Signpost or Billboard?

[BWFoster78]

You've all probably heard the old adage that goes something like: If you have a shotgun in the first scene, you need to use it in the last. And, if you use a shotgun in the last scene, it needs to appear in the first.

There are ways, however, to emphasize or minimize the appearance of said shotgun.

If you mention it in passing as a setting detail, putting up a signpost that can be easily overlooked if you will, the reader is likely to forget about it. If you go on about it and connect the character's emotions to it, sorta like putting up a huge billboard with flashing lights, it will stand out in the reader's memory.

The question is:

What is the author's responsibility when it comes to laying the foundation for plot developments, character actions, etc.?

 

[Ankari]

As a rule of thumb, I'd go with the signpost. The question of what to use falls on plausibility. If, use the shotgun example, we're talking about fairies in a My Little Ponies setting, and suddenly at the end one crazy fairy threatens the pink perfection of the world with the shotgun, you need to use the billboard method.

PS:I have not idea if my example makes sense. I'm not a Brony.

 

[Guru Coyote]

As far as responsibility of the author goes... i think the hints need to be there, so that the reader CAN look back and say "oh, yes, I should have seen that coming."

But it is the responsibility of the reader to make the connection.

 

[Steerpike]

Signpost.

I don't think it matters much if the reader remembers it. Some will, and some won't. The key is that when the reveal is made, it should come to the reader's mind if they haven't remembered it all along. As Guru Coyote says, as long as they can go back and say "Oh, yeah, I remember that," you're fine.

Huge billboards irritate me because they makes things too predictable and insult the intelligence of the reader.

The best writers of stories that have these kinds of placements of things that come to be important later typically mention them once, often in passing, often in a way that actually minimizes things so that it doesn't leap out to the reader, but where the reader, at the final moment, says "ah...." as the realization of what is going on dawns.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

I agree with the others. I prefer a more delicate touch than the billboard, as both a writer and as a reader. I do think a writer who feels that their readers need something as obvious as the billboard to foreshadow events does not think highly of their readers abilities to comprehend their immortal prose.

 

[SeverinR]

I think the billboard could be misleading, to throw off the reader. Slight of hand, place a small signpost and a neon flashing billboard, then make the billboard something small, but the signpost something major.

 

[Devor]

I voted signpost. But it all depends. If there's a shotgun on the table, your MC isn't going to be ignoring it. And neither is the reader.

 

[BWFoster78]

I think the question is much easier when we're talking about props. If we translate the argument to character development, does the same hold true?

I may feel that by trait A and trait B and hinting at motivation C, it clearly establishes his tendency to do act D. A reader may interpret the traits and the motivations differently, and thus feel blindsided by the act. On the other hand, I don't wish to make the astute reader feel that I'm hitting him over the head.

 

[Steerpike]

I may feel that by trait A and trait B and hinting at motivation C, it clearly establishes his tendency to do act D. A reader may interpret the traits and the motivations differently, and thus feel blindsided by the act. On the other hand, I don't wish to make the astute reader feel that I'm hitting him over the head.

Depending on the circumstance, this is a situation where 'telling' (used with care) can provide some help. In other words, when reader A and reader B might interpret a trait differently, you essentially tell the reader through internal monologue or whatever mechanism appeals to you how the trait leads to the act.

 

[Penpilot]

I think the question is much easier when we're talking about props. If we translate the argument to character development, does the same hold true?

I might be answering this wrong, so let me know if I'm off he rails.

I look at character development as a form of an argument. Given a character with a personality P, a history H, and a course of action/thinking A, if W, X, and Y happen to them, then it make sense they'll end up changing their course of action/thinking to Z. Of course they may still stick to A. Make both options or more viable and you'll keep your reader guessing.

So to me sometimes it can be a billboard and other times a signpost. It depends on what you want to do. There can be a build up. Some signposts followed by a big friggen billboard. Or you can hammer at the character and reader with billboard after billboard, but have the character fail to see or pay attention until they come to that final billboard where they finally have to choose. Look at Draco Malfoy from Harry Potter. Throughout the series he's given key moments where he can stand up and do something good, the audience wants him to do good, but he always fails to stand up. This is a nice contrast to Harry who always stands up and does good when he's call to do so.

 

[Steerpike]

This got me thinking about a book I recently finished. The story involves the kidnapping of a mother and child, only what the reader doesn't know until she figures it out or gets to the reveal is that the kidnapping was staged and the mother and child fled the home purposefully.

There were about half a dozen clues, maybe more. I got most of them as I was reading, and missed two or three. None of the clues were given special treatment. They were all bits of description provided with no more of less emphasis than anything else. For example, one of the clue that I missed was when the main character was in the child's bedroom. He notes (seemingly in passing) that the child's bed is covered with brand new stuffed animals. It turns out later that the reason there are a bunch of new animals there is the child packed her old, ratty stuffed animals that she'd had forever. She knew she was leaving and packed them up.

I missed that clue. When it became part of the reveal, my reaction was "Ah, that makes sense." If I had figured it out when I came across the clue, that would have been fine. I would have been pleased that I caught on. In fact, I did figure things out before the reveal, and I was happy to be proved right.

If the author had used a giant billboard, saying "HEY, NEW ANIMALS! WHY ARE THEY NEW? WHY DON'T THEY LOOK PLAYED WITH? HINT! HINT! HINT!" I not only would have been annoyed and felt like my intelligence was insulted, but I would have been robbed of the pleasure of having figured things out without being beat over the head.

 

[Devor]

I may feel that by trait A and trait B and hinting at motivation C, it clearly establishes his tendency to do act D. A reader may interpret the traits and the motivations differently, and thus feel blindsided by the act. On the other hand, I don't wish to make the astute reader feel that I'm hitting him over the head.

I don't really understand the question.

A lot of plot subtly is about setting up big reveals or big surprises. Once you drop the surprise factor, you end up with entirely different situations.

I want to answer that I've been an advocate of show, then tell, then show some more. But really I'm too confused to know if that answers the question.

 

[Guru Coyote]

I think a billborard works best when it's actually not one. When the writer set up an obvious course of action/development, only to later twist the expectations. The result must follow logically from the billboard, but still be unexpected. The stronger the initial expectation is, the more unexpected the twist will be.

 

[ThinkerX]

A lot of it depends on the length of the story.

Short story, you have to go for a surprise ending most of the time, so you take the 'signpost' route. Anything more than that, and A) it ruins the surprise (and the story) and B) you run out of room. The billboard route is possible, but difficult to pull off.

Novel, you can go the billboard route. You can plainly establish whats what at the get go, and much of the story deals with getting there. The signpost bit is still an option, though. Or you can do both.

Novella's (as I seem fated to write)...depending on what else is involved, you can go either way.

 

[BWFoster78]

I look at character development as a form of an argument. Given a character with a personality P, a history H, and a course of action/thinking A, if W, X, and Y happen to them, then it make sense they'll end up changing their course of action/thinking to Z. Of course they may still stick to A. Make both options or more viable and you'll keep your reader guessing.

I think the problem lies in: Will the reader get that P + H + A = W, X, or Y? And, more to the point, is it the author's responsibility to make sure that the reader does understand the equation?

Stated another way: As long as the equation exists and is possible to be inferred, what is the author's responsibility to help the reader understand how he got his answer?

 

[BWFoster78]

If the author had used a giant billboard, saying "HEY, NEW ANIMALS! WHY ARE THEY NEW? WHY DON'T THEY LOOK PLAYED WITH? HINT! HINT! HINT!" I not only would have been annoyed and felt like my intelligence was insulted, but I would have been robbed of the pleasure of having figured things out without being beat over the head.

Excellent example. It's helping me refine my question.

I guess I'm not asking as much about how much the author presents the clues but whether the big reveal at the end is needed. For a mystery or thriller like you described, obviously it is. For epic fantasy, do you need to describe to the reader how you got from point A to point B?

 

[BWFoster78]

A lot of plot subtly is about setting up big reveals or big surprises. Once you drop the surprise factor, you end up with entirely different situations.

I'm not really talking about big reveals like the one Steerpike brought up as much as I am normal plot and character development. For example: two guys are good friends. One betrays the other, leading to conflict. How big of an indication should you give to the reason behind the betrayal?

On one hand, you don't want the reader to be blindsided. You don't want the reaction to be, "Hey, that doesn't fit the character at all. He's otherwise portrayed as the perfect friend."

On the other, I'm not sure it's appropriate or necessary to telegraph every motivation.

I tend to thing that laying the groundwork for the betrayal is adequate. Show the character envious of a certain aspect of his friend. Show him having a characteristic that makes betrayal reasonable. Then show the betrayal.

The problem is that a lot of readers, if I'm being subtle, may not pick up on envy + characteristic = betrayal. I'm trying to weight "Resist the Urge to Explain" versus clarity.

EDIT: Note, the betrayal itself isn't meant to be a big reveal as the character could be shown clearly having thoughts of the action before he does it. I'm specifically addressing how the motivation for the betrayal may be a surprise.

 

[Devor]

For example: two guys are good friends. One betrays the other, leading to conflict. How big of an indication should you give to the reason behind the betrayal?

I think the tendency is to still treat it like a big reveal and drop signposts instead of billboards. I don't think that needs to be the case. Two people can have a fight which steadily escalates until someone throws a punch. Not everything needs to be a surprise to be powerful. I think it's best to use a good mix of techniques throughout.

A good surprise is powerful, though, so still use them.

The problem is that a lot of readers, if I'm being subtle, may not pick up on envy + characteristic = betrayal. I'm trying to weight "Resist the Urge to Explain" versus clarity.

I think it's better to underexplain, then go back and fix it when your beta readers call it out, then it is to overexplain and then have to cut later.

 

[BWFoster78]

then go back and fix it when your beta readers call it out

Even with a beta reader call out, I'm not sure "fixing it" is justified.

My theory is that there are three types of readers when it comes to situations like this:

1. A lot of readers aren't going to pay any attention to this kind of thing one way or the other. They'll go along with however you present the characters without any question unless you do something that clearly contradicts what you've established. For this type, you have to make a pretty blatant mistake in order for them to notice it. On the other side of things, they're also unlikely to notice, except perhaps purely on a subliminal level, the effort you put into subtly setting up the conflict.

2. Some readers are going to completely get what you did. They'll marvel at how subtle and complex your characters are because of the deftness of the way you handled it. I don't think many readers fit this category.

3. Some readers will interpret something you wrote differently than you intended. These readers, I think, can be broken into two categories:

A. Some of those will adjust their opinion of your character based on the new information and move on.

B. Some of those will get annoyed because they'll see the new information as contradictory.

I hate to adjust what my story simply to meet the desire of a subset of one type of reader. If it were a clear mistake, that would be one thing. Since I feel that, in this case, the problem lies with a subjective interpretation on the part of the reader, I'm not sure a revision to make it more clear would be justified.

That's kind of the crux of the whole question: To what lengths should an author go to make sure he's not misunderstood?

 

[Steerpike]

I don't favor doing anything under the assumption that you're so clever or subtle, and your readership so dimwitted, that you need to hammer at them or they won't get what you're saying (I realize that's not that you are saying, BWFoster, I'm just making a generalized statement).

There are always going to be some who don't get it, I suppose, but I think you're much better off catering to the more astute, intelligent readership. There are a hell of a lot more of those than authors seem to think.

In other words, I'd completely disregard readers in category 3(b). They're a small minority, and changing the work for their benefit can harm the work and at the very least detracts from it from the viewpoint of your other readers.