Consequences Implicit/Explicit?

[Incanus]

Obviously consequences play a big part in any kind of fiction.

I think I’ve been wrongly making many of my story consequences implicit. And by that I mean that I assume the reader will understand the outcome of something based on how it’s been set up.

Here’s a sort of ridiculous example of what I mean by implicit consequences — I’m in the middle of a sword fight, taking place in the middle of a battle. My opponent is swinging his weapon at me. If I don’t block it, it may strike me. It might hit my left arm, making it more difficult for me to use it to block future attacks. Or it might wound my torso, causing me to bleed and lose energy, making me more susceptible to attack. But if I strike at my opponent, I could leave myself open to counterattack, etc, etc.

I didn’t do that very well, but the point is that many consequences are readily understood without a detailed explanation.

My question is: under what conditions should I be explaining consequences? And under which circumstances do I rely on the obvious?

I’m guessing that it should be explicit when it is something personal, something to do with an MC’s or other POV character’s story arc, something more nuanced. Things like that.

A related question: Is it possible to overdo explaining some consequences? Sort of like in the example above?

 

[troynos]

Yeah, you don't need to write out every consequence of getting hit with a sword. Only the ones that are directly related to the story should be mentioned and only those that relate to the next action or reaction.

For example, you swing the sword, if I dodge to the left this could happen or if I dodge to the right this could happen or if I move down this will happen or if I try to block with my free hand I could drop the object that will save the world.

 

[Penpilot]

Yes, you can definitely over explain consequences. If you do that it's like a very long conversation with an over protective parent. They mean well, but you just want them to get to the point and move on.

What gets told explicitly and what can be left unsaid is a skill that every writer has to develop. You have to be able to remove yourself from being the author, where you know exactly what's going on, and put yourself in the reader's shoes. And when in the reader's shoes, with what's peen put on the page, is what you're seeing what you, the author, intends?

Some things are obvious. A character runs into a rabid bear in the forest. There's no need to explain why they decide to run. BUT if they stay and head towards the bear, that probably need a bit of explaining.

Standard reactions generally don't have to be explained. A character gets a phone call that tells them their Mom passed away. There doesn't need to be an explanation to why they cry.

Now going back to your sword fight example, yes a strike to the arm may disable that arm. But you have to show the consequences if they matter. Generally speaking, you shouldn't say the villain sliced into your POV character's arm and leave it at that. Your POV character should react to the injury even if it's to say they're not hurt.

Reactions are what gives the fight emotion and feeling.

For example.

1 - The villain cut into the hero's arm, and his arm went numb.

2 - The villain cut into the hero's arm, and he smiled at the pain.

3 - The villain cuts into the hero's arm. The hero poked the villain's gut. The villain jabbed the hero in the leg. The hero jumped at the villain and hit them in the head. The villain punched the hero in the face.

Notice in the third example the consequences are obvious, but there are no reactions, thus no emotion. It's just a boring blow by blow description.

Yes, you can infer consequences but make sure the consequences matter and add to the emotion.

Sorry, I think I went a bit rambly here. Hopefully some of this was helpful.

 

[skip.knox]

Go with your instincts. This is exactly the sort of thing you don't want to overthink.

THEN

Show your work to others. If they complain that things happen without apparent reason, or that things *don't* happen when they assumed something should, then you are over or under explaining. Adjust accordingly.

Be prepared to accept that you have not made something obvious and that you're going to have to go back and rewrite portions that you yourself didn't think needed it. Be prepared also to accept that no matter how you write it, *somebody* is going to complain. Be prepared never to be able to resolve that dilemma.

 

[La Volpe]

I think that a lot of people tend to over explain all kinds of things in novels, including consequences. The problem is, because of the curse of knowledge on your side, you can never really know if you're over explaining by just reading it yourself. So I would second Skip on showing it to other people and making note of the places where they don't understand.

I would suggest that you under explain and add later, rather than over explain and take out, because it is a lot harder to detect over explaining than under explaining. I think it was James Scott Bell who has a mnemonic in The Art of War for Writers called RUE; Resist the Urge to Explain.

I've found that I spend a lot of time explaining things that are inherently obvious, so these days I try to implement RUE, and then I'll add in where things are unclear.

 

[Holoman]

My advice is whenever you are in doubt, just write the consequences anyway. Then when you have put the story down for a while and come back to read it, it should be very obvious to you which parts are superfluous and don't read well.

Often it's easier to make the call when looking at it fresh.

 

[Incanus]

Good points. Thanks everyone.

Skip--overthinking is my specialty. It can be crippling at times, but if I wasn't doing it, it just wouldn't be me.

Penpilot--I like your example with the bear. Things that go counter to expectations need explanation. Of course, if the plot involved the bear in the first place, and the character was seeking it out, the explanation for the reaction would already have been built in.

I think I'll continue my practice of under-explaining, and then adding in clarity when needed. My first drafts tend to include only about half the details anyway.