Clarity versus RUE

[FifthView]

2. RUE (Resist the Urge to Explain). Overexplaining insults the reader's intelligence. Not a great way to win fans.

On a more theoretical note, I wonder greatly about RUE as a conceptual tool for good writing.

On the one hand, the problems of excessive exposition and info-dumping are, I think, well established problems. RUE as a guard against those things is a sensible guideline.

But RUE as a positive approach to writing – I mean, as a way to improve writing by purposefully writing obliquely? I think that other stylistic approaches and strategies kind of cover that sort of thing, for example foreshadowing, purposely including mystery to raise suspense, setting up a surprising twist, and so forth. There are multiple ways in which withholding information until a later point can improve a story.

Purposely withholding information...simply because one can fill in the details later, but for no other reason – is that a useful strategy? It might be a stylistic choice rather than a strategic choice.

As a guard against info-dumping or boring exposition, the question when using RUE introduces other questions, for instance, "Is there absolutely no way I can explicate (use descripting language for the scene, more informative dialogue, etc.) without info-dumping?"

 

[BWFoster78]

But RUE as a positive approach to writing — I mean, as a way to improve writing by purposefully writing obliquely?

Here's how I think RUE should be applied:

1. You write something that you feel told the reader everything the reader needed to know at that point in the story.
2. A beta reader or editor indicates that more explanation is needed.
3. You know that you've given enough information, but you have that nagging doubt whether you've done the right thing.
4. You say, "RUE." And move on.

In this case, the nagging doubt overcame my good judgment, and the helpful denizens of MS helped me regain my sanity.