How long does a subplot survive without attention?

[Svrtnsse]

This is probably one of those questions that don't have an answer that can't be prefaced with "It depends..." but I'll ask anyway as it's something I'm pondering at the moment:

How long can you leave a subplot before the reader forgets about it?

I'm writing a series, and it's a long one. There are two main plot lines, and the story swaps back and forth between them. Each plot line will touch upon several different subplots - events from the protagonists's past, or people they meet.
Most of these will go unresolved as they're outside the scope of the main story, but some of them will show up early on and then not be relevant again until much later.

The way I see it, if a subplot is left out of the story for too long the reader will forget about it. The subplot dies. Is it worth trying to keep it alive be reminding readers it exists, or will it be better to resurrect it once the time is right?

If I never resurrect an unresolved subplot, will the reader even remember it when they get to the end of the story?

I don't expect anyone to have any specific answers, and it's all relative to each individual story, but I'd like yo hear your thoughts on the matter.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

Callbacks are going to be useful to keep things in mind, I suspect. It could be a bit like big multi-POV pieces where we won't be in a character's head for hundreds of pages, not to mention a year or more between books. SoIaF might be a good one to look at. Martin has so much going on and years between books, he (sometimes heavy handedly) uses callbacks and phrases to remind us of what characters were upto, their POV on events, etc.

On the other hand, if it's just sitting there not mattering, it could just rest until coming to the fore. My gut would say, if it's just resting, then pops up and keeps running in its arc, you'd be ok. But, if it takes a long time to pop up, and then fades to the background again, before again popping up, and just shows up sporadically, you might want to remind readers of it in between instead of having the dead zone.

Hopefully that makes some sense in my brain dead morning babble.

 

[skip.knox]

If you never resolve a subplot, why is it there? To put it another way, if I start a joke and never finish it, why did I start it?

 

[TheKillerBs]

Yes, if you never resolve a subplot readers will remember. Maybe not all, but a significant number will, and reactions may range from mild annoyance to "you'll never live it down."

 

[Svrtnsse]

If you never resolve a subplot, why is it there? To put it another way, if I start a joke and never finish it, why did I start it?

"What is the sound of one hand clapping?"

Seriously though, it's a good question, and I probably should have asked me that myself.

With the one I'm thinking about most at the moment i'm currently trying to decide if it's even a subplot at all, or if it's just a character with a potentially interesting story to tell. It's not someone I care enough about to write her own story, but the reader may still be curious about what happens to her after the rest of the story moves on.

I had an idea for a way to give the reader some closure in case they're still wondering, and I might actually bring that to use. It'll add some depth to the story/world and it shouldn't take much space.

To put it into some kind of context, this is about a supporting character who figures in the first part of the series. She will also show up briefly in the second part and there may be some veiled threats against her. After that she doesn't figure in the story any more. There will be room to mention her in some of the later parts, but not give any details about what happened to her. I can let the reader know she's dead, safe, or missing/unsafe.

As I started typing that last sentence, the plan was to and it with something like "it doesn't really matter" but when I got to the end I realised it wasn't true. I can make it matter quite a bit - if I want to.


This is the kind of thing that fascinates me with storytelling. I had this vague idea about something, and as I'm exploring it (writing about it here) I'm coming up with new and interesting ways to add depth to my story.

The question is should I?

These are shorter stories we're talking about, novella length at most. From what I've read, one of the important things is to focus on the plot and don't add in too many distractions and side plots. This speaks against adding in quirky little details for the sake of depth. However, I'm also writing a rather long series of these novellas, and I have to trust that someone who's reading all of it will be able to remember what's happened in previous parts.

Does the added depth to the overall story outweigh the added distraction in the current part/episode?

Knowing me I'll probably go with adding the depth, but that's not necessarily the right decision.

 

[Zeppo]

I know of a writer that introduced little items that could be used as a subplot. He did receive complaints such as "why did you do that if it wasn't used in the next book?" Ultimately, he did use it, as it became a story idea. So, I think (similar to what Skip.Knox said) why did you put it in there if you didn't intend to use it.

Perhaps it was an issue of what you first thought was a good idea and turned out to be something you weren't interested in actually writing? Perhaps you could shift the original subplot into something more mysterious or somehow take it into a different direction that will resolve the subplot, which still giving something interesting to write, even if it was not the original intention of that particular sub plot.

 

[skip.knox]

Still feels like candidate for a cut. There are plenty of interesting people in my world--in all our worlds--but if they don't serve the story, then they must be hustled off stage. If they're genuinely interesting, maybe they get their own story. If they're there only for color, then they're no more than a pretty flower.

I'm picturing a movie. We get pulled into the plot. A character walks on, says some intriguing stuff or does something attention-getting, then never appears again. As a viewer, I'm not going to like that much. It's akin to having something in the next row start talking. It doesn't matter how interesting the fellow might be, he's not part of the movie.

 

[Svrtnsse]

I hear what you're saying, and it makes sense. I'm not sure that what you're picturing matches what I'm actually doing with the story though. Most likely this is due to the much too brief summary of what's happening, combined with my own uncertainty about what to actually do with it.

This is why I'm asking and shy I'm outlining though. It gives me the opportunity to consider things like this before I hook them too deep into the story to change.

 

[Aurora]

Ideally, subplots are woven into the major plot and resolved before the main plot's climax. Bueno?

 

[Heliotrope]

I'm with skip and Aurora.

I do have a suggestion? When I find myself in this sort of situation, where I have what should be a minor side character take more of a front seat and develop a more interesting plot than I had intended then I see if there is another, major character, I could combine them with.

I'll use an example. I had this minor character in my book, a teacher, who was purely meant in an early chapter as a foil to show my MC's "greatest nightmare".... basically this small character was meant to show everything the MC doesn't want to become.

But then he got so interesting! He took me a bit by surprise. He had this funny backstory that sort of developed on its own and after that chapter he became my favourite "character" in the book. He had so much personality. He was such a tragic figure. I had an important role later on in the book that was supposed to go to a different character, so I took out that character and rolled the teacher into that role instead.

So if you like this character and her subplot, can you find another character you could combine her with, or replace with her, to give her more "screen time" and help flesh out her subplot a bit more?

 

[pmmg]

I can juggle and chew gum at the same time (really I can...)

If a subplot is introduced and not brought up for a long while, I don't think that would phase me. And if it adds to the story as a whole, then it might even seem like all that cool stuff that the author snuck in there when I was not looking. Course, with no way of knowing what this is and how it fits in, I can only speculate.

I would be inclined to cut it, if I felt it was distracting and not adding to the story, something along the lines of killing off darlings, but novels and book series do offer the space to throw in quite a lot. If it adds depth, and makes the story even more fascinating, then keep it. And, as I am sure you already know, it may just grow in ways you had not expected.


Though, I might read, as you are asking the question, that you are already questioning if this portion is a really fit. I suppose only you can answer that.

And I agree with KillerB. If you don't resolve it, your readers will likely remember you for it.

 

[Svrtnsse]

I can't help but feel like I expressed myself really badly when I wrote the original post. The thread took a different turn than I expected. I was thinking about how attention works, and how long it takes for something to slip out of memory if there aren't any reminders that it exists. Instead, it's gotten to be about making sure sobplots are resolved.

That said, the advice here is good, and it's giving me plenty to think about that I may not have thought about otherwise, so the comments are still useful - which is cool.

 

[FifthView]

I was thinking about how attention works, and how long it takes for something to slip out of memory if there aren't any reminders that it exists.

I don't know if there's any kind of definable length of time guideline.

My suggestion would be to make whatever happens in those subplots obviously relevant to the main plots, so that while those main plots are spinning forward they also carry the subplots forward in memory.

I'll give an example created on the spot.

Let's say a main plot for a story involves the MC trying to steal a valuable item from a government facility without being captured or even appearing on the radar of whoever runs the government. It's a "little guy vs big institution" kind of plot. Maybe he needs to work on assembling a crew of thieves to help him out.

Then let's say that a subplot involves this MC's estranged, black-sheep relationship with his family, maybe a particular member of that family like an elder brother or uncle. This family member wants the MC to pay for some kind of serious past deed; maybe the MC was a drug addict when young, stole from his family regularly, and drove his parents to an early grave.

In such a scenario, the break-in to the government facility might be a kind of reflection on the family events in the past, and the brother or uncle–the family in general–might be reflected in the authoritarian government institution. I.e., some slight parallelism. You could even throw in some kind of family-government connection, laying the foundation for having that family situation somehow affect the outcome (or consequences) of the attempted break-in–perhaps a hint of foreshadowing. As the main plot proceeds, the reader might have this other subplot in mind, waiting for the hammer to drop, as it were, or even for a potential fortuitous break.

 

[Svrtnsse]

I don't know if there's any kind of definable length of time guideline.

I'm pretty sure there isn't, but it's interesting to muse on. I'm wondering if you can do it like stage illusionists do where they pull your attention to whatever is in their right hand so you don't notice what the left hand is up to.

My guess would be it doesn't quite work in the same way. You can't make the reader not notice the words they're reading. This makes it more difficult to make events seem unimportant too. Everything word you write is there for a reason, and you'll have a hard time convincing the reader you're describing something by accident.

Or is this what's happening in con-man stories, where someone's pulling off a con and you see them do it, but not until at the very end when the explanation comes do you understand why?

 

[Aurora]

OP: I'm sorry for not answering your questions. Can we try again? Because I'm not certain I get it either...

 

[Svrtnsse]

OP: I'm sorry for not answering your questions. Can we try again? Because I'm not certain I get it either...

No worries at all. It was a badly worded question.

I was thinking of trying to explain the question again, but the more I think of it, the less of a question it is. It's more an incident of unstructured musings on a fuzzy topic.

It's not so much about "how do I write" as it is about "how do readers process story" which is a bit fluffy, but a the same time fascinating.

For example, how many plots and subplots can a reader keep track of at the same time? What happens when a subplot the reader lost track of comes back into play? If a reader loses track of one subplot and something in another subplot indirectly affects it, will the reader make the connection at the time, or will they have to be reminded about it?

One thing that I think is really important is to understand how readers take in the words we write and the stories we tell them. We focus a lot on technicalities and how to do things and what works and what doesn't, but there's a lot less talk about understanding reading. I think if we improve our understanding of how reading works it will be very beneficial to us as storytellers.

 

[pmmg]

Personally I think the better the author is able to show how the events in one part of the story affect other areas of the story the cooler it will all be. So if there are many subplots, and they are affected other subplots, and the author is able to keep it all straight and not drop his own details, then I think it just makes for a cooler story.

 

[Aurora]

No worries at all. It was a badly worded question.

I was thinking of trying to explain the question again, but the more I think of it, the less of a question it is. It's more an incident of unstructured musings on a fuzzy topic.

It's not so much about "how do I write" as it is about "how do readers process story" which is a bit fluffy, but a the same time fascinating.

For example, how many plots and subplots can a reader keep track of at the same time? What happens when a subplot the reader lost track of comes back into play? If a reader loses track of one subplot and something in another subplot indirectly affects it, will the reader make the connection at the time, or will they have to be reminded about it?

One thing that I think is really important is to understand how readers take in the words we write and the stories we tell them. We focus a lot on technicalities and how to do things and what works and what doesn't, but there's a lot less talk about understanding reading. I think if we improve our understanding of how reading works it will be very beneficial to us as storytellers.

Isn't it kind of impossible to determine how a reader would understand your work? Everyone interprets things differently. Also, writing in a state of flow is like reading. Focus only on things you can control, would be my suggestion. Things like pacing, plot development, characters.

 

[Svrtnsse]

Isn't it kind of impossible to determine how a reader would understand your work? Everyone interprets things differently. Also, writing in a state of flow is like reading. Focus only on things you can control, would be my suggestion. Things like pacing, plot development, characters.

Yes and no. It's impossible to know exactly how any given reader understands my work, but we can try and understand the mental process involved with interpreting the text.

Something I've thought a lot about is the power of association combined with the concept of first impression. I can't predict what associations someone will have to the words I'm using, but I can influence it in a certain direction. Similarly, I can't predict what someone's first impression of my writing will be, but I can make a decent estimate on how long it takes them to form the first impression.
Having a grasp on those things helps a lot when writing descriptions of things and makes it easier for me to bring life to the thigns I describe - or so I'd like to believe.

I'm sure there are similar things that can be taken into account when it comes to storytelling on a larger scale. Something like reader expectations is a great example. If I make a promise to my reader and don't deliver on it, they'll feel cheated. Why does three act structure work so well? Is it just because we're so used to it, or is there something more fundamental in how it relates to how we understand the world?

It's hard/impossible to determine what a reader will think about our story, but we can try to understand the mental processes involved with taking in the story. At least, I think we can.

 

[Michael K. Eidson]

How I process stories now differs much from when I was young. I read more then, and read faster. I didn't set a book aside for any significant period of time. If a subplot was introduced in book 1 of a series, not mentioned again until book 5, that would not have fazed me. I'd have remembered the subplot from book 1 when it was mentioned again in book 5, and have been mightily pleased that I remembered.

These days, I might set a book aside for days or weeks at a time. When I get back to it, I have to reread the last few pages just to remember what's going on at this point of the story. In these situations, I won't remember the subplot you introduced even earlier and did nothing with. But, frankly, that doesn't bother me. When you mention it again, I'm pretty sure your bringing it up again will spark my memory of the earlier mention, and I'm fine with that. There have been a few times I've gone back to earlier chapters for a reread, but that's not usually necessary.

The way I see it, your audience is going to vary. Some readers will treasure having the opportunity to feel pride in recalling late in the story (or a series) something that occurred early on. Some readers might be at the other extreme, and hate having to remember anything about a subplot being revived long after they'd dismissed it as meaningless. Choose the readers you want to write for and run with it, would be my recommendation.