VanderMeer's Wonderbook, Chapter 2: The Ecosystem Of Story (continued: Kim Stanley Robinson, Thoughts On Exposition)
Robinson takes an interesting view on perspective, beginning by discussing advice encountered before, to break up the exposition into tiny pieces and put them all through the story, advice that is often summed in the cliche "show, don't tell." Robinson points out that it is all telling. The duality between exposition and other aspects of story is a false one. Indeed, their are many genres where exposition can be an integral aspect of the book. Is Victor Hugo's lush descriptions of the architecture and history of Notre Dame's cathedral expository? When one considers that the preservation of the cathedral was the motivating factor for writing the book, and when one comes to understand that the cathedral is meant to be the main character of the entire work, it calls that into question, at least for me.
What is more, as Robinson points out, in some works, the exposition is fun. I know that reading Tolkien, I have felt that way. The history of Middle Earth and it's races is liberally inserted through the books, and is central to the work. The same can be said for many wonderful writers of fantasy (I think of Susanna Clarke for one, and she is also clever enough to somehow swap exposition into main story in ways as magical as the works of her characters). Robinson points out his own love for passages of technical explanation in science fiction novels, where a detail of how a ship functions can be expansive.
In many cases, these types of diversions can be central to a work. For me, the question becomes one of attitude. In writing out passages of exposition, the question is not only, can this be cut up and moved around so that it fits invisibly into the story, but also, can I tell this in a way that the reader will enjoy, and which will enhance the work. Melville wrote entire chapters that were solely exposition, but by keeping the readers experience of those passages in mind, he utilized the distancing from plot and character to ground the entire book and competently add the weight of realism into a work that is rich in metaphor and image. In the end, Melville is able to combine these two tones in the book, connecting the stories symbolism to real world detail. That alchemy would not be achieved if the real world aspects were integrated wholly into the book, since it would force the narrative to become grounded in those details directly. By making the reader do the work of incorporating the knowledge and connecting it to the story, Melville is able to focus his work within the narrative on the building of those affects. Such an extreme example is not, of course, a model for every work, but it makes the point: exposition need not be villified.
I would also suggest that exposition can be an opportunity for exploring the tone of the narration. Douglas Adams, again, is masterful at this, and it is because of the voice he presents that the exposition in his novels is often a highlight. Adams will spend several pages describing things utterly irrelevant to the plot, and making it clear that this is the case (in one novel, he describes a woman thinking up the solution to all of Earth's economic problems, only to have her and those ideas utterly annihilated in the explosion of the planet, which is clearly irrelevant to the plot even as you read it, but still sticks in my mind as a great passage). Adams is able to indulge in exposition, because it is going to be fun for the reader. His diversions add richness, but they are purely exposition.
As an example take a look at the following passage from The Restaurant At The End Of The Universe. The passage begins with a rather straight description of a the Total Perspective Vortex, one that, until the end, seems reasonable. Throwing in the fairy cake, obviously, is a bit silly, but it is the turning point is obviously line "The man who invented the Total Perspective Vortex did so basically in order to annoy his wife." To me, that turn alone earns the description above, and makes the rest of the description worth reading. That he can indulge so much further within the passage demonstrates how liberal it is possible to be if you are good at writing exposition.
So, the point is, to think about what exposition can do in a narrative and not to just see it as some monster that needs to be hidden in the dark, allowed only to come out in the light at the appropriate moments. Exposition can be a central part of a work, and can be handled in ways that make it a central part of the readers experience, even a highlight of it.
What is more, as Robinson points out, in some works, the exposition is fun. I know that reading Tolkien, I have felt that way. The history of Middle Earth and it's races is liberally inserted through the books, and is central to the work. The same can be said for many wonderful writers of fantasy (I think of Susanna Clarke for one, and she is also clever enough to somehow swap exposition into main story in ways as magical as the works of her characters). Robinson points out his own love for passages of technical explanation in science fiction novels, where a detail of how a ship functions can be expansive.
In many cases, these types of diversions can be central to a work. For me, the question becomes one of attitude. In writing out passages of exposition, the question is not only, can this be cut up and moved around so that it fits invisibly into the story, but also, can I tell this in a way that the reader will enjoy, and which will enhance the work. Melville wrote entire chapters that were solely exposition, but by keeping the readers experience of those passages in mind, he utilized the distancing from plot and character to ground the entire book and competently add the weight of realism into a work that is rich in metaphor and image. In the end, Melville is able to combine these two tones in the book, connecting the stories symbolism to real world detail. That alchemy would not be achieved if the real world aspects were integrated wholly into the book, since it would force the narrative to become grounded in those details directly. By making the reader do the work of incorporating the knowledge and connecting it to the story, Melville is able to focus his work within the narrative on the building of those affects. Such an extreme example is not, of course, a model for every work, but it makes the point: exposition need not be villified.
I would also suggest that exposition can be an opportunity for exploring the tone of the narration. Douglas Adams, again, is masterful at this, and it is because of the voice he presents that the exposition in his novels is often a highlight. Adams will spend several pages describing things utterly irrelevant to the plot, and making it clear that this is the case (in one novel, he describes a woman thinking up the solution to all of Earth's economic problems, only to have her and those ideas utterly annihilated in the explosion of the planet, which is clearly irrelevant to the plot even as you read it, but still sticks in my mind as a great passage). Adams is able to indulge in exposition, because it is going to be fun for the reader. His diversions add richness, but they are purely exposition.
As an example take a look at the following passage from The Restaurant At The End Of The Universe. The passage begins with a rather straight description of a the Total Perspective Vortex, one that, until the end, seems reasonable. Throwing in the fairy cake, obviously, is a bit silly, but it is the turning point is obviously line "The man who invented the Total Perspective Vortex did so basically in order to annoy his wife." To me, that turn alone earns the description above, and makes the rest of the description worth reading. That he can indulge so much further within the passage demonstrates how liberal it is possible to be if you are good at writing exposition.
So, the point is, to think about what exposition can do in a narrative and not to just see it as some monster that needs to be hidden in the dark, allowed only to come out in the light at the appropriate moments. Exposition can be a central part of a work, and can be handled in ways that make it a central part of the readers experience, even a highlight of it.
Comments
Post a Comment