the alternative examples of the convo work. Also, you could mix dialogue with the character's thoughts. For example, if character 1 comments on the earthquakes, the MC could go on to think more about the topic. For example:
"Another earthquake this morning... that makes three this week!" Suzy exclaimed.
Bob shook his head. Ever since the T. Corporation drilling destabilized the core, drawing it into collision with the gas giant, there had been a steady stream of earthquakes. And with each passing week, matters were only getting worse.
Now Suzy or Bob remarks on how the earthquakes are getting more violent, or begin to complain bitterly about T. Corps carelessness! And so on.
If there is information they both know, it would be better if the MC summarizes it in his/her thinking. Or you could introduce a character into the conversation who doesn't know anything about the situation so that it is the characters who do know it explaining it to the one who doesn't.

Anyway, best of luck!

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Why put it in dialogue? If you have POV characters, and they know about this, simply sum it up succinctly in their internal monologue.

I think a lot of this comes down to how well you (as in the collective you) write dialogue. If you're strong at it, use dialogue - it keeps a nice, active scene, and moves things along pacily. If internal exposition is your strength use that.

Personally, I suck at internal monologues, totally, whereas dialogue is one of my strengths. Ergo, for me dialogue wins over internal thoughts any day of the week. There are other fantastic dialogue writers (Mouse and Harebrain spring to mind, I could read their dialogue forever) who I would weep if they switched a good dialogue scene to internal thoughts. (Not that they're not fab at that, too.*)

But Teresa is right - only if the dialogue is right. If they're telling each other things they already know/are likely to, it shouts info-dump louder than anything.

So, in answer to your question (being a dialogue writer and having been told by every editor who's looked at my work to use it as a strength) why put it in internal monolgue; it often seems to slow things for me.

* I'll get my own spade, cheers.