Forum: Author Hangout

The usefulness of an infodump depends a lot on the context. The example you gave can would be useless in a long story that has only scene involving that particular tree trunk. I can also see it being a source of one of the sub plots in a different story.

One that has been driving me batty with some self-published authors lately has been their tendency to info-dump the same thing on me(the reader) multiple times within the same book. I don't need to hear the history of the fallen olive tree on 4+ different occasions. (Almost every time a major character encounters it)

That there is no way to contact the author, except via (public) product reviews just makes it more of an annoyance.

I don't need to hear the history of the fallen olive tree on 4+ different occasions.

I can assure you it's the first time the olive tree will be mentioned and it's also the last time.

Yes, it's a fantasy story but without any elves or fairies dancing in a forest clearing under a clear starry night sky. No one acting in this story gives a flying fuck about the fate of a tree.

Sing a song of termites, scrambling in the dust, mandibles a'clacking, hordes of them attacking, the tree consumed in lust.

See the committee birth a camel anew; no horse produced in the tumultuous hue. So cry. Sine die.

You never have been young
You never have been sane
And if you say that you don't care,
In your eyes I see the shame
Looking through the window of your mind
I see your lonely shadow running out of time

Termite Song lyrics by Joseph Arthur.

Running out of time
Running out of time
When I drive
When I drive around the bend
Singing bye bye bye bye...

Rode a runaway horse once.
Never got spit on by a camel.
Rather do either of those again
than submit myself to a committee.

My first reaction to 'manmade' was that it should be 'man-made'.

I would get rid of manmade completely.

Not every hole in the ground is a crater. To me the term crater implies sudden and violent creation, a large violent impact or explosion.

I would reduce it to: He looked down into an old exhausted sandstone quarry.

Once crater has been eliminated and quarry specified immediately, man-made becomes redundant.

I would reduce it to: He looked down into an old exhausted sandstone quarry.

Yup, I'll do that. It's not the part I displayed in regards to the OP, though.

Yup, I'll do that. It's not the part I displayed in regards to the OP, though.

I came back here to comment that what DS said was correct.
The first sentences have three words with the same meaning, canyon, crater, and quarry.
One of the first two should be eliminated, then having both 'quarry' and 'man-made' is redundant.

I came back here to comment that what DS said was correct.

Too late, Bruce. I choose DS for useful pre-editorial corrections.

I do think, however, that section would be significantly improved by making it significantly shorter - without the loss of any meaning. If you ask, I'll tell you how I would "fix" it.

I don't think shortening the passage would improve it. From an informational point of view the scene is superfluous and I wouldn't just shorten something redundant, I'd scratch it completely. It isn't for any kind of informational reasosns I want to keep the passage, though. It's my kind of humor.

The passage didn't pass my editor yet, so there is no need to discuss grammar or specific word choices.

It isn't for any kind of informational reasons I want to keep the passage, though. It's my kind of humor.

Which I why I said "no problem" keeping the passage.

When I suggested shortening, I said "without any loss of meaning". I did not mean attempt to eliminate redundancies. I only meant rewording the way the ideas you have now are expressed.

EDIT TO ADD:
I meant precisely what EB just said.

I'm forcing the reader to read long and wordy passage without any further importance to the story. The fate of the tree is what you would suspect it to be - nothing worth mentioning. That is my humor. Shortening the passage would lessen the impact.

Before anyone accuses me of abusing my readers' trust; I wouldn't do something like that a second time...at least not within one story. These bastards would simply skip it then.

That is my humor. Shortening the passage would lessen the impact.

I recall making that exact same explanation here about a passage I had written. Nobody "got" it.
The lesson I learned was not to stop writing such stuff ... but to stop posting it here. :-)

The lesson I learned was not to stop writing such stuff ... but to stop posting it here. :-)

Bah, I remember it was CW who complaint about your joke. I hope you're too smart to take anything serious CW has to say about humor.

I hope you're too smart to take anything serious CW has to say about humor.

He wasn't the only one who had unkind things to say.
I take CW's comments on most things here very seriously - but never about humour.

The key is, your opening passages are the most vital to the entire story. If it doesn't represent your best work, readers might not bother with the rest of the story.

If you want longer, reflective passages, I'd introduce them later, when you can relate what the passages mean to the character. Expecting readers who don't know you to respect your particular sense of humor is expecting a lot.

Where did you read anything about 'opening passages'? The scene discussed here belongs to my current story. 30 chapters with more than 100k words submitted so far and the scene is a part of a future chapter.

If you think the passage necessary, then I'd suggest breaking it up, so you only hit the reader with a few lines at a time, mixed with other, more vital information.

In a previous post I clearly stated the scene is not necessary at all. The passage is a joke. Do you think 'breaking up a joke, to only hit the reader with a few lines at a time, mixed with other, more vital information' is a good idea?

A classic example is showing a character enjoying and soaking up nature, simply relaxing with no expectations. That establishes that the character is into communing with nature, is relaxed and enjoys time to himself. If you then counter that during the course of the story as he devolved, growing increasingly angry at how unfair life is, it'll provide a striking contrast to his basic nature, as is an essential part of the overall plot. (Not that that's your intent, of course.)

In a previous post of this thread I stated:

'No one acting in this story gives a flying fuck about the fate of a tree.'

Seriously CW, I'd appreciate your courtesy to actually read the things you cite and comment.

If there was a clear transition from 'not yet a god' to 'god' in the story, I must have missed it.

How would the transition to become a god look like to you ... to me ... to the pope ... or to Jabbit?

What is a god? Someone with unusual powers? Someone who people believe to be a god? Or someone who himself believes to be a god?

In other words - no, there wasn't a clear transition you missed.

I would have expected Jabbit to have some kind of 'Aha!' moment, when he realised he could actively influence events.

The pivotal event marking Jabbit's ascendance to a god (in his point of view) is a central theme of the story. I don't believe you missed it; more likely, you just don't share his opinion.

shortening the passage

Would make it greasier. With an oily coating it might go down easier. If it isn't too anal.

Would make it greasier. With an oily coating it might go down easier. If it isn't too anal.

I should probably bow to your superior knowledge in this regards but I'll ignore it this time.

It isn't for any kind of informational reasons I want to keep the passage, though. It's my kind of humor.

The main thing that bothers me about that passage is number of times the word 'tree' and adjectives associated with it were repeated.
In only 152 words, 'tree' was used 9 times. 'Fallen', 'olive', 'dead', and 'fertile' were all repeated too.
I do not object in principle to a lengthy superfluous passage. It's avoidable repetitions of major words that is a red flag to me. I'd definitely want to replace at least some of those words with simple pronouns. I don't think doing that would reduce the impact you're trying to create.

I posted this after I wrote it. I was taking a break and thought it could be interesting to talk about reasons to keep all kinds of info-dumps.

You're a terrier locking his jaws into insignificant word choices and grammatical mistakes.

I don't care about such things before my editor viewed the text and before that'll hapen, I'll have changed the passage several times on my own.

You're a terrier locking his jaws into insignificant word choices and grammatical mistakes.

I mentioned two such things, in passing, and described them 'trivial'.

thought it could be interesting to talk about reasons to keep all kinds of info-dumps.

I did too. And I was supportive of a lengthy superfluous passage being a legitimate style choice.

You said this was just a first draft. Fair enough. I mentioned one thing I saw that I would consider a major problem if an author was doing it consistently. I think that passage would be improved by finding some number of places to replace noun phrases with pronouns. You may call that a matter of "word choices" and you may have got there soon enough. I would consider it more a matter of the way someone goes about the process of writing. But I do not wish to argue. If you don't agree with me there are undoubtedly many who very much enjoy the writing style of your final versions.

If you don't agree with me there are undoubtedly many who very much enjoy the writing style of your final versions.

I fully agree but to receive suggestion how to improve the passage I posted wasn't my reason to open this thread.

The passage didn't pass my editor yet, so there is no need to discuss grammar or specific word choices.

That's a quote from my second post but regardless, it's pretty much all which we discuss. It's the repeating theme of 95% of all threads on this forum.

Here is my current version of the passage I previously posted. I hope you'll notice I listen, even when I don't want to listen.

Jabbit sat on a fallen tree close to the edge of a canyon. He looked down into an old exhausted sandstone quarry.

The trunk he sat on once had been a fertile olive tree but the removal of the sandstone by the quarrymen caused a minor landslide and his roots lost their hold in the soil. That happened more than a century ago. The once fertile tree was long dead. No one had taken him away nor did he rot. Even after more than a hundred years had passed, he wasn't even brittle; just lying around and doing nothing. Until this day. On this day, the long past fallen olive tree had been chosen by Jabbit to sit on. Nothing which mattered to anyone or anything, other than the dead tree, of course.

It still hasn't passed my editor, though.

I hope you'll notice I listen, even when I don't want to listen.

You've already found most of the changes I would raise as an editor for consideration by the author.

I do like the personification of the tree.

Is it too presumptuous to suggest that making that work requires 'The trunk he sat on ...' to be changed to 'The trunk Jabbit sat on ...'?

Is it too presumptuous to suggest that making that work requires 'The trunk he sat on ...' to be changed to 'The trunk Jabbit sat on ...'?

Done. Your obstinate presumptuousness wins the day once more.

Your obstinate presumptuousness wins the day once more.

This little exchange has done one thing for me. It's kind of restored my faith that readers here can recognise, and will reward, stories that are well-written as well as interesting. :-)

This little exchange has done one thing for me. It's kind of restored my faith that readers here can recognise, and will reward, stories that are well-written as well as interesting. :-)

Three hurrahs for all the obstinate and presumptuous readers.

Three hurrahs for all the obstinate and presumptuous readers.

I'll grant you this, you know the first rule about telling a good joke: save the kick in the head until the final word. :-)

I don't know. I believe that's common in fantasy. It's kind of cute.

This tree was killed by man's violation of nature. It was totally forgotten — useless. Until the character decided to sit on it.

Yes, it reads like that.

Nothing which mattered to anyone or anything, other than the dead tree, of course.

The last sentence regards the story, the story characters, the author, and the readers - everyone. It's the punch line.