Exposition vs. dialogue

[Bramblethorn]

It's not only Sith Lords who deals in absolutes Pilot - writers do too. And while there are exceptions to every rule (in a scientific novel for instance exposition can enhance the feeling of reading a technical paper - Michael Crichton used this often to great effect), I can't imagine an erotic novel where exposition doesn't diminish the experience.

And it's simple to avoid:

Wrong way: "My wife is a readhead, 35 years old and has big boobs. I have an 8 inch cock."

Right way: "As I watched my wife slowly walking towards me, her flaming red hair flowing in the summer breeze, I felt like the luckiest guy in the world. She didn't look anywhere near her thirty-five years and the way her ample chest fought to escape the confinement of the skimpy dress made me swell with pride. I looked down at the front of my pants. Yep - eight inches of pride right there."

Tastes differ. To me the first is certainly lazy writing... but the second is the exact same thing, just dressed up in a rented tuxedo. It's still basically an identikit picture. For me it does diminish the experience, because I'm really not interested in guys bragging about measurements; as long as the personalities are interesting I'm quite happy to come up with my own mental images.

Sometimes stories work better when you let readers fill in the blanks - "For sale: baby shoes, never worn."

 

[trace_ekies]

... Sometimes stories work better when you let readers fill in the blanks ...

I wish more writers would do this. It's really hard to get interested in an otherwise well-written story when the description of a main character turns you off.

 

[A_Little_Show]

[deleted]

 

[Weird Harold]

Regarding dialog vs. exposition though, I think it's a different issue from letting readers fill in the blanks or not. ...

Too many authors think putting quotation marks around exposition makes it dialogue. That isn't the case.

 

[trace_ekies]

... I found this one white hot this evening: http://www.literotica.com/s/27-minutes I highly recommend it...

Thanks for the recommendation. I just read it and agree 100%. If Elmore Leonard had been that good at exposition, his stories would have had a lot less dialog.

 

[jezzaz]

I'm not sure I agree with quite so blunt a view. I think it depends upon the story.

I have two women in one (incomplete) discussing their mutual problems, and each tells the story as part of their conversation.
I have another where the Narrator explains things in easy bites.

The problem I have with this is it takes a damn good writer to make it sound natural. I just watched Gravity the other day, and the movie starts out with Sandra Bullock and George Clooney as astronauts, fixing an orbital telescope. Now, there's a lot of background that needs to come out there, just so the viewer understands the relationships and the situation.

However, it's TERRIBLE. The dialog is So Forced - people telling each other things that they should already know, purely to get the information across to the viewer. People don't naturally recap events at the beginning of a conversation - particularly not when you are in orbit fixing satellites and time is a decided premium. It's so unnatural and forced and it instantly makes the characters morons for doing it.

The problem with conversational exposition is making it natural, as though how people would naturally talk. I tend to mix it - have a conversation where something is mentioned, then try and work in one character saying "Well yeah, but this isn't the same as that, is it? Situation X was blah blah blah, and this is different." That enables your characters to go into the story / details / whatever you need to get out there, but makes it more realistic in terms of how people actually talk to each other.

I like to mix exposition and story telling - When I want to define characters, I use exposition. How people talk to each other gives you more background on who they are, and allows readers to view them through their eyes. But sometimes you just need to bite the bullet and TELL people what is going on, just to move the story along.

YMMV

 

[sr71plt]

The dialog is So Forced - people telling each other things that they should already know, purely to get the information across to the viewer.

Yep, that's a typical problem of trying to let the dialogue carry too much of the necessary burden.

 

[Bramblethorn]

However, it's TERRIBLE. The dialog is So Forced - people telling each other things that they should already know, purely to get the information across to the viewer. People don't naturally recap events at the beginning of a conversation - particularly not when you are in orbit fixing satellites and time is a decided premium. It's so unnatural and forced and it instantly makes the characters morons for doing it.

"As you already know, Bob..."

 

[patientlee]

I agree. I don't care if she has 36Cs or he is proud of 8 inches. I also don't like being beaten over the head with plot points. I can read between the lines and surmise a few things. On the other hand, most readers skim as you'll see in the comments on patientlee's recent story, http://www.literotica.com/s/purple-glitter (If she hasn't deleted them). Many readers missed the plot reversal foreshadowed from the first paragraph and didn't catch the blunt force explanation of the protagonist's misunderstanding driving the plot. [Edit: it's karmic retribution. Patientlee commented on one of my stories saying "I was reading and watching tv. Shame on me." ]

.

HAHAHA! I am so busted!! Did you notice my disclaimer at the beginning of Purple Glitter? I was crocheting a scarf while I edited. One of the comments pointed out that the editing wasn't perfect. I'm a compulsive multi-tasker. What can I say?

That story taught me that some readers read as well as my high school freshmen. It doesn't matter how clearly you explain something. Most won't read carefully. Obviously, I'm just as guilty.

 

[1sickbastard]

I like to mix exposition and story telling - When I want to define characters, I use exposition. How people talk to each other gives you more background on who they are, and allows readers to view them through their eyes. But sometimes you just need to bite the bullet and TELL people what is going on, just to move the story along.

YMMV

I tend to enjoy writers for whom exposition is story telling and treat it as such.

As far as physical descriptions go as related to erotica, my feeling are to use a bare essential; enough so the reader has a decent guide, but sufficiently sparse so the reader can also let his/her imagination fill in the gaps and make said character(s) a reflection of what turns them on.

 

[trace_ekies]

This thread contains a number of thoughtful comments from some well qualified writers. The following though, taken from one of the earlier posts, is one of the more insightful.

... Different situations call for different treatments of information ... what is "better" will depend on the author, the story and what the author is trying to achieve ...

 

[A_Little_Show]

[deleted]

 

[Hypoxia]

Too many authors think putting quotation marks around exposition makes it dialogue. That isn't the case.

It isn't ALWAYS the case. Sometimes it works. Throw some UMMs and AHHs into the exposition, break the exposition into reasonable chunks by injecting questions and reactions from the expositor's audience. IOW, make the exposition conversational.

I wish this new fangled internet thing had existed when I was 14 though. You wouldn't believe the flights of imagination I endured to masturbate without a story or porn of any kind. I was very hazy about how sex worked and how the other gender functioned...

Right on! But online pr0n is only part of the mix. I hate to admit this, but I've actually learned more details (and strategies and tactics) re: sex since I started reading LIT here, than in all my previous decades. LIT should be required reading for all pubescent humans.
_ _ _ _ _

Back to the subject. I'm working on an ad-hoc hypothesis, that exposition is best to establish facts, and dialogue is best for establishing attitudes and emotions. So, tell us what a place is like (exposition), and show us how people feel and behave there (dialogue).

A personal note: I find all-dialogue stories to be MUCH harder to read than all-exposition stories. IMHO the two techniques must be mixed carefully. Of course, I may be prejudiced, as I used to write and edit tech manuals. Not much dialogue there, hey?

*

 

[sr71plt]

Fiction is too much a creative process to put any of this stuff in a self-contained box.

 

[jezzaz]

Fiction is too much a creative process to put any of this stuff in a self-contained box.

What he said.

Rules are there to be broken, but be sure you understand what the rules are and why they are there before you do.

On the other hand, writing is an intensely personal journey and no one has the right to tell you what it should or shouldn't be for you.

 

[sr71plt]

Again, you only have to look to the market to see what folks will buy that don't follow anyone else's opinion of what the "rules" are. You can turn your nose up at what you'll find, but the authors are enjoying writing them and the trip to the bank and there are buyers happy reading them--without your opinion.

 

[A_Little_Show]

[deleted]

 

[Weird Harold]

It isn't ALWAYS the case. Sometimes it works. Throw some UMMs and AHHs into the exposition, break the exposition into reasonable chunks by injecting questions and reactions from the expositor's audience. IOW, make the exposition conversational.

If you make the exposition "conversational," then it isn't "quotation marks placed around exposition," is it?

If "It Works," then the author probably understands the difference between exposition and dialogue. If it doesn't, then not.

 

[StrangeLife]

For example, most of the character backstory of Captain Marko Ramius in Tom Clancy's "The Hunt For Red October" was told via exposition as a way of setting up his motivations for the rest of the story, and this would have been difficult to do via dialogue later on due to the structure of Clancy's work being incredibly detail oriented.

By contrast, John Grisham's "The Chamber" was a character heavy story with many interpersonal scenes, so dialogue was both a more natural way for character motivations to be discussed and for the story to progress.

Yes, a good point indeed. I suppose one can technically say that any story told from a third person perspective is all exposition.

But when used derogatory about movies and books the term isn't quite as broadly defined. When a movie reviewer complains about "exposition" he's referring to "introduction of information in a way that breaks the narrative style." Tom Clancy does this a lot, but somehow it fits in the style of hard military fiction. He will often start a chapter with a headline like...

04:35 north Atlantic Grid Sector 57.345 on board the USS Narwhal

... and it works because it reflects how you communicate in that world. Another good examples is the internal dialogue of a Sam Spade gumshoe-type PI. It works because it not only serves as exposition but also sets the mood for the story and the character.


But in erotic stories it almost never works and is basically - in the words of Bramblethorn - lazy writing. Take this for instance:

"I'm a 45 year old man, balding and a little on the pudgy side. Guess I've let myself go and crossed that 250 lbs mark. My cock is on the small side at 6 inches but I work a lot so I don't see it so often anyway. My wife on the other hand is a 30 years old blonde with big boobs and... bla bla bla."

There is no way a man would talk or think like that about himself. Being semi-oblivious to our own shortcomings is a common male characteristic, just as being overly concerned with the same issue is a female trait.

No - this is clearly the writer breaking the fourth wall and speaking directly to the reader and thus devaluating the immersivenes of his own story. Bad/lazy writing.


For a good example of how to introduce the fact that the protagonist of a story is on the less attractive side, take a look at Jezzaz' latest instalment in his cheating wife serial Live From The Game - 02

************* quote ************

Crystal's nose wrinkled, and she hesitantly said, "Well, Ryan, lets be fair here. Have you looked in a mirror lately? Do you understand how other people perceive you? Your middle aged, used up, balding, a bit overweight and you wear a rumpled suit twenty four / seven. You aren't exactly lust material."

I sat there, open mouthed, staring at her in shock, and she warmed to her theme.

"I mean, is it any surprise she's interested in someone else? Look at you. Not exactly making me want to jump your bones. Can you blame her for going to a bit of stranger, who's younger and cuter?"

************** end quote ********

This is a perfect way of doing it. It fits the character of Crystal (who is a self centered person prone to stepping on others in order to justify or help herself) and the fact that she's a woman validates her observations, since this is how women typically evaluate men. It also fits the protagonist character to be shocked - he's focused on his job and gets his validation from his success in business. He probably hasn't looked in a mirror for years and even if he had, his mind would have focused on his strong points rather than his problem areas.

So Jezzaz not only manages to sneak in a description of the protagonist without breaking the narrative, but even strengthens our impression of both characters in the process.

 

[BuckyDuckman]

I tend to enjoy writers for whom exposition is story telling and treat it as such.

As far as physical descriptions go as related to erotica, my feeling are to use a bare essential; enough so the reader has a decent guide, but sufficiently sparse so the reader can also let his/her imagination fill in the gaps and make said character(s) a reflection of what turns them on.

Agree!

Sometimes I think the worst thing that ever happened to erotic writing would be Penthouse Forum and its like. I believe it set an expectation, especially for first person erotic writing - you give a quick description of the people involved, where they are and how things got started. Then you spend the rest of the story describing what's happening. I used to write for those markets and I know my stories suffer because of it.

I guess part of the answer to exposition depends on the purpose of the story. If it's primarily to titillate, appeal to prurient interests and entertain while doing it - then any exposition should be treated as quickly and neatly as possible to get it out of the way of the action.

However, if it's a more "literary" approach intended, then the extra work is a good idea. Sometimes I believe it helps to think of a story in a different genre for suggestions and hints. If you turn your story on its head, imagine its an action thriller instead of erotica, then you might see it in a different light.

 

[jezzaz]

Yes, a good point indeed. I suppose one can technically say that any story told from a third person perspective is all exposition.

But when used derogatory about movies and books the term isn't quite as broadly defined. When a movie reviewer complains about "exposition" he's referring to "introduction of information in a way that breaks the narrative style." Tom Clancy does this a lot, but somehow it fits in the style of hard military fiction. He will often start a chapter with a headline like...

04:35 north Atlantic Grid Sector 57.345 on board the USS Narwhal

... and it works because it reflects how you communicate in that world. Another good examples is the internal dialogue of a Sam Spade gumshoe-type PI. It works because it not only serves as exposition but also sets the mood for the story and the character.


But in erotic stories it almost never works and is basically - in the words of Bramblethorn - lazy writing. Take this for instance:

"I'm a 45 year old man, balding and a little on the pudgy side. Guess I've let myself go and crossed that 250 lbs mark. My cock is on the small side at 6 inches but I work a lot so I don't see it so often anyway. My wife on the other hand is a 30 years old blonde with big boobs and... bla bla bla."

There is no way a man would talk or think like that about himself. Being semi-oblivious to our own shortcomings is a common male characteristic, just as being overly concerned with the same issue is a female trait.

No - this is clearly the writer breaking the fourth wall and speaking directly to the reader and thus devaluating the immersivenes of his own story. Bad/lazy writing.


For a good example of how to introduce the fact that the protagonist of a story is on the less attractive side, take a look at Jezzaz' latest instalment in his cheating wife serial Live From The Game - 02

************* quote ************

Crystal's nose wrinkled, and she hesitantly said, "Well, Ryan, lets be fair here. Have you looked in a mirror lately? Do you understand how other people perceive you? Your middle aged, used up, balding, a bit overweight and you wear a rumpled suit twenty four / seven. You aren't exactly lust material."

I sat there, open mouthed, staring at her in shock, and she warmed to her theme.

"I mean, is it any surprise she's interested in someone else? Look at you. Not exactly making me want to jump your bones. Can you blame her for going to a bit of stranger, who's younger and cuter?"

************** end quote ********

This is a perfect way of doing it. It fits the character of Crystal (who is a self centered person prone to stepping on others in order to justify or help herself) and the fact that she's a woman validates her observations, since this is how women typically evaluate men. It also fits the protagonist character to be shocked - he's focused on his job and gets his validation from his success in business. He probably hasn't looked in a mirror for years and even if he had, his mind would have focused on his strong points rather than his problem areas.

So Jezzaz not only manages to sneak in a description of the protagonist without breaking the narrative, but even strengthens our impression of both characters in the process.

Ummmm..........


I honestly don't know what to say to that. Thanks. A huge amount. You have no idea of the validation you just handed out.

 

[TadOverdon]

Okay, let me apologize for the necropost up front, but I'm still not sure which is preferred here - searching out an existing version of a topic or starting a new topic if the existing one is too old.

I figured if a topic about exposition already existed, revival might be more...economical. There are at least two participants in this one who are still active posters.

So, alternate versions of expository dialogue - which reads better to you:

She ignored his baiting and pressed on. "It's just awful marketing boilerplate, and completely useless to us domestically. These are structure/function claims, and the first ad we run like this, the whole regulatory apparatus will dogpile us—FTC, FDA, the works. We sell supplements, dear. Not drugs."

She ignored his baiting and pressed on. "It's just awful marketing boilerplate, and completely useless to us domestically. The first ad we run like this, the whole regulatory apparatus will dogpile us—FTC, FDA, the works. We sell supplements, dear. Not drugs."

My instinct is to delete the opening phrase of that sentence; it makes the exposition that much more exposition-y and the whole thing sound less plausibly like dialogue. It's just jargonish enough that it probably doesn't communicate information to most readers, which is rather the point of the exposition to start with.

 

[NotWise]

My instinct is to delete the opening phrase of that sentence; it makes the exposition that much more exposition-y and the whole thing sound less plausibly like dialogue. It's just jargonish enough that it probably doesn't communicate information to most readers, which is rather the point of the exposition to start with.

I prefer the second. But if "The first ad we run like this," were to become "The first time we run an ad like this," then I think it would work even better. There might be a syntactical problem with the original version. It seems odd to me.

I'm not sure which phrase you want to delete.

 

[RejectReality]

I honestly can see the first emerging from a company lawyer or the person(s) responsible for filtering stuff before it gets to the lawyer. Those folks end up picking up that lingo when the lawyer is reading them the riot act over something, and they end up parroting it.

However, if the two people engaged in the conversation are close... ( Since this is erotica, they're likely to be fucking in the near future LOL ) They would probably filter themselves under those circumstances.

Then again, if the person speaking is cast as an authority figure and that's part of the kink of what you're writing...

It's not the words coming out of their mouth, it's whether they fit the person speaking them.

 

[NotWise]

As for the necropost, I look to see how real the poster is whenever I see an old thread resurrected. It's fairly common for old threads to be brought back by someone with a very small number of posts. The comment is often tangential at best, and they come back later to edit in a spam link for advertising.