In the most recent edition of Analog is an article by the SF author Stanley Smith, entitled "Hiding the Info-Dump."
It's one of the best pieces of writing advice I've encountered because it is specific. Too many writerly advice columns (most blogs) have as much depth and substance as a Sunday School lesson. Smith, otoh, gives advice like 'have a character explain something to another who should not already know'. And then he gives examples.
Other bits include:
Chop it up and spread it out
Use a character who doesn't understand what's happening, but needs to
Use an omniscient narrator when a limited viewpoint can't do the work
I won't go through all of them. Just read the article if you can get your hands on it. He finishes with an underlying principle that I found especially valuable. Namely, that exposition should involve some form of conflict or tension. He makes the excellent point that this is the same principle that underlies good plot.
I found this useful because it lets me view exposition as just another element of the plot, subject to the same principles as action scenes or dialog. It lets exposition become something more than merely "I need to tell the reader about how magic works" and evolve into "I need to say why that fireball didn't work this time."
Recommended.
As a postscript, I'm finding it a worthwhile exercise to read SF as if I were studying fantasy. The two genres share much in common, the need to describe an unfamiliar word being the most obvious, and by reading SF I make myself more aware that I'm *not* reading fantasy, so I pay more attention to how the author is working. With fantasy novels I tend to get caught up in the story and so not pay attention, or else I get put off by the story and give up on it. Either way, less learning. FWIW. YMMV.
It's one of the best pieces of writing advice I've encountered because it is specific. Too many writerly advice columns (most blogs) have as much depth and substance as a Sunday School lesson. Smith, otoh, gives advice like 'have a character explain something to another who should not already know'. And then he gives examples.
Other bits include:
Chop it up and spread it out
Use a character who doesn't understand what's happening, but needs to
Use an omniscient narrator when a limited viewpoint can't do the work
I won't go through all of them. Just read the article if you can get your hands on it. He finishes with an underlying principle that I found especially valuable. Namely, that exposition should involve some form of conflict or tension. He makes the excellent point that this is the same principle that underlies good plot.
I found this useful because it lets me view exposition as just another element of the plot, subject to the same principles as action scenes or dialog. It lets exposition become something more than merely "I need to tell the reader about how magic works" and evolve into "I need to say why that fireball didn't work this time."
Recommended.
As a postscript, I'm finding it a worthwhile exercise to read SF as if I were studying fantasy. The two genres share much in common, the need to describe an unfamiliar word being the most obvious, and by reading SF I make myself more aware that I'm *not* reading fantasy, so I pay more attention to how the author is working. With fantasy novels I tend to get caught up in the story and so not pay attention, or else I get put off by the story and give up on it. Either way, less learning. FWIW. YMMV.
Inkling