bell notificationshomepageloginNewPostedit profile

Topic : Re: Avoiding the "as you know" trope in exposition When writing fiction, especially in universes other than our own such as sci-fi/fantasy genres, the reader often has to be given a piece of information - selfpublishingguru.com

10% popularity

If you have the luxury, I would say the best advice is to take your time with it, and find a way to get drama out of it. Here's the best example I can think of, the miniseries Oppenheimer, which is an absolute masterclass in exposition. I can't place video embeds, so you'll have to click links:

In this video the problem is set up. We find out a lot about the dynamics in the group: the guy at the blackboard is impatient with his colleagues, Seth is shy, and has difficulty expressing his ideas and we see how calm Oppenheimer is, and how he gives the shy people the time to get their thoughts heard.

For your question, the most important trick they use here, is to have a character explain things poorly and then have another character step in, and simplify the explanation. This makes for a more realistic dynamic, since most people aren't good at explaining things, and it sets up a little tension between your characters.

The point is returned to at the start of the next episode, where Oppenheimer explains the problem to his superior. Again, a very realistic scenario, and a neat trick, since the superior is not a scientist and understands little more about physics than the audience does:

We get some visualization of the problem with props. You can do this in writing too, just create the image of a dented bar of metal. Repeating the problem in different terms and in a different setting is also important to cement the idea (especially at the start of the next episode).

Finally, the solution to the problem lands in their lap, but the scientists are too focused on quick successes to see it:

The nice thing is that we as the audience are actually a step ahead of the characters at this point. We now understand that this solution is valuable, we're rooting for it, hoping that the characters will finally understand it.

That's how the BBC did it: slow and methodical. By contrast, here's the Hollywood approach, quick and dirty. A few props and a cool scene, with little attention to realism or actual exposition:

Seth Neddermeyer is suddenly a lot more expressive and charismatic, and the idea of implosion is treated as a brilliant breakthrough, rather than a relatively simple idea, which would be difficult to execute. But, the audience gets the important elements: there was a problem, and they found a solution, and it's got something to do with oranges. Sometimes, that's all you need: don't explain the problem, pretend to explain, but show only that there's a problem and why your characters care.


Load Full (0)

Login to follow topic

More posts by @Cofer669

0 Comments

Sorted by latest first Latest Oldest Best

Back to top