Should I address the elephant in the room?

[TheNovelist2000]

I am writing a story called 'An Incestuous Panic Attack', and so far, I've written about five chapters. The story is about a taboo relationship between a mother and her son, and it kicks off when the mom sits on the son's face in an attempt to abort a severe panic attack (improvised rebreathing technique).

The event takes place on a random Saturday, after Melissa has seen her husband off at the airport, and things escalate to a blowjob for her son on the same day. On Sunday morning, they have their first ever intercourse and the current chapter I’m writing is about their post-coital talk and the formalisation of their new dynamic.

My question is: since so many things have happened in the story without mentioning any details about the travelling father, do I actually need to write about him and Melissa’s interactions with him? At the moment, I feel that introducing him would slow the pace and disrupt the momentum that has been developing between Melissa and her son. His presence would bring guilt into the picture, which could undermine her enthusiasm for continuing their taboo relationship. On the other hand, I also feel the need to establish a bit of groundwork so that I can later bring the dad back into the story and add drama.

This dilemma has made me think about an important aspect of storytelling. Many new authors feel compelled to lay too much groundwork, even when doing so slows down the pace and risks losing readers who are here primarily for the central dynamic between the mother and son—not a long, guilt-laden conversation between two married adults. But when we tell anecdotes or recount events in real life, we often skip certain details until they become relevant again. So I’m considering continuing with the next two weeks of the story without mentioning the father at all, and then summarising his communication with Melissa once he returns.

Do you think that’s a good approach? And have you ever dealt with this issue in your own writing, or do you prefer to lay out all the groundwork from the beginning?

P.S.: If you are going to suggest mentioning only one or two lines about the father while keeping the story focused on the mother and son, that won’t work. At this stage, any interaction—no matter how small—between Melissa and her husband would immediately require exploring her guilt, and guilt would make her less captivated and less enthusiastic about her son. That is not the direction I want the story to take.

 

[SmilingLez]

Does introducing the father add or take away from the essence of your story? For example, is the son a younger version of the father? If so, IMO, include some background info to connect the two. HTH

 

[YmaOHyd]

If the presence of the father is an elephant in the room then you have to address it. If the guilt is a focus of the story then the reason for the guilt has to exist before the guilt does, and "I feel guilty about cheating on my spouse, who you are just now learning I have" is too tenuous. The pipe has to be laid before you can put something through it.

That's only applicable if you're telling a story about the mother's emotional state, though. If it's a story about her doing taboo stuff, then I'd just put the dad out of the picture on page 1 para 1 and cut straight to the good bits.

 

[TheNovelist2000]

Does introducing the father add or take away from the essence of your story? For example, is the son a younger version of the father? If so, IMO, include some background info to connect the two. HTH

I have mentioned about the father generally, like when she compares the two dicks or when she mentions how he's a younger version of him. What I am reluctant to mention is what the father is doing on his trip since it will take away Melissa's devotion to her son. Once guilt enters the picture, Junior will have to become the main driver of the story, and since the story is told with Melissa's POV, we cannot know her son's motivations and his advances will feel very mechanical and forced. Right now, I am letting Melissa take the helm. The thing that keeps the relationship going is Melissa's infatuation with her son.

 

[SmilingLez]

I have mentioned about the father generally, like when she compares the two dicks or when she mentions how he's a younger version of him. What I am reluctant to mention is what the father is doing on his trip since it will take away Melissa's devotion to her son. Once guilt enters the picture, Junior will have to become the main driver of the story, and since the story is told with Melissa's POV, we cannot know her son's motivations and his advances will feel very mechanical and forced. Right now, I am letting Melissa take the helm. The thing that keeps the relationship going is Melissa's infatuation with her son.

Unless you left out the plot,
what the father is doing matters not

Edit - Damn it; now I am writing like Dr. Seuss

 

[YmaOHyd]

In that case, I'd barely mention him. Once he's gone he's gone.

 

[TheNovelist2000]

If the presence of the father is an elephant in the room then you have to address it. If the guilt is a focus of the story then the reason for the guilt has to exist before the guilt does, and "I feel guilty about cheating on my spouse, who you are just now learning I have" is too tenuous. The pipe has to be laid before you can put something through it.

That's only applicable if you're telling a story about the mother's emotional state, though. If it's a story about her doing taboo stuff, then I'd just put the dad out of the picture on page 1 para 1 and cut straight to the good bits.

The thing is she can't feel guilt. She is compartmentalising her affair and her relationship with the husband, like all cheating women do. She doesn't want to face the husband unless she absolutely has to.

 

[NotWise]

The husband generally doesn't play a part in my Mom/Son stories. Usually he's dead or they're divorced. The one story I wrote (not on Lit) where the dad was present, his role was as the antagonist.

I think you can find some way to include Dad if you want, but it's a can of worms that may not really contribute to your story.

Some time ago, @lovecraft68 started this thread specifically about what to do with Dad. You should be able to get a lot of input there.

 

[TheNovelist2000]

Some time ago, lovecraft68 started this thread specifically about what to do with Dad. You should be able to get a lot of input there.

This is a gold mine. Thanks.

 

[Z_TheWriter]

The thing is she can't feel guilt. She is compartmentalising her affair and her relationship with the husband, like all cheating women do. She doesn't want to face the husband unless she absolutely has to.

My immediate thought upon reading this is that you just specified exactly why you should mention the husband. Not in long detailed ways, but having small interactions or references throughout until he becomes plot-relevant will do two things:
1) Prepare the reader so he doesn't seem like a weird reverse deus ex machina when he appears.
2) More importantly, give you opportunity to demonstrate that and how the mother is compartmentalizing.

 

[TheNovelist2000]

My immediate thought upon reading this is that you just specified exactly why you should mention the husband. Not in long detailed ways, but having small interactions or references throughout until he becomes plot-relevant will do two things:
1) Prepare the reader so he doesn't seem like a weird reverse deus ex machina when he appears.
2) More importantly, give you opportunity to demonstrate that and how the mother is compartmentalizing.

There lies the problem. There is an elephant in the room. What you’re suggesting is that the narrator points at the elephant and says, “Look, there seems to be an elephant,” without giving any further explanation. But the elephant’s existence is so significant that once it’s mentioned, you have to address it—at least spend a chapter on it. According to the rules of writing, any major event in a story must affect the characters and influence their behavior. This means that once the dad is mentioned, the entire romance between the two is gone, and the story shifts into a survival scenario. Melissa might suggest ending things, or Junior might panic and double down, and suddenly the story becomes a melodrama rather than one about mutual attraction between a mother and her son.

So, I am thinking about letting the two of them have two weeks of seemingly stress-free fun before retrospectively introducing strategies Melissa emploies to deal with her husband.

 

[Z_TheWriter]

There lies the problem. There is an elephant in the room. What you’re suggesting is that the narrator points at the elephant and says, “Look, there seems to be an elephant,” without giving any further explanation. But the elephant’s existence is so significant that once it’s mentioned, you have to address it—at least spend a chapter on it. According to the rules of writing, any major event in a story must affect the characters and influence their behavior.

I don't know any details about your story, I'm not a writer nor reader of incest, and I'm definitely a novice writer. So feel free to just ignore me. I am however gonna spout some nonsense anyway

Actually I am suggesting that you do address it, and that it does affect the characters. Melissa would by your own words be compartmentalizing, which you can show by how she still responds to calls or messages from him, but then seems to completely ignore the fact he exists the next moment. Junior might think about his dad, but not mention him because Melissa isn't, and he doesn't want to risk making things weird(er). You don't have to tell the reader any actual details about the father or give the reasons why the characters act like this explicitly. But if he isn't mentioned even in passing for a long time, you might, in my opinion, have a problem explaining why later.

As I'm writing this, however, I'm realizing that you could also make it a 'gotcha' moment for the reader. "Ha ha you didn't think there was a dad! But I've just been skipping over the parts where he exists." That would still have the characters affected by it though, even if the reader is intentionally left unaware.

 

[nice90sguy]

If you do address the elephant in the room, a word of warning: don't call him "Jumbo" or "Dumbo". Or look at his ears or his chubby legs. Start out by asking him how his day's going. Make sure you smile, but keep your smile from resembling a rictus of terror.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

I often treated the Dads sort of like Charlie Brown's Teacher.


Sorta there, but not in a way people paid much attention to.

 

[Olderwiserstillhorny]

Options?

Extended business trip,

Having an affair of his own.

Killed in an accident while traveling.

Shows up, mom and son have issues to deal with.

 

[SimonDoom]

No, there's no need to bring Dad into the picture. What Five Inch Heels said is exactly right: it's perfectly fine for him to be a background character that never appears. Readers will get used to him that way, and introducing him may be jarring, in addition to disrupting the flow of the story.

 

[YmaOHyd]

Again, what is this story about? That's where you'll find your answer. I'm not talking about the actions that occur; I'm talking about the characters and their emotions. Dad doesn't need to exist if you're writing to tell a story about how mom and son started playing Hide the Sausage. Dad does need to exist if you're telling a story about how Melissa made a series of choices that lead to her dancing on the edge of meltdown as the walls she's tried to build around the parts of her lives fall apart. The way you're describing this, I'm not sure which one you want. It kind of seems like you're aiming at a summery fling story for two or three chapters, then Dad walks in the door - surprise! - and the whole tone changes. I don't think that's a good idea, and it's not often well-executed when people do it here, in my reading experience.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

No, there's no need to bring Dad into the picture. What Five Inch Heels said is exactly right: it's perfectly fine for him to be a background character that never appears. Readers will get used to him that way, and introducing him may be jarring, in addition to disrupting the flow of the story.

I played up the working Dad. Business owner or sales person traveling extensively. He made the money to pay the bills. His visits home were short, uneventful and barely mentioned. Mom ran the house.

In one case, I had him messing with the daughters a few times, but not a main focus.

 

[Britva415]

First of all, is this a repost? I swear something extremely similar if not identical, right down to specific phrases and the entire very specific premise, was asked about by someone earlier this year.

But beyond that:

Someone mentioned "what is the story about." Write about the dad if you want to write about the dad. I don't read this category and am not interested in the fetish, but I imagine that The Dad isn't what readers of this category give a damn about at all.

Are you a reader of this category? What do you see writers including in the stories, in general, regarding The Dad? How do you see readers reacting to stories which lean in to the "elephant?"

And beyond that:

You're describing "lampshading" here, a well recognized deliberate technique:

There lies the problem. There is an elephant in the room. What you’re suggesting is that the narrator points at the elephant and says, “Look, there seems to be an elephant,” without giving any further explanation.

Now:

Lampshading is employed as a way to handle something you can't simply not address. I don't think The Dad falls into that category. It really seems he can be completely skipped, not addressed at all. But lampshading is the technique of getting away with addressing it without handling it.

I'm also not convinced of this:

But the elephant’s existence is so significant that once it’s mentioned, you have to address it—at least spend a chapter on it. According to the rules of writing, any major event in a story must affect the characters and influence their behavior.

Yes, you're describing Chekhov's Gun. But that also is not a hard-and-fast rule. Mentioning The Dad only to justify why he isn't impeding the mon-son business does not require you to make him part of the plot or write a whole-ass chapter about him. The purpose of mentioning him is exactly what we've been saying: To justify why he isn't impeding the mom-son business. Mission accomplished, no further lampshading or elephant-hunting required.